Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #511155 > unrolled thread

Sucking carbon from the sky may do little to slow climate change

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Sucking carbon from the sky may do little to slow climate change Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-08-04 08:15 -0500
    Re: Sucking carbon from the sky may do little to slow climate change Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-08-04 08:22 -0500
    Re: Sucking carbon from the sky may do little to slow climate change jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-04 17:31 +0000
      Re: Sucking carbon from the sky may do little to slow climate change benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-08-05 01:46 -0400
        Re: Sucking carbon from the sky may do little to slow climate change HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-05 07:15 -0400
    Re: Sucking carbon from the sky may do little to slow climate change gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-04 16:42 -0500
    Re: Sucking carbon from the sky may do little to slow climate change "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-08-04 15:16 -0700

#511155 — Sucking carbon from the sky may do little to slow climate change

Sucking carbon from the sky may do little to slow climate change
> http://news.sciencemag.org/chemistry/2015/08/sucking-carbon-sky-may-not-slow-climate-change

> CDR technologies belong to a class of climate change–fighting
> techniques known as geoengineering. They include enhancing forests to
> make them absorb more CO2, building chemical plants that filter the
> air directly, and burning biofuels and storing the emitted carbon
> dioxide underground. These may sound far-fetched, but the
> Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded last year that
> reaching a key emissions goal—roughly equivalent to limiting warming
> to 2°C by 2100—would rely on the deployment of one or several CDR
> technologies. Deploying them could cost more than a trillion dollars,
> one expert estimates.
>
> The new study puts the concept of CDR to the test—without getting
> into the specifics of which technology to use. The authors used
> computer simulations to figure out what would happen if engineers
> removed a whopping 5 gigatons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere
> each year. Achieving that goal, equivalent to removing roughly half
> the amount of CO2 that is now emitted from manmade sources, would
> require a gargantuan global effort. (To visualize the scale, imagine
> 5000 new facilities each roughly the size of a sports stadium.)
>
> Yet the scientists found the environmental benefits of such a massive
> technological campaign were surprisingly small, especially in terms
> of protecting the ocean from the impacts of climate change. One key
> impact of rising CO2 levels is seen in the pH of ocean waters—the
> global sea surface has been acidified by roughly 0.1 units and
> impacts on marine shells are beginning to show. But the experiment
> demonstrated that the CDR campaign had only limited effect to reverse
> that trend: Without the CDR the surface pH was reduced by 0.75 units
> by 2200; with CDR the acidification was reduced 0.7 units, the team
> reports online today in Nature Climate Change.



-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#511156

On 8/4/15 8:15 AM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> Sucking carbon from the sky may do little to slow climate change
>> http://news.sciencemag.org/chemistry/2015/08/sucking-carbon-sky-may-not-slow-climate-change
>>
>
>> CDR technologies belong to a class of climate change–fighting
>> techniques known as geoengineering. They include enhancing forests to
>> make them absorb more CO2, building chemical plants that filter the
>> air directly, and burning biofuels and storing the emitted carbon
>> dioxide underground. These may sound far-fetched, but the
>> Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded last year that
>> reaching a key emissions goal—roughly equivalent to limiting warming
>> to 2°C by 2100—would rely on the deployment of one or several CDR
>> technologies. Deploying them could cost more than a trillion dollars,
>> one expert estimates.
>>
>> The new study puts the concept of CDR to the test—without getting
>> into the specifics of which technology to use. The authors used
>> computer simulations to figure out what would happen if engineers
>> removed a whopping 5 gigatons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere
>> each year. Achieving that goal, equivalent to removing roughly half
>> the amount of CO2 that is now emitted from manmade sources, would
>> require a gargantuan global effort. (To visualize the scale, imagine
>> 5000 new facilities each roughly the size of a sports stadium.)
>>
>> Yet the scientists found the environmental benefits of such a massive
>> technological campaign were surprisingly small, especially in terms
>> of protecting the ocean from the impacts of climate change. One key
>> impact of rising CO2 levels is seen in the pH of ocean waters—the
>> global sea surface has been acidified by roughly 0.1 units and
>> impacts on marine shells are beginning to show. But the experiment
>> demonstrated that the CDR campaign had only limited effect to reverse
>> that trend: Without the CDR the surface pH was reduced by 0.75 units
>> by 2200; with CDR the acidification was reduced 0.7 units, the team
>> reports online today in Nature Climate Change.


    Your reaction:

    [ ]  So What
    [ ]  It's not happening
    [ ]  Don't mess with my life
    [ ]  It's my grandkids' problem, not mine
    [ ]  What's a mere 2°C, So What
    [ ]  What's a mere 4-6°C, So What
    [ ]  We're Toast


-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#511191

Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sucking carbon from the sky may do little to slow climate change

Or in other words, we are all doomed!!


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#511313

On 08/04/2015 01:31 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Sucking carbon from the sky may do little to slow climate change
>
> Or in other words, we are all doomed!!
>
>
Well, jimp, we WOULD be doomed if it were true that CO2 is the major 
cause of global warming. Luckily it isn't.



-- 
         ___           ___           ___            ___
        /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
       /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
      /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
     /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
    /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
    \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
     \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
      \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
       \_:/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
                      \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#511336

On 8/5/2015 1:46 AM, benj wrote:
>
> Well, jimp, we WOULD be doomed if it were true that CO2 is the major
> cause of global warming. Luckily it isn't.


BJ cops to believing in global warming.


-- 
Cut off one head, two more shall take its place.
HAIL HYDRA!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZcG5UOY224

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#511243

On 8/4/2015 8:15 AM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> Sucking carbon from the sky may do little to slow climate change

what a narrow and biased article.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#511265

On Tuesday, August 4, 2015 at 6:15:26 AM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote:
> Sucking carbon from the sky may do little to slow climate change
> > http://news.sciencemag.org/chemistry/2015/08/sucking-carbon-sky-may-not-slow-climate-change
> 
> > CDR technologies belong to a class of climate change-fighting
> > techniques known as geoengineering. They include enhancing forests to
> > make them absorb more CO2, building chemical plants that filter the
> > air directly, and burning biofuels and storing the emitted carbon
> > dioxide underground. These may sound far-fetched, but the
> > Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded last year that
> > reaching a key emissions goal--roughly equivalent to limiting warming
> > to 2°C by 2100--would rely on the deployment of one or several CDR
> > technologies. Deploying them could cost more than a trillion dollars,
> > one expert estimates.
> >
> > The new study puts the concept of CDR to the test--without getting
> > into the specifics of which technology to use. The authors used
> > computer simulations to figure out what would happen if engineers
> > removed a whopping 5 gigatons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere
> > each year. Achieving that goal, equivalent to removing roughly half
> > the amount of CO2 that is now emitted from manmade sources, would
> > require a gargantuan global effort. (To visualize the scale, imagine
> > 5000 new facilities each roughly the size of a sports stadium.)
> >
> > Yet the scientists found the environmental benefits of such a massive
> > technological campaign were surprisingly small, especially in terms
> > of protecting the ocean from the impacts of climate change. One key
> > impact of rising CO2 levels is seen in the pH of ocean waters--the
> > global sea surface has been acidified by roughly 0.1 units and
> > impacts on marine shells are beginning to show. But the experiment
> > demonstrated that the CDR campaign had only limited effect to reverse
> > that trend: Without the CDR the surface pH was reduced by 0.75 units
> > by 2200; with CDR the acidification was reduced 0.7 units, the team
> > reports online today in Nature Climate Change.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
> to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
> community, and physics-related social issues.

Sam We must put LA in the shaded.It can be done easily. TreBert

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web