Blind Freddie knows that it will be next to impossible to supply the demands of the world's resources and reduce carbon emissions at the same time.

Despite the fact that this appears to be a forbidden subject, why is carbon capture not high on the list of priorities.

We are heading for an economic melt down, especially if we increase our population, increase our tax income stream burden and reduce outputs, yet neither of the major parties seems the least bit interested in this subject. It appears to be in the TO HARD basket.

Is it not at least worth consideration?

rehctub, carbon capture is aready being done and it will get much, much more important. As well as sequestration, there's the ability to recycle the CO2 and CO into useful products, including polymers and even fuel!

Australian industry actually leads the world in this stuff, mostly because of the whole "clean coal" thing.

The biggest impediment is that there is simply so much CO2/CO produced that it massively exceeds the current capacity to use it. That's going to create new industries.

dont worry
you got the right buzzword
now to write the rest of your grant application

and govt will give you a tax credit
you can sell for half its cost to us the tax payer

win win

all we need do is do nothing
and let the trees grow

if you watched that show on channel 7
you know if we do nothing,the earth mother
will heal herself in a few years..

anyhow im getting out of breath
talking about the same old subsidy grab
via yet another new tax

so please note todays news
thousands of solar cells..[should read SUBSIDISED solar cells are failing...looks like we got the next pink batts scam unwinding]

the reason is poor componants
and poor workmanship

well at least this will minimise
the cost of bying solar BACK

we gotta stop these scames..[scemes]
and the delusion of green jobs[yesterdays headline]

the scam is slowly devolving
why are we subsidising the carbon price
for double the 'market rate'

heck i just coped a lecture from belly
who ignored my proof of an after life
by calling me a liar..cause im a warming denier
refuses to even look at a link[but heck he isnt alone]

we all have
our blind minds

talk of missing the forrest for the trees
those who bought into the scam
need to recall pride
goeth before the fall

[not aimed at you belly]

and ps...im only online for another month..or so
[dec 4 is d day..for me
then im over the lot of it]

so why begin spell checking...now
people who ignore
will allways ignore

ps the spell check might spell well
but we still got to...*chose an option

and if we pick the wrong option..it only looks more silly
[aimed at you belly]

we are both sows ears mate
im not pretending im not

[and i dont lie]
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4728&page=0

anyhow im over it
all of it

do what you will
increase the gst..so takeover corperations
wont have to pay sales tax

should i comment
on that other topic

cause ignorant unionists...paying double the cost of services
cause of this green clean scam..and paying subsidies to scamers[alp govts]

and the boss only offering 2% wage increase
heck your a boss..

the mugs wont want more pay mate
if govt would stop trying to plunder it from their wages

sure increase compulsory super
and the boss will need to increase the wage 2%

clubber..man

the more we pay..in taxes
the more you will be paying..in wages

think about it

One of the problems seems to be the cost addition onto electricity.
I gather one of the problems is that the sequestration places are not
near the power stations and require pipelines and pumps.
All that increases the CO2 level.

The processes that antisceptic mentioned have been suggested but I have
not seen any report that they are economic.

Most politicians, greens excepted, probably run away for anything that
will push up electricity prices.
I suspect that it might be another catch 22.

Rehtub, there is far more going on in this field then you might
think or be aware of. Its just not on the front page of your
newspaper.

Some of the world's brightest money and brains are working on it.
People like Richard Branson, Bill Gates and Craig Ventor are
placing their bets on algae, backed by the US Navy, which wants
a fuel solution for its ships and planes.

What limits algae growth in a large enough scale to produce cheap
fuel is in fact CO2. So it makes perfect sense to take CO2 from
something like a power station and use it to create algae based
biofuel on a massive scale.

Some small scale operations are working on it in Australia too.
Last time I checked, IIRC the Smorgons were backing it here.

Algae growth is alive and well. Blue Green Algae is the most prolific grower. Carbon stowage is ok , but there is always a limit, and the end product will have to be , don't make it and we won't have to worry about it. So all solutions have to be implemented. Self powering generators need more work on them. A generator that generates vastly more power than it takes to run itself. There's a lot of projects on the experimental bench. The ultimate winner will be drowning in grog for life.

When we actually get low on hydrocarbon fuels, in a century or more, if we haven't developed something better by then, using CO2 to promote algae growth for fuel production will be worthwhile.

Meanwhile, if the truth be known, when the global warming con collapses, genuine research will prove that the atmosphere requires a greater than current percentage of CO2, for the health of most life on the planet.

Meanwhile how insidious is the con, that people, who well know that CO2 is not some villain, are thinking that it should be restricted, & even how to do it.

"""
Self powering generators need more work on them. A generator that generates vastly more power than it takes to run itself.
"""

The law of physics/entropy prevents this, and the last time I checked we were no closer today than ever from changing the very laws of the universe!

Is this how greenies and the left think we will power our societies in the near future?

Dreamers the lot of them!

Don't be so silly 579, how could a nice lefty government survive with out a fuel tax?

Hell, even with a huge fuel tax it's not enough for them. They have to invent a new one to rip us off.

How could any govt; survive without a fuel tax. It still has to be distributed so you won't miss out on putting your fair share in.
A self propelled generator is not unusual, when it comes to inventions, does medieval physics come into it.

I will stay with my planed road Rechtub.
Avoid the threads that are so very remote from true discussion .
And lead to warfare.
Understanding and or fair minded contributors will under stand.
Both Abbott and Gillard, in fact every plan I have ever heard of, includes in part Carbon capture.
This debate brings insults and uninformed comments not debate,
'So enjoy!

*using CO2 to promote algae growth for fuel production will be worthwhile*

Hasbeen, it will be worthwhile when the numbers and technology stack
up. Its also about US energy security. Relying on those pesky
Arabs, Venezuelans etc, for reliable supplies, is not the best of
ideas.
Besides, oil extraction is becoming increasingly difficult and
costly as rigs go deeper and deeper, so oil prices will be heading
upward.

So throw in some genetic engineering of algae by people like Ventor
and good old US venture capital might just work wonders yet again.

Besides, it would also create massive amounts of American jobs

CO2 capture on a planetary scale within the timeframe we have, even if nations worked immediately and strenuously together towards it, is just another furphy. We can't be inactive while waiting for it and we can't be waiting to see whether experiments such as UV light and water droplet formation etc. will have an effect on the scientific consensus that there is a man-made problem. We must act now on the basis of the knowledge and technology at hand.

Those with the notions we have a century of fossil fuels might want to get more across the subject by having a look at the series starting at http://www.search-results.com/videos/watch-video/arithmetic-population-and-energy-part-1-a-talk-by-al-bartlett/BY7LTZYQtgoBAcCSTgOIXw?o=14900&l=dis&ver=11&domain=www.search-results.com

We have to work all ends of the problems we face. Sitting back with a faith in some amazing future salvation is just wishful thinking. We must act on the basis of the knowledge and technology available now.

I realize such moronic thinking stereotypes me as a pinko-commie-gay-whale-loving-tree-hugging-brown-rice-eating-bead-wearing-incense-burning-kombi-driver and I expect a proper flaming for my outburst from the OLO trolls. UOG, if your stuff rhymed I might read it

"""
A self propelled generator is not unusual
"""

Then you shouldn't have too much trouble pointing one out to me?

"""
does medieval physics come into it
"""

Is this a rhetorical question?

I think there's still a long way to go to make algae a viable fuel solution from what I've read.

There's only a couple of strains with high enough lipid count to be suitable and keeping contaminating strains out of the culture is a huge task.

Also great amounts of energy are required to extract the oils upon cultivation, so much so that NASA gave up on the idea back in the 70's when they spent considerable amount of time and money researching this tech.

I think they need to genetically modify some of the better strains to make it easier to extract their oil, otherwise it wouldn't be worth the setup costs and energy required to cultivate them.

On another note, beware of scams in this field, some have already been burned!

dont sweat on it luc-erase
im not about seeking praise

anyhow..on a point of note
here i quote what you have wrote

""We must act now"''

now there is a phrase
that my mind cant erase

so tell mr ol luci erase
who first coined the phrase

thing is mate..thats the same words i heard
when we bailed out the bankers..virtually overnight
and where did we get the cash from...we lent it from the banks

so the rich..got the bailout
and the poor are stuck paying of the debt
where did the money go..to banker bous..lest we forget

we are urged to act now
dont think..do it NOW
tomorrow is too late
wake up to the spin..[mate]

""on the basis of the knowledge"'

so tell me oh light of erasure
who's knowledge of phrase..who's knowledge
shall recieve our hard earned lucre'

""and technology at hand""
is petro chemical
we got at least 50 years with known reserves
and we got coal seam gas..comming out of our sarse

so who get the subsidy mate
solar cells or wind..or those growing algie
or ge and the nukes they refuse to recind..who wants the subsidy silly

its not me
so it must be you

so you dealt out your hand
got a link..strike up the band

sorry mate im not seeing it
i hope you hang arround

carbon capture...lol..how droll
how about googling up magnet moters on youtube
or the other gas..that dont explode..[see it implodes]
from a few stainless steel cylenders..[from the joe cell]..that runs our car for free.

pro hart had 3

bah im over trying to please

how much of my cash tax..will your polution solution cost me
if you want my subsidy..it isnt really free

yes i know
im such a tease

"""
how about googling up magnet moters on youtube
"""

How about you point me to one that's been proven credible?
And really, OUG, the Joe Cell? Is that the best you can do?
Next you'll be telling people will all have a Steven Marks, Toridial Coil running our houses. It's all in the ticks, those damn ticks no one can find!

I'm not saying that one day scientists won't unlock the secrets to untold amounts of power, hell there's a bazillion joules just in the air we breath out everyday, but we're far from it I'm afraid.

And if you think it's being suppressed by the evil elite, why is it they die and fly planes just like the rest of us, pretty big secret to keep for all those years donchayathink?

I have seen a bit on this algae fuel and it looks interesting.

The problem I see is it's just an alternative fuel, which is burned in any case.

What about making timber mandatory in buildings, say a certain percentage. That's carbon trapped for as long as the building stands.

There is also the thought of including carbon in building blocks, can this be done?

I think we must not confuse carbon capture with alternative energy as they are two different approaches.

Bottom line is, were will th jobs come from if we meet the reductions planned and, will we be happy allowing someone else to supply resources.

Rehctub said;
I think we must not confuse carbon capture with alternative energy as they are two different approaches.

Indeed and this is something not generally recognised.
As an example, in worrying about energy we absolutely need coal to
build the infrastructure we need to transition to a new energy regime.
However if the AGW worriers had their way we would have the coal mines
shut down and it would be too late to make the transition.

I recently read something that stated that our present level of CO2 is
only about double that needed for plant growth.
Less CO2 and the plants die.
The best level for CO2 for plants was somewhere about 1500 ppm.
For humans CO2 maximum level was in the many thousands ppm.
So the question that was asked was, "Is reducing CO2 dangerous ?"

Historically it appears that CO2 levels varied widely.
By undertaking major modification of CO2 levels could we trip on a natural reduction ?

If 50% of the population reduces their emissions by 10% and the remaining 50% don't increase their output, then does that not achieve the same result, without the need for a new tax.

If you are a true believer in human induced climat change, and you are passionate about it, what's the problem, so long as the rest of us don't increase our outputs.

Seems logical to me.