Blog Reader Roger sends....
"I watched the 60 minutes report on CO2 capture
in Iceland and it looked interesting until you look at it
closely. Using their own numbers the total CO2 produced
world wide is 40 billion tons per year. This hot shit
carbon removal plant removes 3 million tons/year and pumps
it underground, they are working on a plant 10 times bigger
which is still meaningless. They also claim that they
aren't producing any CO2 to run the plant since its
electricity comes from geothermal heat. What is totally
ignored is that this electricity could be sent elsewhere
instead of running this useless feelgood project. The idea
here is that if we spend huge amounts of money we can
somehow make a difference so they only compare it to
handpicked reductions in the US and Western countries. The
amount of CO2 captured is laughable when looking at the
whole picture.
There's been a stampede of investment into direct air capture, but some advocates worry the carbon capture process may not be scaled up fast enough to make an impact.
Direct air capture is a new technology that vacuums carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. The CO2 is trapped by a special filter inside a giant collector – each the size of a shipping container. In Iceland, home to the world's first commercial direct air capture plant, CO2 is then sent to be buried deep underground in porous volcanic rock, where it hardens to stone in less than two years.
Scientists estimate carbon capture needs to remove 10 billion tons of carbon dioxide annually, at the same time as there are drastic cuts in fossil fuels. ORCA, which CBS news correspondent Bill Whitaker visited in Iceland, can take out the emissions of about 800 cars, or 4,000 tons of CO2. Scaling direct air capture is a gargantuan challenge.
China permitted more coal power plants last year than any time in the last seven years, according to a new report released this week. It's the equivalent of about two new coal power plants per week. The report by energy data organizations Global Energy Monitor and the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air finds the country quadrupled the amount of new coal power approvals in 2022 compared to 2021.
CO2 is not a pollutant.
ReplyDeleteDo these "people" (I use the word cautiously) want to kill off all the plants and people?
That's what it sounds like to me.
Plants absorb CO2 as food and exhale O2 that mammals (that includes people) breathe.
If anything, I'd want to throw extra CO2 into the atmosphere to encourage more plant growth.
CO2 is not a pollutant.
ReplyDeleteDo these "people" (I use the word cautiously) want to kill off all the plants and people?
That's what it sounds like to me.
Plants absorb CO2 as food and exhale O2 that mammals (that includes people) breathe.
If anything, I'd want to throw extra CO2 into the atmosphere to encourage more plant growth.
Direct air capture technology is being built only because of tax credits. Nobody in their right mind would otherwise do this. Which explains why government is involved.
ReplyDeleteThe whole thing is just a scam. Co2 isn't gonna kill us or the planet. Satellites show there is more green stuff growing now. How many times do they have to be wrong before they lose credibility? Show me ONE of their dire predictions that have come true. Just ONE, aand, the medieval warm period,, it Used to be warmer than it is now.. Remains of grape ggrowing, vineyards, in Europe, further north than they can be grown today Proves the climate was warmer. So why not pay attention to that? Because this is not about the earth. It's about control over the population. Fight against this agenda
ReplyDeleteHow about planting some trees? Nature figured this thing out a couple of years ago.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.freightwaves.com/news/more-coal-is-being-shipped-by-sea-than-ever-before And where does a lot of that cold come from? You guessed it via warren Buffett and BNSF
ReplyDeleteAnother exercise in pointlessness. Even if every CO2 molecule that humankind is responsible for, up to and including our exhales, could be captured and sequestered somehow, and hint: it can't, not even close, the maximum reduction in atmospheric CO2 we could hope for is 12ppm.
ReplyDeleteCan CO2 affect global temperatures? Yes, but there is currently no way to determine how much. That technology simply does not exist no matter how many guesses there are, that's all they are, guesses. The system is far too complicated to model, all the climate models are propaganda.
Does humankind contribute to the CO2 in the atmosphere? Yes, about 3% of the total CO2 content or approximately 0.000012% of the current atmosphere.
What would happen if all human sources of CO2 were completely eliminated? No one knows but chances are really, really good that whatever does happen would be impossible to detect.
The math associating human caused CO2 with any rise in global average temperatures has never worked and never will.
It has never been about climate change or pollution. It has always been about the money and power. It would be more obvious to the millennials and gen Z if the message came from some African Prince by email. But for some reason the millennials and Z's are immune from common sense and committed to mass suicide.
ReplyDeleteIt would cost so much less & be much better for the planet to just plant more trees letting them take in CO2 and releasing O2. It is all natural and the way things were meant to be.
ReplyDeleteThe algae in the ocean will take up most of that CO2, so while we dump 40 tons per year the equilibrium will shift to only an added 1 billion tons per year,
ReplyDeleteHeres some info from John Birch about Carbon capture and the threat it really is.
ReplyDeletehttps://jbs.org/tag/carbon-capture/
R
The co2 scare is total bull. when this miserable rock was formed the ENTIRE atmosphere was co2. but according to the scare these grifters do today, the planet should have fried itself ala venus. it didnt happen but the venus scenario is used to create the total BS meant to frighten you to giving up your way of life and money to make the snake oil salesmen rich.
ReplyDeleteI have to laugh at Iceland bringing a carbon capture plant online. Do they NOT UNDERSTAND that Icelandic volcano's belch more CO2 in a week than the plant can EVER recapture?
ReplyDeleteThen there's the Indonesian undersea volcano that exploded last year injecting 300 Trillion TONS of water vapor into our atmosphere. The water vapor reached the Mesosphere where it will remain suspended for no one knows how long. Water vapor not only absorbs heat from the sun, it acts like a blanket keeping the captured heat in the atmosphere below, not allowing it to be released back into space.
CO2 comprises .04% of atmospheric gas. That's .004 of the total. Water vapor is "estimated" to be 2-5% of atmospheric gas, i.e. 5X as much. The papers I've read on the subject of atmospheric water vapor content label it as "estimated" BECAUSE IT DOESN'T FIT THE NARRATIVE of human caused Anthropogenic warming. The "studies" which result in these papers are all .gov funded by governments all over the developed world and by the corrupt United Nations IPCC(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, notice the name governmental included in their title), so the conclusions drawn from the studies are, at best, strongly influenced by the sources of the funding for the studies. Not to mention that members of the IPCC study committee were CAUGHT RED HANDED COLLUDING to alter historic temperature data used as the basis for the study's conclusions.
As with all other things associated with the modern world, always follow the money to determine if what is reported is real or BBBOOOOOOLLLSSSHHHIIITTT.
Nemo
The volcano was in Tonga. That water has been falling back down on me ever since with, apparently, about another 18 months to go before things get back to normal. I've never seen the ground so saturated.
DeleteThe usual idiots blame climate change of course.
We need CO2, and lots of it. Without it things don't grow.
ReplyDeleteAnd you can explain it to the very people who holler Follow the Sighunse, you can show them the documents, and nothing they believe will change.
ReplyDeleteThis is a two-fer for the scum who worship the Great Reset. Reducing carbon dioxide will also reduce food production - a goal of the WEF and the elite fools who grovel at Schwab's (and Xi Jinping's) feet.
ReplyDeleteA year or so back, when the Biden/Obama admin opened up Oil/gas leases in the Gulf of Mexico, Exxon leased the biggest one available.NOT to produce useful oil or natural gas. They leased it as a place to pump the millions (billions, eventually?) of TONS of CO2. Exxon doesn't care about our continuing need for fossil fuels, for inexpensive and reliable energy. They only care about the money. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/exxon-record-profits-gouging-consumers-cd/
The business of business is money. Anything that interferes with that is pure pablum and ought to be exterminated right ricky tick.
Delete(Sacred bulls not withstanding)
Would you rather a business be more mindful of its eco and social standing?
We see that crap right now with the ESG nonsense. ESG is a real threat to economies the world round.
(This is not to be confused with being a good steward.)
Anonameless - Yes, making money is fine, usually good news in a free market society, but screwing the rest of us over to make a buck is not. Massive reductions in CO2 will not only be dangerous, it will reduce food production, harm forests and possibly grasslands as well (reduce grazing for cattle, bison, elk), and perhaps even make it tough on people with respiratory issues. Humans don't only produce CO2 by breathing, we cannot keep breathing without the proper amount of CO2 present.
DeleteToo bad you don't seem to understand that Exxon is jumping on the ESG bandwagon, but maybe you just aren't paying attention.
We already have a free "direct air capture" process in the billions upon billions of trees that are scattered around our planet. They are renewable, self-sustaining and work 24 hours a day. They care for us by repaying us for our CO2 by giving us the O2 we need to survive. Coal may be a "fossil fuel" but oil is not.
ReplyDeleteActually, oil IS a fossil fuel. It is created from the remains of organisms living millions of years ago the collected and converted to the liquid we know as petroleum: https://energyeducation.ca › encyclopedia › Oil_formation
Deletehttps://energyeducation.ca › encyclopedia › Oil_formation (a fossil fuel).
DeleteThere’s a new to me outfit that’s been advertising on TV lately: search for Sciencemoms and you’ll find the usual climate BS.
ReplyDeleteThey also have a “contact us” link on the bottom of their webpage. 🤣🤣
Now why on God's green planet would I want to contact them?
Delete(said with tongue firmly planted in both cheeks)
President Elect B Woodman
On the China coal powered electric plants, I've read stories, starting, I think, early last decade reporting that China has been bringing a new coal fired electric power plant online EVERY WEEK since the first of such stories was posted in, in think it was, 2011. That's 624 coal fired power plants counting from 2011.
ReplyDeleteThere is so much coal soot in China's air that most days the air is brown and some days you can't see 50 feet. Then there's other heavy industries like steel and aluminum making and more recently rare earth mineral refining, contributing who knows how much pollution to China's and the earth's Glowbull warming through CO2 and soot generation.
Remember the video news reports on China's air pollution in the run up to the 2008 Summer Olympics? The CCP .gov shut down all industry and most coal fired power plants in the country for a month before the Olympics started to clear the air enough so that athlete' wouldn't be injuring their health by competing outdoors.
Back in the 90's, I worked for a small company whose business was vapor recovery at gasoline fueling stations. The company president and marketing manager traveled to China for two weeks to negotiate with the government about using the company's products there. When they returned, the president, who was in his middle seventies at the time, was sick for a couple weeks because of the pollution. They also showed us pictures of what the air looked like on any given day during their trip. Based on what I saw in those pictures, you really shouldn't venture outdoors there without at least an N95 mask on.
Where there's all of that soot generation, there's also CO2 generation, estimated to be in the Trillions of tons annually that also contributes to glowbull warming.
China, as the world's top producer of CO2, generates as much of the gas as the next five countries combined. https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country/
Yet, is China subject to any of the "Climate Accords" that have been negotiated by the UN in the past 15-20-30 years? China's reply is the "we're and emerging economy", despite their economic size being on par with ours and the EU, "therefore we should be exempt from any of these proposals"(I'm paraphrasing those quotes so that the intent of their reply is clear).
In other words, Eff You, stronger message to follow.
Nemo
The only thing that is unclear is how many 10% honchos have their hands in the project.
ReplyDeleteHow many TONS of CO2 would those 160 MILLION TREES in Scotland absorb? Well, if they hadn't been cut down for the "wind farm"?
ReplyDeleteOne more thing: Milankovitch cycles, which I've commented on in these pages before:
ReplyDeleteThere's also a thing called Milankovitch cycles which take into account all the KNOWN(emphasis because there may still be unknowns) orbital variables of earth/sun/rest of the solar system interactions. According to a temperature plot I saw some time ago, we just passed the peak of the current cycle. These interactions are lllooonnngg on the time scale encompassing thousands of years. One of them is +40,000 years. neither of the cited papers below take into account added variables like volcano's and soot injection into the atmosphere as far as I could tell from skimming through both.
There's more info here: https://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/milankovitch-cycles-paleoclimatic-change-and-hominin-evolution-68244581/
and here: https://courses.seas.harvard.edu/climate/eli/Courses/EPS281r/Sources/Glacial-cycles/Milankovitch-cycles-Wikipedia.pdf
The graph at the link below shows where we are in the current cycle:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/53/MilankovitchCyclesOrbitandCores.png
Nemo
GIVE me more CO2!!!! it is at a level near the all time world low.....more CO2 will increase vegetation and bring higher crop yields....BRING IT ON!!!!
ReplyDeleteHi Irish!!!!,
ReplyDeleteI liv down in the S/E section of "God's Country!!!".. S/E Louisiana .. down in what we call the Boot!! A pensylvania Co. (I don't give them credit for a Capital Letter!!!) called (air products) got in with the Gov. .. ol' "bel edwards" greased his ass and now we are looking at the destruction of Lake Maurepas if the project goes thru.. there was a seismic survey just done but the results of fissures and etc. are not in yet! If thy (Lie their way thru!! WE ARE F%(&ed!!!!) Within a year of doing it, a couple of those 17 to 37 well heads poking up out of the lake .. and people trying to enjoy the area .. an accident will happen Wait till the "Ticfaw 200" poker run with 100 mph boats barrelin' down the lake and one hits a well head!!! It won't be pretty and me sayin' ,"Itol'ya'so!!!" ain't gonnadomuchgood!!!!!
BUE SKYZ, BLACK DEATH!!!!!!!,
skybill
PS Where Have I Heard THAT!!! (sayin') BEFORE!!!!
where on that graph are the pizza ovens? I cannot find them?
ReplyDelete