When then is CDR not DAC?
Greg

Sent from the Rau's iPad

> On Aug 31, 2014, at 11:49 AM, Fred Zimmerman <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> I am interested in recent plausible cost estimates of methods to remove CO2 
> from the atmosphere whether they are chemical, mechanical, biotic, or other.
> 
> 
>> On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Greg Rau <[email protected]> wrote:
>> OK, then do the attached (with $ estimates) count? "Chemical engineering 
>> processes" potentially cover a lot of ground, including biochemical, 
>> geochemical, and electrochemical CO2 removal (?) I assumed that DAC only 
>> referred to abiotic CO2 removal where conc CO2 was the end product. 
>> Greg
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> From: Andrew Lockley <[email protected]>
>> To: Greg Rau <[email protected]> 
>> Cc: geoengineering <[email protected]> 
>> Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2014 11:50 AM
>> Subject: RE: [geo] Re: what's new on cost estimates for DAC CDR?
>> 
>> Mechanical / chemical engineering processes, eg as per Keith, Lackner, etc.
>> A
>> On 30 Aug 2014 18:37, "Rau, Greg" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> What qualifies as "DAC CDR"?
>> 
>> Greg
>> From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on 
>> behalf of Fred Zimmerman [[email protected]]
>> Sent: Friday, August 29, 2014 7:02 PM
>> To: Mark Capron
>> Cc: [email protected]; geoengineering
>> Subject: Re: [geo] Re: what's new on cost estimates for DAC CDR?
>> 
>> There are summaries of cost estimates in several of the articles referenced 
>> in this thread. There are values reported at pretty much every stop between 
>> $45 and $1000/ton.  I am not sure that I find any of the estimates 
>> convincing as yet.  I wonder if the size of global demand (whether 
>> industrial or governmental) is a bigger problem than cost. 
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 8:56 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Charlie,
>> 
>> You mean a table or something like an updated McLaren chart, 
>> http://oceanforesters.org/References.html.  The chart is at the bottom of 
>> the page.  Duncan McLaren has produced this chart for a few years.  His 
>> "2012 A comparative assessment..." (link near top of the same page) was 
>> published in the same journal with "Negative carbon via Ocean Afforestation."
>> 
>> Mark E. Capron, PE
>> Ventura, California
>> www.PODenergy.org
>> 
>> 
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: [geo] Re: what's new on cost estimates for DAC CDR?
>> From: Charlie Zender <[email protected]>
>> Date: Thu, August 28, 2014 1:51 pm
>> To: [email protected]
>> 
>> Fred,
>> 
>> It would be a great contribution if you synthsized your review into a table 
>> of DAC CDR cost estimates which we could all view.
>> 
>> Best,
>> Charlie
>> 
>> On Monday, August 25, 2014 10:17:58 PM UTC-7, Fred Zimmerman wrote:
>> Hi --
>> 
>> I am updating a literature review on cost estimates for DAC CDR and I am 
>> wondering what has changed both empirically and analytically since the 
>> flurry of papers in 2011-2013 with APS, House, Keith, Lackner et al.
>> 
>> 
>> Fred Zimmerman
>> Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
>> "a fox, not a hedgehog" -- Isaiah Berlin
>> -- 
>> 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/d/optout.
>> 
>> -- 
>> 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/d/optout.
>> -- 
>> 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/d/optout.
>> -- 
>> 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/d/optout.
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> 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/d/optout.
> 
> -- 
> 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/d/optout.

-- 
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/d/optout.

Reply via email to