I thought "artificial trees" referred only to certain types of CO2 air capture device, not to CO2 air capture in general.
On Apr 17, 5:56 pm, Greg Rau <[email protected]> wrote: > How about "make-believe trees", or is that too harsh? > Bon weekend. - G > > >'fake plastic trees' is used fairly widely in connection with this idea > > >the 'proper' name is co2 air capture > > >2009/4/17 jim woolridge > ><<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]> > > ><What researchers are calling artificial trees, > >actually towers filled with various materials > >that adsorb carbon dioxide from the air, could > >play a major role in reducing climate change -- > >if they prove profitable.> > > >Love it--and if they aren't profitable, then what? The planet goes > >into ecological collapse because enough fizzy drink makers didn't buy > >the CO2? Ok, am just horsing around, to an extent, but there is a > >serious point in there about the level of priority accorded to climate > >change: 'We'll do it when it is cost effective' etc. etc.--the > >biosphere just isn't assigned anything like its real value as a > >foundation and guarantor of economic activity. > > >Also: anyone else hate 'artificial tree' as a name? Any alternatives > >to propose? > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
