Question about global warming, carbon dioxide and half-baked idea

[steve2470]

Please forgive me for my lack of expertise in global warming. I'll do my best to make sense here.

My understanding is that an excess of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (in addition to other factors) is the overwhelming problem causing climate change and overall increased global temperature.

If my thesis is basically correct, in my idle moments I have considered a very half-baked idea that governments/very large corporations could employ to reduce the problem.

Idea: Giant machines to extract carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and then dispose it safely some place.

Yes, the idea is not well thought out. It may be impossible or impractical or too expensive. Of course, the best solution is to reduce our carbon footprint and reduce greenhouse gases, etc.

Thoughts ?

[Rincewind]

1. Dispose of it

where exactly? Can't put it in the oceans, it would turn them acidic and kill off all the life there. If you inject it underground, how would you keep it there?

[steve2470]

3. my only thought, and I'm no chemist....

is to combine the CO2 with another substance to make it "safe" and disposable.

I'm thinking it's impossible.

[Confusious]

15. Ammonia + CO2 will make a salt

But the problem is getting enough. You might be able to collect it from pee.

I'm not Fing with you.

[steve2470]

16. I was reading the link from Tunkamerica and this problem is huge

Of course, the problem is twofold, drastically lower man-made production of CO2 and then a practical method of CO2 sequestration.

Collecting urine, transporting it, processing it..... I can hear the jokes now lol

I'm game for any idea that works. I was shocked to see people at that link vigorously disputing the contribution of man-made CO2 to the problem. I'm obviously new to this debate.

[Confusious]

17. Well, you could probably convert

The urine at waste water treatment plants. Then you just have to transport ammonia.

It could probably be used in the towns it comes from, and you might not even have to transport it.

Of course converting it would take energy, and where dos that come from? Coal?

You have to find something that has low energy need with high yield.

[Tunkamerica]

7. As someone else, somewhere stated.

All of the CO2 that we're pumping into the atmosphere was all gathered from the surface and subsurface of the earth. We don't create any of it, we dig up previously secreted carbon and burn it. Taking that burnt up carbon and re-depositing it somewhere is better than just letting it change the environment. I read tonight about sequestration in the antarctic. I'm not a climate science expert but what i read made sense.

[steve2470]

9. thank you for this !!!! nt

[Tunkamerica]

12. no problem, i thought this was what you were referring to.

Since I literally just read the post then saw your thread a few minutes later.

[Tunkamerica]

10. see my lower links

[dipsydoodle]

2. Algae can be used absorb carbon dioxide

There are many links to that subject.

[steve2470]

4. Algae hmmm

Thinking aloud, how much algae, how deployed, etc.

[Tunkamerica]

5. Is this about the antarctic idea?

http://judithcurry.com/2012/08/24/a-modest-proposal-for-sequestration-of-co2-in-the-antarctic/

[steve2470]

6. I'm lost

This is just a half-baked idea I came up with. I didn't think about the Antarctic when I was pondering this.

[Tunkamerica]

8. I edited with a link. I just read this tonight.

[Scootaloo]

11. No extractive method can keep pace with the production at its current rate

Ever been in line at a fast food place and the person ahead of you orders two quarter-pounders with cheese and bacon, super-sizes their fries, takes the offer of a hot apple pie... and then orders a diet coke?

That's our situation here. Only with carbon instead of calories.

[dipsydoodle]

13. Given that the US has been the greatest contributor for at least the past 60 years

one solution would be for the US to stop using all oil based products for the next 60 years.

[NickB79]

22. We don't have 60 years

Hell, the Arctic Ice Cap will be gone in 6 years, at which point the positive feedback of methane release from the tundra will become unstoppable.

[BadgerKid]

19. They're still experimenting with sequestration of CO2 byproduct.

For example: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace/2011/11/illinois-sequestration-project-first-in-us-for-man-made-co2.html

[steve2470]

20. very interesting, thanks ! nt

[steve2470]

14. thanks to Tunkamerica, this is an excellent discussion of the problems involved:

http://judithcurry.com/2012/08/24/a-modest-proposal-for-sequestration-of-co2-in-the-antarctic/

[DetlefK]

18. Massive forestation?

The answer is: plants.

Planting new forests would lower the CO2-content of the atmosphere over the course of decades and centuries.
And the trees would keep erosion in check, which leads to more groundwater. (H2O is also a greenhouse-gas.)

This is a long-term plan that takes decades to kick in, but it's very simple and doesn't rely on international coordination (just cooperation).

[Scootaloo]

21. Okay. Where are you going to plant them?

You can't just cram trees everywhere and go "there I fixed it!" Most of the places that trees are suitable for... are deforested areas (I know, and the sky is blue, too!) - the problem is that heavily deforested areas tend to look like this nowadays: