Re: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still alive at the MIT geoengineering competition

2013-07-14 Thread William H. Calvin
All depends on plumes. These are tethered pumps in moving water. DO will be 
available on all sides of the thin plume. 
Cheers, 
Bill


   William H. Calvin  wcal...@uw.edu
WilliamCalvin.org


On Jul 13, 2013, at 7:28 PM, markcap...@podenergy.org wrote:

Bill,

My thoughts are suggestions to quantify your Climate Colab entry more.

One other thought.  Bacteria will first use all the dissolved oxygen (DO) and 
oxygen from nitrate before resorting to anaerobic digestion.  Thus the reason 
for dead zones under algal blooms.  Your Climate Colab entry could quantify 
how much if any DO will remain in the downwelling areas.

Typical controlled anaerobic digestion in WWTP's produces about 60% CH4 and 40% 
CO2 by volume.  Landfills can be similar but may be only 50% CH4.  The CH4 
bacteria are likely to exceed CH4 saturation and produce gas bubbles.  Even so 
those bubbles are likely to be converted to CO2, if the water column includes 
DO.  The biomass would have to be compressed to relatively low water content 
(more than about 10% solids) for CO2 to exceed saturation.  The CO2 
saturation-depth curve bends to near constant at about 500 meters and 60,000 
ppm.  Below about 500 meters CO2 exceeding saturation would be a liquid or a 
hydrate.

Mark E. Capron, PE
Ventura, California
www.PODenergy.org


 Original Message 
Subject: RE: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still
alive at the MIT geoengineering competition
From: Peter Flynn peter.fl...@ualberta.ca
Date: Sat, July 13, 2013 4:43 pm
To: William Calvin wcal...@uw.edu, Peter Flynn
peter.fl...@ualberta.ca
Cc: markcap...@podenergy.org, andrew.lock...@gmail.com, geoengineering
geoengineering@googlegroups.com

William,
 
A question: even if biomass is converted to CO2 in the deep ocean (1000 m) 
would it not stay there? My understanding is that the deep ocean is not 
supersaturated, due to the high pressure; it is the reduction of pressure in a 
rising deep water column that causes degassing of CO2.
 
Not sure this is correct, I would welcome your comments.
 
Peter Flynn
 
From: William Calvin [mailto:wcal...@uw.edu] 
Sent: July-13-13 5:34 PM
To: Peter Flynn
Cc: markcap...@podenergy.org; andrew.lock...@gmail.com; geoengineering
Subject: Re: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still alive at 
the MIT geoengineering competition
 
Circulation time for the water is about a thousand years but the radiocarbon 
age for DOC in the depths is more like 4,000 years. It's not a regional effect 
but widespread. I discussed it in the cleanup book:
Estimates for the delay until the flushed surface water resurfaces range from 
400 to 1,600 years. Excess carbon sunk to just below the winter thermocline is 
likely to resurface sooner. It may take a sinking depth of more than 1,000 m to 
achieve millennial-scale storage.
In the cold depths, about half of the new dissolved organic carbon from the 
upper ocean is promptly converted into total CO2. But it has recently been 
shown that the rest has a 6,000 year residence time. Since the reason for this 
postponed oxidation into CO2 is not yet clear, one cannot say that half of the 
carbon debt, if sunk within twenty years, would also stay out of the 
atmospheric circulation for an extra 5,000 years. But it seems a good bet, one 
we should take.
 
The major ref is
McNichol, A and Aluwihare, L. I. “The Power of Radiocarbon in Biogeochemical 
Studies of the Marine Carbon Cycle: Insights from Studies of Dissolved and 
Particulate Organic Carbon (DOC and POC) Luther III, G. W. and Boyle, E. A. 
Chemical Reviews (thematic issue on Chemical Oceanography.) 107, 2007, 
pp.443-466.
 
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Peter Flynn peter.fl...@ualberta.ca wrote:
Mark,
 
The residence time for exchange between the deep ocean and the shallow ocean is 
on the order of 600 to 1000 years. This is an average; there are ocean 
locations where the exchange is far slower (negligible downwelling and 
upwelling currents). Hence conversion of biomass to CO2 in the deep ocean would 
not liberate it to the atmosphere for a very long time, perhaps past the age of 
fossil fuels.
 
I don’t know enough about the behavior of methane, i.e. whether it is soluble 
or would form gas bubbles. If it is soluble the same long storage would apply.
 
Peter Flynn
 
Peter Flynn, P. Eng., Ph. D.
Emeritus Professor and Poole Chair in Management for Engineers
Department of Mechanical Engineering
University of Alberta
peter.fl...@ualberta.ca
cell: 928 451 4455
 
 
 
From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com [mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com] 
On Behalf Of markcap...@podenergy.org
Sent: July-12-13 9:40 PM
To: andrew.lock...@gmail.com; william.cal...@gmail.com
Cc: geoengineering
Subject: RE: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still alive at 
the MIT geoengineering competition
 
Bill,
 
At a quick glance:
 
1.  I did not detect your nutrient cycling or nutrient mass balancing.  There 
may be sufficient N, P, K, iron, etc

Re: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still alive at the MIT geoengineering competition

2013-07-13 Thread John Nissen
Hi Mark,

Your comments about the production of methane are very interesting.  The
group which I chair, the Arctic Methane Emergency Group (AMEG), is
concerned about all things methanical, including waste water treatment, of
which you have expertise.  If William's proposal is to sink carbon (and I
have not time at this moment to read his proposal), then it might be
advisable to promote methanotrophs at the same time.  I might be able to
discuss this tomorrow, when I get back to Bath.  I leave my hotel room in
Davos in a few minutes and then will be travelling back without any
internet access.

Cheers,

John




On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 5:00 AM, Peter Flynn peter.fl...@ualberta.cawrote:

 Mark,



 The residence time for exchange between the deep ocean and the shallow
 ocean is on the order of 600 to 1000 years. This is an average; there are
 ocean locations where the exchange is far slower (negligible downwelling
 and upwelling currents). Hence conversion of biomass to CO2 in the deep
 ocean would not liberate it to the atmosphere for a very long time, perhaps
 past the age of fossil fuels.



 I don’t know enough about the behavior of methane, i.e. whether it is
 soluble or would form gas bubbles. If it is soluble the same long storage
 would apply.



 Peter Flynn



 Peter Flynn, P. Eng., Ph. D.

 Emeritus Professor and Poole Chair in Management for Engineers

 Department of Mechanical Engineering

 University of Alberta

 peter.fl...@ualberta.ca

 cell: 928 451 4455







 *From:* geoengineering@googlegroups.com [mailto:
 geoengineering@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *markcap...@podenergy.org
 *Sent:* July-12-13 9:40 PM
 *To:* andrew.lock...@gmail.com; william.cal...@gmail.com
 *Cc:* geoengineering
 *Subject:* RE: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still
 alive at the MIT geoengineering competition



 Bill,



 At a quick glance:



 1.  I did not detect your nutrient cycling or nutrient mass balancing.
  There may be sufficient N, P, K, iron, etc. in deep water below the
 themocline.  But what fraction are you extracting?



 2.  I am a wastewater engineer with some landfill and dairy waste
 experience.  Do you know what fraction of the sunk or pumped to bottom
 carbon is available to anaerobic bacteria?  Years ago, we used to think
 anaerobic bacteria required fresh water and mammal body temperatures to
 convert biomass to CH4 and CO2.  Now we can buy anaerobic bacteria that
 produce at 5C for use in unheated temperate climate dairy digesters.  The
 bacteria exist or evolve to work in all ocean conditions.  The gas
 production at seafloor temperatures in seawater will be slower, but not
 that much.  Perhaps 80% of volatile solids (aka ash-free biomass) hitting
 the deep seafloor should be converted to CH4 and CO2 within a decade, if
 not sooner.



 Mark E. Capron, PE
 Ventura, California
 www.PODenergy.org



  Original Message 
 Subject: Re: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still
 alive at the MIT geoengineering competition
 From: Andrew Lockley andrew.lock...@gmail.com
 Date: Fri, July 12, 2013 7:15 pm
 To: william.cal...@gmail.com
 Cc: geoengineering geoengineering@googlegroups.com

 I looked through it in detail earlier. Where's the evidence you can get
 anywhere near the numbers you need?

 A

 On Jul 13, 2013 4:13 AM, William H. Calvin william.cal...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 I seem to be one of the three finalists in this geoengineering
 competition, despite both judges remaining dubious and dismissive. You can
 judge for yourself, as it is all at


 http://climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/20/planId/1302501

 My detailed response is in the Comment following the judges’ report. (Note
 that the revised proposal you see is not the original proposal the judges
 saw and from which I quoted in my reply Comment).

 The 2,000 word limit forced me to boil it down at lot but it has also
 become, I hope, a bit more understandable for those who haven't been
 following developments since 1983. A more complete proposal is in my short
 book, *The Great CO2 Cleanup*, at the Kindle store or the PDF at
 http://WilliamCalvin.org/bk16 http://williamcalvin.org/bk16 .

 I have until Monday to make revisions to the proposal before final
 judging. Please email suggestions.  If you wish to add public comments or
 “Supporter” endorsements, the Comments tab has a login/register link. I am
 encouraged to “use on-line social networks” to build support, something I
 am not good at doing.

 This competition is my best chance so far to get a wider audience to
 consider my reframing of the climate problem and its implications for the
 time scale of needed climate actions.

 Thanks to many of you for earlier comments,

 -Bill

 William H. Calvin, Ph.D.
 University of Washington, School of Medicine.

 --
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
 geoengineering group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from

Re: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still alive at the MIT geoengineering competition

2013-07-13 Thread rongretlarson
William : 

Can you give a URL for the judges report? 

Ron 

- Original Message -
From: William H. Calvin william.cal...@gmail.com 
To: geoengineering@googlegroups.com 
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 8:10:28 PM 
Subject: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still alive at the 
MIT geoengineering competition 



I seem to be one of the three finalists in this geoengineering competition, 
despite both judges remaining dubious and dismissive. You can judge for 
yourself, as it is all at 

http://climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/20/planId/1302501 

My detailed response is in the Comment following the judges’ report. (Note that 
the revised proposal you see is not the original proposal the judges saw and 
from which I quoted in my reply Comment). 

The 2,000 word limit forced me to boil it down at lot but it has also become, I 
hope, a bit more understandable for those who haven't been following 
developments since 1983. A more complete proposal is in my short book, The 
Great CO2 Cleanup , at the Kindle store or the PDF at 
http://WilliamCalvin.org/bk16 . 

I have until Monday to make revisions to the proposal before final judging. 
Please email suggestions. If you wish to add public comments or “Supporter” 
endorsements, the Comments tab has a login/register link. I am encouraged to 
“use on-line social networks” to build support, something I am not good at 
doing. 

This competition is my best chance so far to get a wider audience to consider 
my reframing of the climate problem and its implications for the time scale of 
needed climate actions. 

Thanks to many of you for earlier comments, 

-Bill 

William H. Calvin, Ph.D. 
University of Washington, School of Medicine. 

-- 
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/groups/opt_out . 


-- 
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/groups/opt_out.




RE: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still alive at the MIT geoengineering competition

2013-07-13 Thread Peter Flynn
William,



A question: even if biomass is converted to CO2 in the deep ocean (1000 m)
would it not stay there? My understanding is that the deep ocean is not
supersaturated, due to the high pressure; it is the reduction of pressure
in a rising deep water column that causes degassing of CO2.



Not sure this is correct, I would welcome your comments.



Peter Flynn



*From:* William Calvin [mailto:wcal...@uw.edu]
*Sent:* July-13-13 5:34 PM
*To:* Peter Flynn
*Cc:* markcap...@podenergy.org; andrew.lock...@gmail.com; geoengineering
*Subject:* Re: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still
alive at the MIT geoengineering competition



Circulation time for the water is about a thousand years but the
radiocarbon age for DOC in the depths is more like 4,000 years. It's not a
regional effect but widespread. I discussed it in the cleanup book:

Estimates for the delay until the flushed surface water resurfaces range
from 400 to 1,600 years. Excess carbon sunk to just below the winter
thermocline is likely to resurface sooner. It may take a sinking depth of
more than 1,000 m to achieve millennial-scale storage.

In the cold depths, about half of the new dissolved organic carbon from the
upper ocean is promptly converted into total CO2. But it has recently been
shown that the rest has a 6,000 year residence time. Since the reason for
this postponed oxidation into CO2 is not yet clear, one cannot say that
half of the carbon debt, if sunk within twenty years, would also stay out
of the atmospheric circulation for an extra 5,000 years. But it seems a
good bet, one we should take.



The major ref is

McNichol, A and Aluwihare, L. I. “The Power of Radiocarbon in
Biogeochemical Studies of the Marine Carbon Cycle: Insights from Studies of
Dissolved and Particulate Organic Carbon (DOC and POC) Luther III, G. W.
and Boyle, E. A. Chemical Reviews (thematic issue on Chemical
Oceanography.) 107, 2007, pp.443-466.



On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Peter Flynn peter.fl...@ualberta.ca
wrote:

Mark,



The residence time for exchange between the deep ocean and the shallow
ocean is on the order of 600 to 1000 years. This is an average; there are
ocean locations where the exchange is far slower (negligible downwelling
and upwelling currents). Hence conversion of biomass to CO2 in the deep
ocean would not liberate it to the atmosphere for a very long time, perhaps
past the age of fossil fuels.



I don’t know enough about the behavior of methane, i.e. whether it is
soluble or would form gas bubbles. If it is soluble the same long storage
would apply.



Peter Flynn



Peter Flynn, P. Eng., Ph. D.

Emeritus Professor and Poole Chair in Management for Engineers

Department of Mechanical Engineering

University of Alberta

peter.fl...@ualberta.ca

cell: 928 451 4455







*From:* geoengineering@googlegroups.com [mailto:
geoengineering@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *markcap...@podenergy.org
*Sent:* July-12-13 9:40 PM
*To:* andrew.lock...@gmail.com; william.cal...@gmail.com
*Cc:* geoengineering
*Subject:* RE: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still
alive at the MIT geoengineering competition



Bill,



At a quick glance:



1.  I did not detect your nutrient cycling or nutrient mass balancing.
 There may be sufficient N, P, K, iron, etc. in deep water below the
themocline.  But what fraction are you extracting?



2.  I am a wastewater engineer with some landfill and dairy waste
experience.  Do you know what fraction of the sunk or pumped to bottom
carbon is available to anaerobic bacteria?  Years ago, we used to think
anaerobic bacteria required fresh water and mammal body temperatures to
convert biomass to CH4 and CO2.  Now we can buy anaerobic bacteria that
produce at 5C for use in unheated temperate climate dairy digesters.  The
bacteria exist or evolve to work in all ocean conditions.  The gas
production at seafloor temperatures in seawater will be slower, but not
that much.  Perhaps 80% of volatile solids (aka ash-free biomass) hitting
the deep seafloor should be converted to CH4 and CO2 within a decade, if
not sooner.



Mark E. Capron, PE
Ventura, California
www.PODenergy.org



 Original Message 
Subject: Re: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still
alive at the MIT geoengineering competition
From: Andrew Lockley andrew.lock...@gmail.com
Date: Fri, July 12, 2013 7:15 pm
To: william.cal...@gmail.com
Cc: geoengineering geoengineering@googlegroups.com

I looked through it in detail earlier. Where's the evidence you can get
anywhere near the numbers you need?

A

On Jul 13, 2013 4:13 AM, William H. Calvin william.cal...@gmail.com
wrote:

I seem to be one of the three finalists in this geoengineering competition,
despite both judges remaining dubious and dismissive. You can judge for
yourself, as it is all at

 http://climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/20/planId/1302501

My detailed response is in the Comment following the judges’ report. (Note

Re: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still alive at the MIT geoengineering competition

2013-07-12 Thread Andrew Lockley
I looked through it in detail earlier. Where's the evidence you can get
anywhere near the numbers you need?

A
 On Jul 13, 2013 4:13 AM, William H. Calvin william.cal...@gmail.com
wrote:

 I seem to be one of the three finalists in this geoengineering
 competition, despite both judges remaining dubious and dismissive. You can
 judge for yourself, as it is all at**

  *
 http://climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/20/planId/1302501
 *http://climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/20/planId/1302501
 

 My detailed response is in the Comment following the judges’ report. (Note
 that the revised proposal you see is not the original proposal the judges
 saw and from which I quoted in my reply Comment).

 The 2,000 word limit forced me to boil it down at lot but it has also
 become, I hope, a bit more understandable for those who haven't been
 following developments since 1983. A more complete proposal is in my short
 book, *The Great CO2 Cleanup*, at the Kindle store or the PDF at *
 http://WilliamCalvin.org/bk16* http://williamcalvin.org/bk16 .

 I have until Monday to make revisions to the proposal before final
 judging. Please email suggestions.  If you wish to add public comments or
 “Supporter” endorsements, the Comments tab has a login/register link. I am
 encouraged to “use on-line social networks” to build support, something I
 am not good at doing.

 This competition is my best chance so far to get a wider audience to
 consider my reframing of the climate problem and its implications for the
 time scale of needed climate actions.

 Thanks to many of you for earlier comments,

 -Bill

 William H. Calvin, Ph.D.
 University of Washington, School of Medicine.

 --
 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/groups/opt_out.




-- 
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/groups/opt_out.




RE: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still alive at the MIT geoengineering competition

2013-07-12 Thread markcapron
Bill,At a quick glance:1. I did not detect your nutrient cycling or nutrient mass balancing. There may be sufficient N, P, K, iron, etc. in deep water below the themocline. But what fraction are you extracting?2. I am a wastewater engineer with some landfill and dairy waste experience. Do you know what fraction of the "sunk or pumped to bottom" carbon is available to anaerobic bacteria? Years ago, we used to think anaerobic bacteria required fresh water and mammal body temperatures to convert biomass to CH4 and CO2. Now we can buy anaerobic bacteria that produce at 5C for use in unheated temperate climate dairy digesters. The bacteria exist or evolve to work in all ocean conditions. The gas production at seafloor temperatures in seawater will be slower, but not that much. Perhaps 80% of volatile solids (aka ash-free biomass) hitting the deep seafloor should be converted to CH4 and CO2 within a decade, if not sooner. Mark E. Capron, PEVentura, Californiawww.PODenergy.org


 Original Message 
Subject: Re: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still
alive at the MIT geoengineering competition
From: Andrew Lockley andrew.lock...@gmail.com
Date: Fri, July 12, 2013 7:15 pm
To: william.cal...@gmail.com
Cc: geoengineering geoengineering@googlegroups.com

I looked through it in detail earlier. Where's the evidence you can get anywhere near the numbers you need? A  On Jul 13, 2013 4:13 AM, "William H. Calvin" william.cal...@gmail.com wrote:  I seem to be one of the three finalists in this geoengineering competition, despite both judges remaining dubious and dismissive. You can judge for yourself, as it is all at http://climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/20/planId/1302501  My detailed response is in the Comment following the judges’ report. (Note that the revised proposal you see is not the original proposal the judges saw and from which I quoted in my reply Comment). The 2,000 word limit forced me to boil it down at lot but it has also become, I hope, a bit more understandable for those who haven't been following developments since 1983. A more complete proposal is in my short book, The Great CO2 Cleanup, at the Kindle store or the PDF at http://WilliamCalvin.org/bk16 . I have until Monday to make revisions to the proposal before final judging. Please email suggestions. If you wish to add public comments or “Supporter” endorsements, the Comments tab has a login/register link. I am encouraged to “use on-line social networks” to build support, something I am not good at doing. This competition is my best chance so far to get a wider audience to consider my reframing of the climate problem and its implications for the time scale of needed climate actions. Thanks to many of you for earlier comments, -Bill William H. Calvin, Ph.D.  University of Washington, School of Medicine.   --  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/groups/opt_out. --  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/groups/opt_out.   





-- 
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/groups/opt_out.




RE: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still alive at the MIT geoengineering competition

2013-07-12 Thread Peter Flynn
Mark,



The residence time for exchange between the deep ocean and the shallow
ocean is on the order of 600 to 1000 years. This is an average; there are
ocean locations where the exchange is far slower (negligible downwelling
and upwelling currents). Hence conversion of biomass to CO2 in the deep
ocean would not liberate it to the atmosphere for a very long time, perhaps
past the age of fossil fuels.



I don’t know enough about the behavior of methane, i.e. whether it is
soluble or would form gas bubbles. If it is soluble the same long storage
would apply.



Peter Flynn



Peter Flynn, P. Eng., Ph. D.

Emeritus Professor and Poole Chair in Management for Engineers

Department of Mechanical Engineering

University of Alberta

peter.fl...@ualberta.ca

cell: 928 451 4455







*From:* geoengineering@googlegroups.com [mailto:
geoengineering@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *markcap...@podenergy.org
*Sent:* July-12-13 9:40 PM
*To:* andrew.lock...@gmail.com; william.cal...@gmail.com
*Cc:* geoengineering
*Subject:* RE: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still
alive at the MIT geoengineering competition



Bill,



At a quick glance:



1.  I did not detect your nutrient cycling or nutrient mass balancing.
 There may be sufficient N, P, K, iron, etc. in deep water below the
themocline.  But what fraction are you extracting?



2.  I am a wastewater engineer with some landfill and dairy waste
experience.  Do you know what fraction of the sunk or pumped to bottom
carbon is available to anaerobic bacteria?  Years ago, we used to think
anaerobic bacteria required fresh water and mammal body temperatures to
convert biomass to CH4 and CO2.  Now we can buy anaerobic bacteria that
produce at 5C for use in unheated temperate climate dairy digesters.  The
bacteria exist or evolve to work in all ocean conditions.  The gas
production at seafloor temperatures in seawater will be slower, but not
that much.  Perhaps 80% of volatile solids (aka ash-free biomass) hitting
the deep seafloor should be converted to CH4 and CO2 within a decade, if
not sooner.



Mark E. Capron, PE
Ventura, California
www.PODenergy.org



 Original Message 
Subject: Re: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still
alive at the MIT geoengineering competition
From: Andrew Lockley andrew.lock...@gmail.com
Date: Fri, July 12, 2013 7:15 pm
To: william.cal...@gmail.com
Cc: geoengineering geoengineering@googlegroups.com

I looked through it in detail earlier. Where's the evidence you can get
anywhere near the numbers you need?

A

On Jul 13, 2013 4:13 AM, William H. Calvin william.cal...@gmail.com
wrote:

I seem to be one of the three finalists in this geoengineering competition,
despite both judges remaining dubious and dismissive. You can judge for
yourself, as it is all at

 http://climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/20/planId/1302501

My detailed response is in the Comment following the judges’ report. (Note
that the revised proposal you see is not the original proposal the judges
saw and from which I quoted in my reply Comment).

The 2,000 word limit forced me to boil it down at lot but it has also
become, I hope, a bit more understandable for those who haven't been
following developments since 1983. A more complete proposal is in my short
book, *The Great CO2 Cleanup*, at the Kindle store or the PDF at
http://WilliamCalvin.org/bk16 http://williamcalvin.org/bk16 .

I have until Monday to make revisions to the proposal before final judging.
Please email suggestions.  If you wish to add public comments or
“Supporter” endorsements, the Comments tab has a login/register link. I am
encouraged to “use on-line social networks” to build support, something I
am not good at doing.

This competition is my best chance so far to get a wider audience to
consider my reframing of the climate problem and its implications for the
time scale of needed climate actions.

Thanks to many of you for earlier comments,

-Bill

William H. Calvin, Ph.D.
University of Washington, School of Medicine.

-- 
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/groups/opt_out.



-- 
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/groups/opt_out.



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google