tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post2705569283923002088..comments2024-03-19T03:14:04.172-04:00Comments on Rabett Run: EliRabetthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-87876277985869196892008-11-29T19:39:00.000-05:002008-11-29T19:39:00.000-05:00Hank, that's a billion tonnes per year per cubic k...Hank, that's a billion tonnes per year per cubic kilometer. There are vast number of cubic kilometers available.<BR/><BR/>Eventually all the olivine is carbonated and no further removal is possible in that location; move on to the next one down the line.David B. Bensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02917182411282836875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-76366386823380825552008-11-26T21:35:00.000-05:002008-11-26T21:35:00.000-05:00They're saying this could handle a billion tons pe...They're saying this could handle a billion tons per year, out of the 20 to 30 billion tons -- so it's an increment, not a panacea.<BR/><BR/>Do they say for how many years that level of CO2 sequestration could go on, or what sets the limits?<BR/><BR/>Depth? Area of deposits? Access?Hank Robertshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07521410755553979665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-32854761998520612912008-11-26T20:09:00.000-05:002008-11-26T20:09:00.000-05:00In situ carbonation of peridotite for CO2 storage ...<A HREF="http://www.pnas.org/content/105/45/17295" REL="nofollow"><BR/>In situ carbonation of peridotite for CO2 storage --- Peter B. Kelemen and Jürg Matter --- PNAS</A>David B. Bensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02917182411282836875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-20999290501950359382008-11-26T12:12:00.000-05:002008-11-26T12:12:00.000-05:00ourchangingclimate, yes, that's weird. it even say...ourchangingclimate, yes, that's weird. it even says so explicitly.<BR/><BR/>Could it be that complete replacement of energy generating technologies is not counted toward fuel savings, and there is more of that in the 450 scenario?<BR/><BR/>:wqAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-82667896697797968952008-11-26T10:40:00.000-05:002008-11-26T10:40:00.000-05:00I can't find the PNAS article...I can't find the PNAS article...Magnushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01617272924116099306noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-27164967206779109762008-11-26T03:03:00.000-05:002008-11-26T03:03:00.000-05:00Anonymous, it sounds to me like you interpret the ...Anonymous, it sounds to me like you interpret the numbers for the 450 scenario relative to the 550 scenario (which I thought was meant as well), but on http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/docs/weo2008/fact_sheets_08.pdf it is mentioned that these numbers are "relative to the reference scenario". I don't see how fuel savings from the reference (leading to 1000ppm in 2100) to 450 ppm could be less than from the same 1000 ppm reference to 550 ppm. I'm sure I'm just missing something here, but don't know yet what it is.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-65541999787777048952008-11-25T19:07:00.000-05:002008-11-25T19:07:00.000-05:00But we can afford to save ourselves: Peridotite we...But we can afford to save ourselves:<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/21629/?a=f" REL="nofollow"> Peridotite weathering almost for free</A><BR/><BR/>Thanks to Micael Tobis for finding and blogging about this paper.David B. Bensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02917182411282836875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-68364557625465292382008-11-25T18:06:00.000-05:002008-11-25T18:06:00.000-05:00The present economic worries do not excuse back-tr...<I>The present economic worries do not excuse back-tracking or delays in taking action to address energy challenge.</I><BR/><BR/>Fortunately, Mr. Obama seems in agreement with this assessment. Also, few in the mainstream seem to be buying into the "we can't afford now to save ourselves" meme.Douglas Wattshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06686351092076044875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-51031615241385496232008-11-25T15:28:00.000-05:002008-11-25T15:28:00.000-05:00ourchangingclimate, that's simple: look at the pic...ourchangingclimate, that's simple: look at the picture. The figures for the 450 ppm scenario are <EM>above and beyond</EM> those for the 550 ppm scenario... which are relative to BAU.<BR/><BR/>:wqAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-45625517094453067882008-11-25T12:54:00.000-05:002008-11-25T12:54:00.000-05:00It is comforting to know that savings (from increa...It is comforting to know that savings (from increased eficiency) could outweigh the costs (of investment). I don't quite understand though how fuel savings can be lower for the 450 ppm scenario compared to the 550 scenario?<BR/><BR/>That said, it seems that the costs associated with the consequences of climate change are not included here, and I think that they may start to increase rapidly above a certain level (and after a certain time).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-10537289077684070312008-11-25T01:33:00.000-05:002008-11-25T01:33:00.000-05:00In Reinfeldt we trust ;) Quite rational speech.In Reinfeldt we trust ;) Quite rational speech.Magnushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01617272924116099306noreply@blogger.com