.
Regards,
Nilay
From: Greg Rau
Sent: Sunday, 20 November 2016 21:14
To: Shah, Nilay; 'r.d.schuil...@uu.nl'; 'andrew.lock...@gmail.com';
Geoengineering@googlegroups.com
Reply To: gh...@sbcglobal.net
Subject: Re: [geo] CO2 capture may be our only option for stabilising
temperatures - we need to find
Dear Chris,
It depends on the source. The largest sources will be coal and gas power plants
which mean nitrogen (by far the largest constituent) some residual oxygen,
water and low level impurities would be vented to the atmosphere after carbon
capture. Some sources eg hydrogen and ethanol
Dear Olaf,
Although I can see where you are coming from, I have to disagree with one
statement. The CO2 that is in flue gas *is* different from that in the
atmosphere in terms of what needs to be done to capture it and lock it away,
almost regardless of the technology used. That is because the
However this sentence:
“They had included "negative emissions" from BECCS into their models - often on
a grand scale, without considering whether such a technology was viable,
whether carbon pumped underground can be trusted to stay there forever, nor
whether burning billions of tons of wood,
[mailto:andrew.lock...@gmail.com]
Sent: 03 December 2015 08:55
To: Shah, Nilay
Cc: geoengineering
Subject: RE: [geo] techno optimism and bad science in paris
Elsewhere in the same document, they point out that bioenergy often has higher
carbon emissions than fossil fuels. I accept the wording of the extract
Dear all,
bad news for CCS in the UK:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/nov/25/uk-cancels-pioneering-1bn-carbon-capture-and-storage-competition?CMP=share_btn_tw
Regards
Nilay
From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com
