Happy to help you tilt at the DOE windmill, but the problem is much larger than this FOA. The problem is the assumption that supercritical CO2 can be affordably produced from waste sources in the first place. Until (if) that is solved, what to do with such CO2 seems rather secondary (also scary considering the volatility of conc CO2 at ambient T and P). What needs to happen is R&D on reacting CO2 out of waste streams to make stable/useful compounds other than conc CO2, the standard approach in mitigating all other gaseous pollutants. How/why DOE has avoided doing this for CO2 mitigation is the "burning" question ;-) Greg
>________________________________ > From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >To: [email protected]; Greg Rau <[email protected]> >Sent: Monday, February 3, 2014 8:04 PM >Subject: [geo] Tilting at the DE-FOA-0001037 windmill to increase carbon >storage options > > > >Greg and Group, > > >The U.S. Department of Energy plans another $6million to check out deep-earth >supercritical CO2 storage. If you have the ear of a State Governor or >Senator, you could send them the attached. > > >State interests come in two flavors: >1. Coastal states and territories without oil and gas wells (and therefore >not likely to have locations for deep-earth supercritical gas storage) >including: Hawaii, Florida, Maine, southeastern Alaska, Puerto Rico, etc. >> >> >>2. Coastal states with fracking produced oil because the oil industry will >>employ CO2 enhanced oil production to keep the wells flowing longer while >>"storing" CO2. The DOE funded research would reduce the risk of CO2 leaking, >>so California might want DOE covering 80% of the research cost. States in >>this boat include: California and Gulf Coast states. >The logic for extending the definition of "geologic storage" is in the sample >letter. > > >Mark > > >Mark E. Capron, PE >Ventura, California >www.PODenergy.org -- >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 [email protected]. >To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. >For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
