Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (57405)	12/21/2004 6:27:56 PM
From: Snowshoe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

>>Where things get far fetched is when we start hearing about CO2 sequestration schemes.<< Yeah, I thought John Kerry's plan was really far fetched... The Kerry-Edwards Plan for Clean Coal johnkerry.com excerpt... We can meet the climate-change challenge in a way that preserves and expands America's coal sector, that keeps clean-energy jobs at home, and that boosts the American economy. The key to doing this is by investing in the clean coal technologies of the future -- technologies that we and the rest of the world can use to fuel our economic growth with abundant coal, while capturing and sequestering safely in the ground the climate-altering carbon dioxide that today's coal-powered facilities emit. And that is what the Kerry-Edwards Administration's coal policy will do.

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (57405)	12/22/2004 1:50:02 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

<The idea of compressing CO2 and then storing it '20,000 Leagues Under The Sea' is just crackpot. It's a lot cheaper to plant a tree plantation> Ray, I did an extensive scientific investigation of the 20,000 leagues in 1987, but my memory is as good as Google, so I can tell you that the energy cost of the process is only 20%. The depth required is only 400 metres to retain liquid phase. Little turbines in the pipe would also be good generators. With a specific gravity of 1.2, liquid CO2 falling 400 metres would generate a decent amount of electricity. It might even be worth taking it a lot further to get even more generation if the cost of pipework and water depth allows. It was sufficiently uncrackpot for Mitsubishi to patent the idea, so there was more than me thinking it possibly worthwhile. That patent would be expiring soon. Of course, what's really crackpot is the idea that plant food in the atmosphere is a bad thing. If plants could have a vote, they'd vote for CO2 into the atmosphere and lots of it. I also like the idea of planting Australia in pine trees, and photovoltaic panels, and have advocated that idea for many years too. Mqurice