For energy production, ocean has a number of possibilities. But I am focused on hauling down the atmospheric CO2 in a manner that is big, quick, and sure-fire. No amount of cleaner energy is going to clean up the excess CO2 accumulation in the air, though it is a good plan for the long-run.
On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Ronal W. Larson <[email protected]>wrote: > Dr. Calvin: > > 1. I'd like to follow up on your statement below: > > *Better to get nutrients by pumping up and then pumping down the new green > stuff --before it can decompose-- into deep waters that take a thousand > years to begin resurfacing and then are spread out over 10k years.* > > > 2. Since you wrote on this list about push-pull pumping 13 months ago, > Michael Hayes and others have been talking on this list about harvesting > the produced ocean biomass and using it on land - probably via pyrolysis > and biochar. The costs would be greater than for your approach, but also > the benefits - in useful energy (backup for wind/solar) and soil > productivity improvement. Also I have seen concerns about your > down-pushed biomass decomposing at depth. > > 3. What are your thoughts on this single pump-up approach - with CDR > in soils, not deep oceans? > > Ron > > > > On Feb 8, 2014, at 7:08 AM, William Calvin <[email protected]> wrote: > > Oops, cut and paste left out the rest. Here again: > A rather lame assessment. > > Solar radiation management will have a big problem: an uneven application > will rearrange the winds and thus precipitation. Guess who they will blame > for the droughts. > > Doubling forests is the right amount of carbon but keeping it from > returning to the air via fire and rot is impractical; we cannot even do it > in rain forests. > > Iron blooms sink only 25% of the carbon into deep water and less than 1% > into sediments. Better to get nutrients by pumping up and then pumping down > the new green stuff --before it can decompose-- into deep waters that take > a thousand years to begin resurfacing and then are spread out over 10k > years. > > -WHC > > > On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 5:31 AM, Andrew Lockley > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> http://www.lawrentian.com/archives/1002557 >> >> Olson gives Spoerl Lecture on geoengineering, climate change solutions >> <snipped by RWL> >> > -- > William H. Calvin > [email protected] WilliamCalvin.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. > -- William H. Calvin [email protected] WilliamCalvin.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.
