It just keeps it sealed up instead of putting it into the atmosphere. So you're stuck with tons (literally) of this gas. What do we do with it?
Neat idea, and I hope it turns out to work well, but there's a lot missing right now.
I like your ashes to ashes idea more.
Neat idea, and I hope it turns out to work well, but there's a lot missing right now.
I like your ashes to ashes idea more.
"We feel safe when we read what we recognise, what does not challenge our way of thinking.... a steady acceptance of pre-arranged patterns leads to the inability to question what we are told."
~Camilla
Ghavrel is Ghavrel is Ghavrel
*MySmiley*
~Camilla
Ghavrel is Ghavrel is Ghavrel
*MySmiley*
Coal - One of the Cleanest Energy Sources in the World!
- 20/02/2013 09:41:02 PM
1106 Views
I wonder if it could work on other fuels?
- 20/02/2013 10:18:08 PM
803 Views
Uh, not quite...
- 21/02/2013 02:45:03 AM
674 Views
But the CO2 levels in our atmosphere are 20% higher than 50 years ago
- 21/02/2013 08:49:29 AM
890 Views
There's a certain irony to being criticized on this one from that sector
- 21/02/2013 05:37:37 PM
865 Views
It seems pretty dubious. It still produces CO2.
- 21/02/2013 10:02:55 AM
680 Views
The technology is still a big improvement over current methods.
- 21/02/2013 05:01:31 PM
696 Views
Oh, I agree. My point is just that sequestration will remain an issue. *NM*
- 22/02/2013 12:39:25 AM
326 Views
Well dense CO2 is easier to get rid of
- 21/02/2013 06:08:33 PM
661 Views
Pretty sure putting it in the dirt would increase atmospheric levels, though. EDIT: Never mind.
- 22/02/2013 12:40:38 AM
687 Views
Probably too little, too late.
- 21/02/2013 04:09:45 PM
760 Views