Limitless sequestration? 3

Comments View as Flat

1. 

   PBrazelton Posted 1:13 am
   08 Aug 2006

   CO2 + H20 = H2CO3 (Carbonic Acid)And there are already reports of the acidification of the oceans due to increased atmospheric levels of CO2.  Perhaps liquid CO2 at depth would simply stratify and not dissolve into the surrounding water, but I'm not sure I would be willing to bet all of the oceans of the planet on that.
   Also, aren't there ecosystems even at the depths being spoken of?  I've watched all of the BBC's Deep Blue episodes (so I'm an expert), and there sure seeemed like a lot of things going on, even at incredible depths.

   Permalink

2. 

   Amy Gregory Posted 2:24 am
   08 Aug 2006

   hear hear for some concernI agree. It just seems too good to be true. Why can't we all get together and focus on the right stuff. Sure, i think it is important to have some pragmatism, to prepare for worst case scenarios. But if we put things like this on the back, back burner and spent more money and time on cleaner generation and efficiency and implementing the technologies we already have, we wouldn't need to worry quite as much about capturing massive amounts of CO2 in the future.
   
   Amy Gregory
   
   GreenpeaceUSA

   Permalink

3. 

   sunflower Posted 2:36 am
   08 Aug 2006

   burping from oceansRevkin is grasping at straws, so am I.  Sequestration of CO2 will not be done because it is more expensive than burning coal the old fashion way.  The energy and cost of CO2 sequestration would double the cost of coal energy and shareholders are ultimately greedy and hostile.
   Methane burping from oceans will destroy civilization and the families of my non-human friends.
   
   http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/GlobalWarming/story?id=2...
   
   Don't carpool alone.

   Permalink