RE: [geo] ABO Leads Effort to Get EPA to Recognize Carbon Capture and Utilization
Robert,You should pass your message to the leading Climate CoLab teams for "U.S. Carbon Price." Reconciling paradigms on a global scale is a different perspective on the "free market to include external costs" effort.The carbon reuse industry also addresses the economics of pulling the legacy CO2 out of the air. Our approach has been to first undercut the cost of fossil fuel production with an assist from CO2 storage payments. Then raise the price of fuels to fund continued CO2 storage. With sufficient CO2 reuse to storage products (does not need to be Ocean Forests producing the products), no need to raise fuel prices.Mark Mark E. Capron, PEVentura, Californiawww.PODenergy.org Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [geo] ABO Leads Effort to Get EPA to Recognize Carbon Capture and Utilization From: "'Robert Tulip' via geoengineering" <geoengineering@googlegroups.com> Date: Fri, October 24, 2014 10:45 pm To: "c...@cornell.edu" <c...@cornell.edu>, geoengineering <geoengineering@googlegroups.com> Dear Charles Thank you for this CCU concept. I totally agree with the utilization theme as a superior framework compared to carbon sequestration or storage. We can utilize carbon as fuel, food, feed, fertilizer and fabric. We need to make use of these productive forms of carbon in order to fund activity to stabilize the climate. Now I want to raise a controversial claim: We can utilize more carbon than we emit. That means emission reduction is not necessary to reverse global warming. We can utilize carbon as fabric including for materials construction for roads and buildings. We can utilize carbon as animal feed and fertilizer to improve global food security and nutrition. We can utilize carbon as fuel to address energy security. If abundant useful carbon-based products could be made economically, the demand could be more than the ten billion tonnes of carbon that humans add to the air every year. If we use more carbon than we emit, the amount of carbon in the air will go down. Is it possible? Yes. Ocean based industrial algae production can use energy from wave, wind, tide, current and sun as low cost pumping, transport and heating sources, and can use abundant nutrient and carbon dioxide. Scaling algae production up to 2% of the world ocean with efficient energy and materials could be enough to reduce the amount of carbon in the air and sea, with a profitable system that will pay for its own expansion at scale, while also improving biodiversity through reduction of water temperature and acidity. My most recent presentation on this topic, building on my MIT Climate Collaboration Finalist concept http://climatecolab.org/community/-/blogs/finalist-results-announced- and material from Ocean Foresters http://oceanforesters.org/ was delivered at the Australian National University earlier this year. Here are the slides from my presentation, Ocean Forest Cultivation in Pacific Island Countries - Environmental and Economic Benefits and Strategies, Using carbon can change the climate stabilization paradigm away from the emission reduction model towards a situation where the main issue is the balance between emissions and reuse, using technology to manage carbon stock and flow. Transforming carbon into useful products could build to a larger scale than total emissions. Carbon can be mined from air and sea to produce valuable marketable commodities. This approach means that the fossil fuel economy can become compatible with a stable climate. Like any other product, carbon now seen as waste can be turned into a resource for recycling. Further, that means it can be fine to dig up coal as long as we then turn the produced CO2 into something useful, such as roads or buildings. This objective presents a basis for alliance between efforts to stabilize the climate and the fossil fuel industry. We do not address sewerage by reducing defecation. Nor should we address carbon pollution by reducing emissions. That is like trying to stop the tide. We now have two competing old paradigms, both of which are unscientific. The fossil fuel paradigm ignores global warming. The emission reduction paradigm ignores the economy. We need to put these paradigms together to get a new one, through an economic method to remove carbon from the air and sea. The requirement to achieve this new paradigm is a method to transform carbon dioxide and waste methane into useable products at a scale sufficient to reduce carbon level in the air. The best, and possibly only, way to turn waste carbon into useful products is to mimic how hydrocarbons occurred in nature. Algae falling to the bottom of shallow seas was heated and pressurised over millions of years, gradually converting carbon dioxide into hydrocarbons. Industrial technology can replicate this process in ways that are rapid and commercially profitable. Robert TulipResources and Energy
Re: [geo] ABO Leads Effort to Get EPA to Recognize Carbon Capture and Utilization
DearCharles Thank youfor this CCU concept. I totally agreewith the utilization theme as a superior framework compared to carbonsequestration or storage. We can utilize carbon as fuel, food, feed, fertilizerand fabric. We need to make use of theseproductive forms of carbon in order to fund activity to stabilize the climate. Now Iwant to raise a controversial claim: We canutilize more carbon than we emit. Thatmeans emission reduction is not necessary to reverse global warming. We canutilize carbon as fabric including for materials construction for roads andbuildings. We canutilize carbon as animal feed and fertilizer to improve global food securityand nutrition. We canutilize carbon as fuel to address energy security. If abundantuseful carbon-based products could be made economically, the demand could bemore than the ten billion tonnes of carbon that humans add to the air everyyear. If we usemore carbon than we emit, the amount of carbon in the air will go down. Is itpossible? Yes. Ocean based industrial algae production canuse energy from wave, wind, tide, current and sun as low cost pumping,transport and heating sources, and can use abundant nutrient and carbon dioxide. Scaling algae production up to 2% of theworld ocean with efficient energy and materials could be enough to reduce theamount of carbon in the air and sea, with a profitable system that will pay forits own expansion at scale, while also improving biodiversity through reduction of water temperature and acidity. My mostrecent presentation on this topic, building on my MIT Climate Collaboration Finalist concept http://climatecolab.org/community/-/blogs/finalist-results-announced- andmaterial from Ocean Foresters http://oceanforesters.org/ was delivered at the Australian National University earlier this year. Here are the slides from my presentation, Ocean Forest Cultivation in Pacific Island Countries - Environmental and Economic Benefits and Strategies, Usingcarbon can change the climate stabilization paradigm away from the emissionreduction model towards a situation where the main issue is the balance betweenemissions and reuse, using technology to manage carbon stock and flow. Transformingcarbon into useful products could build to a larger scale than total emissions. Carbon can be mined from air and sea to produce valuable marketable commodities. This approach meansthat the fossil fuel economy can become compatible with a stable climate. Like any other product, carbon now seen aswaste can be turned into a resource for recycling. Further, that means it can be fine to dig up coal as long as we then turn the produced CO2 into something useful, such as roads or buildings. This objective presents a basis for alliance between efforts to stabilize the climate and the fossil fuel industry. We do notaddress sewerage by reducing defecation. Nor should we address carbon pollution by reducing emissions. That is like trying to stop the tide. We now have two competing old paradigms, bothof which are unscientific. The fossil fuel paradigm ignores globalwarming. The emission reduction paradigmignores the economy. We need to putthese paradigms together to get a new one, through an economic method to removecarbon from the air and sea. Therequirement to achieve this new paradigm is a method to transform carbondioxide and waste methane into useable products at a scale sufficient to reducecarbon level in the air. The best,and possibly only, way to turn waste carbon into useful products is to mimichow hydrocarbons occurred in nature. Algae falling to the bottom of shallow seas was heated and pressurisedover millions of years, gradually converting carbon dioxide intohydrocarbons. Industrial technology canreplicate this process in ways that are rapid and commercially profitable. Robert TulipResources and Energy SectionAustralian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade From: Charles H. Greene To: geoengineering Sent: Saturday, 18 October 2014, 0:25 Subject: [geo] ABO Leads Effort to Get EPA to Recognize Carbon Capture and Utilization From: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/encourage-states-use-carbon-utilization-technologies-can-reduce-and-recycle-co2-valuable-products/RMvQcjxd | | | | | | | Algae InSightEdition: October 16, 2014 | | | | | | | In This Issue | | Executive Director's Report | | Algae Biomass Summit Recap | | Learn Algae Cultivation Basics | | Student Award Winners | | Senators Compare Notes on Carbon Utilization | | Upcoming Events | | New Members | | Member News | | Industry News | | Join the ABO | | Quick Links | | ABO Website HomepageMembership Sign-UpABO Events ABO on YouTube | | | | Executive Director's Report | | Today you have an opportunity to personally help create jobs, reduce emissions and unleash the power of innovative technologies across the country. An
