Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Phys Org2)   Talk about "damned if you do, damned if you don't.' This just blows   (phys.org) divider line
    More: Obvious, Tropical cyclone, air pollution, aerosol pollution, Cleaner air, Atlantic storm formation, larger effects of greenhouse gases, NOAA hurricane scientist Hiroyuki Murakami, numerous climate computer simulations  
•       •       •

1125 clicks; posted to STEM » on 12 May 2022 at 11:14 AM (6 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



5 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2022-05-12 10:48:17 AM  
And just like that....the Right accepts science.
 
DVD
2022-05-12 11:31:00 AM  
Indeed, clean air is such a curse.  How dare we stop emitting so many pollutants that reflect sunlight and cool the air below them?  Ya know what would also help cool the air?  To stop emitting so much CO2, so that heat isn't absorbed so much.

The time has come... for my rant about ways to absorb more CO2 out of the atmosphere.  Why?  Because you know what you did to deserve such a diatribe.  (Or one could skip my splurge of words, your choice.)

"
I'm exploring the different methods of environmental, technical or other means of absorption of atmospheric CO2.  I know that reducing emissions is the key here, but removing that which has already been emitted can also be explored and be a way to give society more time to transition over to a non-fossil-fuel economy.

One technological path being developed has examples in the area that companies such Climeworks and Carbfix are promoting.  Air is sucked into a mechanism and the CO2 filtered out and captured or the CO2 is dissolved in water and then the carbonated water injected into basaltic rock where the CO2 mineralizes with the present rock, sequestering it practically forever.

Basaltic rock dust itself could potentally be used as a CO2 sequestration medium.  But the question for me here is if it would be effective when exposed to open air, or would it be better to spread the rock dust where it would be covered in water?

Biological approaches can be pathed using tree growth and other plant management.  Tree planting in wide areas can provide a natural CO2 sink.  The oceans also play a role in CO2 absorption.  Various algae and other plants in the water require CO2 to grow and can take it from dissolved CO2 in the water.  Could more seaweed farms be created in order to absorb more CO2?  Could nutrients such as the aforementioned basalt rock dust be spread around areas of the ocean in order to create algae blooms and a massive CO2 sink in this way, or would this backfire via consequences such as creating fish-kills that would create anoxic zones that would inhibit the growth of the algae blooms?

One mention of a line of disinformation being used against the technology path should be addressed.  The technologies being developed are stil at an early stage, and therefore, the costs per ton of CO2 processed are still being accounted as high, if the entire facility cost is being weighed against the pilot level of gas being processed.  Disinformation agents are treating the fixed costs and development costs as a cost attached to the variable amount that will always remain the same.  The fact is that as the level of gas being processed increases, that fixed cost will be spread out over a far greater number of units, and thus the processing cost per unit will decrease dramatically.  This line of disinformation is used by those that are against processing CO2 out of the atmosphere, for various reasons."
 
2022-05-12 12:15:49 PM  
Some parts of the Southwest welcome hurricanes during severe droughts.  If there were only some pipe line to deliver the water to the region otherwise from flood stricken states.
 
2022-05-12 12:56:50 PM  
simpsonspark.comView Full Size


It's a paradox.
 
2022-05-12 3:09:32 PM  
I saw a tweet yesterday on a similar line of reasoning, if the logic wasn't so straightfoward and weren't slideshows from a climatologist convention you'd think it were a crazy conspiracy theory on the order of contrails.

Basically it went that Western governments have to continue to double-down on stupider and stupider reasons to do nothing about covid, because if we turned down economic output then the loss of particulants make it extremely obvious that there is so much CO2 in the atmosphere that surface temperatures skyrocket quickly without pollution. It went further that if we locked down to deal with covid there is so much of it we would have to lock down for so long that we would blow through every climate tipping point for this century within a year.

I thought about this for a while, and it struck me that China is in the perfect situation to capitalize on this with their fight against covid. The climatology slides note that the global lockdown not only made surface temperatures go crazy, but this had a direct effect on absurd levels of rainfall in Asia, and specifically causing typhoons in China. Remember that big one? Where the second floors of city apartment complexes were getting flooded, thousands drowned in the blocked-off car tunnel in minutes, and the Three Gorges Dam was threatening to burst?

It seems to me that this is a no-brainer for China, that as long as the rest of the world refuses to lock down in earnest they can get away with theirs indefinitely with no consequence, and the rest of the world can't risk locking down because then China's economic infrastructure gets demolished by insane weather which then causes contagion to entire global economy.

The knock-on is that the solution is obvious and overwhelming, that we have to take action on CO2 scrubbing immediately or the planet is one economic catastrophe away from irreversible climate calamity. And not only that, we have to also carefully manage how we scrub or we cause the very thing we are trying to prevent! Furthermore, as time goes on and more things are converted to cleaner technologies like EVs and solar, this makes the situation even more pressing as those don't directly cause particulant shielding. If this really is the case we can't even accidentally solve climate change with green energy without actually doing something about the CO2 at the same time.

If you wanted to make it into a conspiracy theory then you've got China now telling world governments to crack on dying for the Dow or all the economic gears stop. And that doesn't even sound that far-fetched at this point.
 
Displayed 5 of 5 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.