: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 3:51:11 PM
Subject: Re: [geo] Calgary meeting on Direct Air Capture - thoughts?
Ken et al.,
As Ken, I also don't have an objection to Direct Air Capture, and to equating
this with centralized industrialized processes. If I have a vat of algae
consuming CO2 to form
omeconom...@gmail.com
Sent: Mon, March 26, 2012 1:04:29 AM
Subject: Re: [geo] Calgary meeting on Direct Air Capture - thoughts?
I do not have a strong objection to Direct Air Capture, by which I am referring
to direct air capture at centralized facilities using industrial processes. I
am
not commenting
...@sbcglobal.net ; Ken Caldeira kcalde...@carnegie.stanford.edu;
Oliver
Morton omeconom...@gmail.com
*Sent:* Sunday, March 25, 2012 8:02 PM
*Subject:* Re: [geo] Calgary meeting on Direct Air Capture - thoughts?
Prof. Socolow, list, etal
1. Thanks for your DAC response (in full below). I have now
:* Re: [geo] Calgary meeting on Direct Air Capture - thoughts?
*So what is the DAC business model, why is venture capital interested,
and what does it have to do with stabilizing air CO2? -- GH Rau*
Greg, I think you hit the nail on the head.
If we think of direct air capture as negative
@googlegroups.com; soco...@princeton.edu
soco...@princeton.edu; Howard Herzog hjher...@mit.edu; John Schellnhuber
schellnhu...@pik-potsdam.de
Sent: Saturday, 24 March 2012 12:57 AM
Subject: Re: [geo] Calgary meeting on Direct Air Capture - thoughts?
In my previous missive, by 'direct air capture', I
List:
1. I thought this list had a very useful dialog a few months ago on the CDR
technology called Direct Air Capture (DAC - sometimes Artificial Trees). I
have just become aware of an invitation-only meeting on this topic - hosted by
the group ISEEE at the University of Calgary on March 6
