My reason for posting this is not to advocate CCS but to bring attention to what looks like an advance in CCS technology. Efficiencies appear to come from the fact that the geothermal aquifer conveniently does triple duty: supplies dissolved methane, supplies heat, and then receives CO2 for sequestration. I don't know anything about the research funding but the video at this link has the feel of a slick promotion.
On Monday, June 3, 2013 3:45:03 AM UTC-4, Brian Cartwright wrote: > > > > http://www.energy.utexas.edu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=64&Itemid=71 > > "A team of scientists led by University of Texas at Austin Professor Gary > Pope has developed a new, game-changing idea that combines these two > technologies and adds another – the dissolution of CO2 into extracted > brine, which is then re-injected back into the aquifer. This alternative > approach to CO2 injection takes advantage of both dissolved methane and > heat content in geo-pressured geothermal saline aquifers. Conservative > calculations indicate this alternative method could reduce the cost of CCS > such that it could compete in a market environment without subsidies or a > price on carbon." > > Anyone have knowedge or critique of this idea? > > Brian Cartwright > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
