Jed, I agree. There are MANY solutions to our current problems if energy becomes inexpensive. I was thinking bury the CO2 as CaCO3 as mother nature does but oils would probably work also.
It think any/all of these solutions are a much better idea than walking away from a coastal catastrophe. On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Chemical Engineer <cheme...@gmail.com> wrote: > > 3) Removal & sequestration of CO2 from atmosphere either as limestone deep >> in the ocean or under land requiring lots of LENR HP > > > I have a chapter on how to reverse global warming in my book. What we may > need is reverse combustion. You convert CO2 into carbon and oxygen, release > the oxygen, and bury the carbon, either as solid (like coal) or as > hydrocarbon (synthetic oil). Whichever is cheaper. A liquid might be easier > to deal with, for the same reason oil is more convenient than coal. > > However, I not think this is necessary. A much simpler solution is > available that has many other benefits. We can use large scale desalination > to grow crops and forests in some desert areas. Then we sequester the > deadwood from the resulting climax forests. Depending on the forest it > takes 50 to 100 years to reach climax, so there is no rush. I estimated > approximately how much land and how many desalination plants this would > take. The numbers are not that high. > > - Jed > >
