The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The carbon capture con > Comments

The carbon capture con : Comments

By Viv Forbes, published 19/3/2020

The quantities of gases that CCS would need to handle are enormous and capital and operating costs will be horrendous.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
I am reliably informed by one of my friends who works in the power industry in the Latrobe Valley that they actually have a pilot plant which is doing just that.

David
Posted by VK3AUU, Thursday, 19 March 2020 9:58:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I rarely, if ever, agree with this writer but this time I do.
Not completely for his reasons though.
Both "Clean Coal" and CCS are oxymorons, ridiculously expensive and totally impractical.
Solar is nuclear.
Posted by ateday, Thursday, 19 March 2020 9:58:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
While we are on the mania with carbon dioxide and “zero emissions”, think about this:

The China virus could be helping us to see what 'zero emissions' will look like, according to Rafe Champion in Catallaxy Files this morning.

"Planes parked up, cruise ships anchored, airports deserted, tourists not touring, supermarket shelves bare, Disneyland shut, borders closing, motor races cancelled, no fans in the stands, smelters and factories closing, travel banned, oil and coal prices crashing, stock markets plunging, businesses closing, bankruptcies rising, hotels and motels unoccupied, politicians panicking, barbies cold – – looks like zero emissions is almost here."
Posted by ttbn, Thursday, 19 March 2020 10:04:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The CO2 is the bi-product of a process which is using brown coal to produce hydrogen. The Japanese have already built a ship to carry the hydrogen which will be under refrigeration and high pressure. Our chief scientist Finkel seems to think this is the best process since the invention of sliced bread. (my words, not his}. The exhausted oil wells in Bass Strait are the intended storage places for the CO2. Sounds a bit dicey to me.
David
Posted by VK3AUU, Thursday, 19 March 2020 10:21:23 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Wow, what a weird combination of idiotic claims and statements of the obvious!

Plants are not short of food. CO2 warms the atmosphere. The physics is well known, humans have been responsible for a 50% rise in atmospheric CO2 levels since preindustrial times, and temperatures have been rising all round the world. Yet the idiots on this board think that coal is good for humanity therefore this can't be happening!

The fossil fuel lobby knew it didn't make sense to bet everything on suppressing the truth; they could only fool some of the people some of the time. So instead they decided to promote carbon capture and storage. It was known from the start that it was uneconomic, but renewables were expensive then so they thought they might have a chance. And there are quite a lot of suitable aquifers around. But even back then, it was difficult to find backers. And now that renewables are cheap, CCS has no chance.
Posted by Aidan, Thursday, 19 March 2020 10:28:57 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sorry Aiden, but your wrong on two fronts.

1.Increased C02 does improve plant productivity and greenhouse experiments in the early 1990's that proved it. Now so well acknowledged that commercial greenhouses enhance CO2 to promote production figures and are a major user of bottle C02. That's about the only value you could get from using CCS liquified CO2!

2. You blindly state that C02 rise has caused temp rise and that's proven. Well know, as previous OLO authors have pointed out, Plass (1956) theory remains that and is unproven. Just because models have created fake algorithms to simulate the link so they can run they modesl does not proof it! I assume that's what you interpret as "the physics has shown. If not provide me with the papers that have shown it, rather than modelled it. Many have tried to run atmospheric CO2/temp realworld experiments and NONE have been successful. The ONLY useful one of such experiments was by Idso (a proper climate scientist) in the US in the 1970's which showed the link DID NOT EXIST!

On an additional note, please explain why the Vostok cores of the late 1970's show the correlation between CO2 and Temp … BUT, yes BUT as with other cores it shows that CO2 rise LAGS (i.e. FOLLOWS Temp rise) by 100-800 years.

As say again, when will the populous wise up and declare this whole thing as the most destructive scientific scam ever inflicted upon us.

It makes turning lead into gold seem respectable and plausiable.

While the sheep follow pied pipers like Gore, Flannery and Thunberg into the depths of educational oblivion, I hope I live long enough to see them and the cohort of fake modelling so-called-climate science modellers tried, and punitively dealt with for MASS DESCEPTION and CORUPTION. If we are lucky, they will bring back Hanging, drawing and quartering just for them! Now that's a Foxtel Prime Event ticket I would gladly pay for!
Posted by Alison Jane, Thursday, 19 March 2020 11:37:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy