When Seeking Success = Avoiding Failure (Was: As Wildfires Rage in U.S. West, Scientists Predict Worse Blazes in Future: Scientific American



Someone needs to spend more time seeking success developing a cheap super battery because that's the only way we're going to avoid failure of the biosphere.
Bret Cahill
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/16/12 9:32 AM, Bret Cahill wrote:

I was hoping for genetically modified plants that would convert CO2 to useful by products.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Sam Wormley wrote:

I'm hoping for a genetically engineered rabbit that eats grass and lays chocolate Easter eggs.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That's the most likely scenario for carbon abatement.
Still, it doesn't hurt to dream a little either. The ultimate process would be
CO2 + sunlight => carbon nanotubes + O2
Then use the nanotubes for structural and construction materials, aircraft, motor vehicles, roads, 8 mile high skyscrapers . . . .
Bret Cahill
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 17:43:34 -0500, Sam Wormley wrote:

It has been done: Trees convert CO2 to wood.
Only God can make a tree. - Joyce Kilmer
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/16/12 9:20 PM, Wally W. wrote:

Wally misses the point of modifying plants to take out much more CO2 that grass, trees and crops currently do.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And you seem to miss the point of addressing the source of CO2 rather than attempt to remedy it's results.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What's wrong with simply removing CO2?
Do the math on nanotubes: $200/gram X gigatones/year = Big $.
Bret Cahill
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/16/12 10:35 PM, M Purcell wrote:

I doubt that much will be done concerning the source, but I do think it feasible to remove some of the glut.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Not in good time anyway.

If you can get a useful product then you can always claim you aren't "geo engineering." You are merely creating and selling a product. Geo engineering has an even worse stigma than burning fossil fuels.
Bret Cahill
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And you believe global warming isn't geo engineering? Why not allow more smog?
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003433914_webwarming16.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Certainly not! Intent is everything here same as in the law. The intent of burning fossil fuels is to generate heat, not CO2.
That's why it is so important to call the carbon based byproduct a "product" rather than a "byproduct." The term "byproduct" implies that you are really producing or doing something else which is more important. In this case that "more important" goal could be politically incorrect "geoengineering." But everything will be A-OK from a PR POV if you are merely creating and selling a useful "product" and ignoring the consumption of giga tons of CO2.
In that case you are about as much a geoengineer as any farmer.
Or are you one of those who thinks agriculture doesn't alter the biosphere?
Bret Cahill
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

So you believe agriculture alters the biosphere while the burning of fossil fuels doesn't?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Quite the opposite. There is no distinction whatsoever other than maybe the % isotope of carbon.
Bret Cahill
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And of course you are oblivious to the amount.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

So you believe it more feasible to address the symptoms rather than the cause? And although warmer conditions increase the fire danger, thinning, brushing, and controlled burns have reduced it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Depends on your definitions of "cause" and "symptoms.".
If you define the cause as being "the existence of humans" then, my answer is "yes." Killing off 5 billion humans just isn't a political winner, especially if I'm going to be one of those you want to kill off.
On the other hand if you define the cause as "too much CO2 in the atmosphere" then we're not addressing the symptoms with such a CO2 + X + light => CX + O2 process..
We're addressing the causes.

Warmer conditions are caused by having too much CO2 in the atmosphere.
Human created PV is an order of magnitude more efficient than any plant at converting light to low entropy energy. A human created sea water irrigated plant might have similar numbers: And you don't have to manufacture it either. Just do what Monsanto does with all their GM seeds. Make it so the farmer must go back to Monsanto for more seeds every year.
This would make trials/testing safe and if the impact is too damaging to marine life they can try something else.
Bret Cahill
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Obviously you have already forgotten about the burning of fossil fuels.

You could stop drinking water.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No answer?

What is _your_ carbon footprint?

With $0.60 / watt PV fresh water is no longer an issue. Similar developments on carbon sequestration are guaranteed.
Bret Cahill
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.