ST Alpha - "This is why I think more energy/money should be put into carbon sequestration. Alot more. -- nm" (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Login
Create Account

Search Dr. S. Talk
TT/ST Wiki
How Well Do You Know ...

RSS Feed

Hosting by DigitalOcean

Support ST on Ko-Fi

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 172

In response to "In any case, I think Wired is correct that any focus should now be on adaptation. -- (link)" by Agent.Vermin

This is why I think more energy/money should be put into carbon sequestration. Alot more. -- nm

Posted by Loyola Dec 8 '09, 11:30

(No message)

Responses:

more money is going into it - $3.4 billion of stimulus money is going into it, for a start. The EU is forking out money as well - Roger More Dec 8, 11:52
[googles] Hmm! That definitely seems more forward-looking. -- nm - Agent.Vermin Dec 8, 11:34 1
- if the ennergy consumption for CCS can be lowered AND the carbon stored safely then it's pritty smart - Danedukenuuk Dec 8, 11:40
you're right about more energy it uses atleast 25 % more -- nm - Danedukenuuk Dec 8, 11:31 8
- More than what? -- nm - mara Dec 8, 11:35 1
  - more then without CCS -- nm - Danedukenuuk Dec 8, 11:38
- What exactly uses 25% more energy? -- nm - Loyola Dec 8, 11:32 5
  - CCS -- nm - Danedukenuuk Dec 8, 11:38 4
    - Link. -- nm - Loyola Dec 8, 11:39 3
      - no - Danedukenuuk Dec 8, 11:40 2
        
        Tough to find eh? -- nm - Loyola Dec 8, 11:48 1
        
        no Joe Romm has a great multy issue piece on it - Danedukenuuk Dec 8, 11:51

Post a message top

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.