Here is another way to think of the amount of mass being talked about. The global average per capita use of carbon today is of order 9. GtC/yr/7B people, so about 1.3 ton per person of carbon. Multiply by 3.67 to get to CO2, and it is about 5 t CO2 per person. Would olivine be an equal mass (or a bit more to match mole to mole)? That is a lot of olivine‹and for every person on Earth to deal with present emissions‹even if this is off by a factor of a few!!! Every person on Earth‹not just everyone on coastlines in NJ or the US or the world.
This is why we have to get global emissions down down, down and then also be doing something like this. Mike On 1/26/15, 5:36 PM, "Andrew Lockley" <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, placing olivine accurately is almost the exact equivalent of vacuum > dredging, but in reverse. > > You could dump it with a huge Panamax class vessel, but it you'd end up with > the drop too far from the shore, and probably too bunched up, too. > > With a smaller ship, like a dredger, you'd get the distribution you need. > Added to which, the materials handling costs are going to be almost exactly > right, because with dredging you're pulling material out of the sea in an > arbitrary but nearshore location, and moving it to the nearest port with a > rail head where you can get rid of it. > > It's olivine backwards. > > A > > On 26 Jan 2015 22:24, "Bill Stahl" <[email protected]> wrote: >> I hesitate to add to what is already a leviathan of a thread... but here >> goes. >> Assuming a carbon price were in effect, could coastal governments and >> landowners offset the cost of beach enhancement & sand replacement with >> CO2-sequestering sand? It would not have to optimally efficient to be >> substantial. >> On the face of it, getting permitted to use olivine on beaches seems a huge >> hurdle, but there is a already a tremendous amount of stirring-up of shallow >> coastal waters, budgeted and permitted. Transportation has already been >> arranged. Based on my familiarity of the Jersey Shore, coastal towns throw >> enough money at replacing sand that will quickly erode away, so why not put >> it to some long-term use? (Perhaps Atlantic City's unemployed croupiers can >> be sent out stirring the beaches). I have no idea how to calculate the >> potential scale, but perhaps this has already been done. >> >> Convince homeowners' associations to link CDR to property values and you've >> harnessed an unstoppable force... >> >> And is dredging relevant here? Talk about mass-handling. >> -- 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.
