John Nissen wrote : “HiRobert, I'm sorry I've only just readthe description [1], because I immediately jumped to the conclusion that itssignificance was as a champion for theuse of algae for serious CDR, with potential to draw down more CO2 thanbeing emitted while 'only' using one or two percent of the planet's ocean area.The pump itself is almost a distraction!”
RT:Many thanks John for your comments here. You are correct that the Tidal Pump is almost a distraction. I have focused on it in order to suggest atangible incremental practical step towards the big idea of ocean based algaeproduction to remove carbon dioxide. Imet Australia’s CSIRO national algae biofuel experts, and this proof of initialtechnology concept approach was the process they suggested, which I agree with. Even if tidal pumping proves to be only partof the picture, I hope it kickstarts discussion of how large scale ocean basedalgae production can become possible using a range of pumping and other methods. JN: “However Robert appears towant to take the CO2 from concentrated sources, such as coal-fired powerstations, and use the algae to turn the CO2 into something else. Thus it is thecarbon capture part of CCS and of commercial interest to FF companies. But itdoes not have a net effect of reducing the CO2 in the atmosphere, as requiredboth for reducing global warming and staying reasonably below the 2 degree Cso-called safe limit, touted by IPCC, and for reducing ocean acidification.” RT: In fact the mainconcentrated source that I suggest is the Gorgon Liquefied Natural Gas projectwhich plans to geosequester 3000 tonnes of CO2 every day as part of its $50billion investment, which is Australia’s biggest ever project. My reason for taking this approach is thatif algae biofuel can be made profitable for the fossil fuel industry, it willpresent a critical path towards scaling up the technology to mine carbon from the air and sea. JN: “I found this altercation between Michael Hayes andRobert in the comment section [2] particular illuminating: RT: Yes, I wouldlove to see coal burning become ecologically sustainable through HighEfficiency Low Emission technology linked to ocean based algae biofuelproduction to recycle all its produced carbon. We do have to massively raisethe bar, as Michael puts it, to exclude all denialism and develop technology tomake energy production ecologically sustainable. MH: “As to the end strategy ofbringing the FF industry to the wonderfully idealistic paradigm shift of"turning their commercial interests, resources and skills to advantage fornew sustainable technology.": There simply is no plausible indicationwithin this proposal that Mr. Tulip's patented marine bag/tidal pumptechnologies, nor the stated end strategy can, nor will ever, cause, compel orlead the FF industry into a new 'kinder' profit motive.”” RT: Thanks John for drawing attention to this debate. I find it interesting that Michael links toNASA research on offshore membranes (OMEGA) but argues that use of plastic bagsat sea is impractical. This is clearly aquestion in need of much more research. My suggestion of public private partnership is obviously one that willrankle with the more left wing end of the climate science community, but asnoted above in my comments about Gorgon, I think it is the only way to achieverapid results at scale. My perception isthat debate on these topics often involves many unstated assumptions, which Isuggest should be brought into the open. JN: “I am all for algae to drawdown CO2, but they must takethe CO2 out of the atmosphere (or out of solution in water) directly ratherthan from a concentrated source. And, if they also produce an edibleend-product (e.g. fish) or can be converted to a soil improver (e.g. biochar),so much the better for feeding the world! Cheers, John [1] http://climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1301501/phaseId/1309178/planId/1320162 [2] http://climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1301501/phaseId/1309178/planId/1320162/tab/COMMENTS” RT: You are jumping to the end goal while ignoring the needfor a practical way to get from here to there. Algae technology has to grow in stages, funded by commercialprofit. That means use of concentratedsources. I had a similarly lively debateon that issue with an algae scientist who maintained that cost of and access toCO2 was a primary constraint. My pointis that the scale of the Gorgon geosequestration plan provides an abundant free sourceof concentrated CO2, linked to strong capacity and incentives. Link to HELE coalplants is a possible subsequent step, as are direct air capture, etc. Coal and gas willbe big whatever we do, and we should look to removing their waste carbon from theair and sea at point of emission by reprocessing into useful products usingalgae. Thanks again and best regards Robert Tulip From: John Nissen <johnnissen2...@gmail.com> To: Robert Tulip <rtulip2...@yahoo.com.au> Cc: "geoengineering@googlegroups.com" <geoengineering@googlegroups.com>; Michael Hayes <voglerl...@gmail.com>; Richard Harley <harleyrichar...@gmail.com>; Shane Bond <thebondfamil...@hotmail.co.uk> Sent: Tuesday, 14 July 2015, 1:14 Subject: Re: [geo] Tidal Pump Hi Robert, I'm sorry I've only just read the description [1], because I immediately jumped to the conclusion that its significance was as a champion for the use of algae for serious CDR, with potential to draw down more CO2 than being emitted while 'only' using one or two percent of the planet's ocean area. The pump itself is almost a distraction! However Robert appears to want to take the CO2 from concentrated sources, such as coal-fired power stations, and use the algae to turn the CO2 into something else. Thus it is the carbon capture part of CCS and of commercial interest to FF companies. But it does not have a net effect of reducing the CO2 in the atmosphere, as required both for reducing global warming and staying reasonably below the 2 degree C so-called safe limit, touted by IPCC, and for reducing ocean acidification. I found this altercation between Michael Hayes and Robert in the comment section [2] particular illuminating: RT: Yes, I would love to see coal burning become ecologically sustainable through High Efficiency Low Emission technology linked to ocean based algae biofuel production to recycle all its produced carbon. We do have to massively raise the bar, as Michael puts it, to exclude all denialism and develop technology to make energy production ecologically sustainable. MH: “As to the end strategy of bringing the FF industry to the wonderfully idealistic paradigm shift of "turning their commercial interests, resources and skills to advantage for new sustainable technology.": There simply is no plausible indication within this proposal that Mr. Tulip's patented marine bag/tidal pump technologies, nor the stated end strategy can, nor will ever, cause, compel or lead the FF industry into a new 'kinder' profit motive.” I am all for algae to drawdown CO2, but they must take the CO2 out of the atmosphere (or out of solution in water) directly rather than from a concentrated source. And, if they also produce an edible end-product (e.g. fish) or can be converted to a soil improver (e.g. biochar), so much the better for feeding the world! Cheers, John [1] http://climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1301501/phaseId/1309178/planId/1320162 [2] http://climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1301501/phaseId/1309178/planId/1320162/tab/COMMENTS On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 2:04 AM, 'Robert Tulip' via geoengineering <geoengineering@googlegroups.com> wrote: The tidal pump is a proposal I have submitted to the MIT Climate Collaboration Energy-Water Nexus Challenge, as a first step to enable commercial implementation of global carbon dioxide removal as a practical method to stabilise the climate. The judges have described the proposal as "technically very interesting indeed", and have selected it as a semi-finalist. I have responded to judges comments at the link below, and would welcome comment or suggestions. Link is Evaluation - Energy-Water Nexus - Energy-Water Nexus - Climate CoLab | | | | | | | | | | | Evaluation - Energy-Water Nexus - Energy-Water Nexus -...The Tidal Pump, now at proof of concept, aims to shift large volumes of liquid in the ocean at lowest possible cost using new technology.. Enter one of 18 contests ... | | | | View on climatecolab.org | Preview by Yahoo | | | | | Robert TulipResources & Energy SectionAustralian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
