Hiilidioksidin nappaaminen ilmasta

[Heikki Jokipii]

Islannin tapahtuneesta kehitystyöstä ja suunnitelmista tässä:

A Bit Of Perspective Goes A Long Way

Perspective is everything.

The world’s largest CO2-capture plant just went into operation in Iceland, built by a company called “Climeworks”. You can read about it at their site.

Luvattu perspektiivi:

Sounds impressive, huh? Same as taking 7,800 cars off the road? WOW!

However, to return to the question of perspective, how many giant plants of this size would we need to neutralize the annual global CO2 emissions, which are currently about 38 gigatonnes of CO2?

Why , a mere ONE MILLION EQUALLY LARGE PLANTS would do it … should be no problem, right?

I mean, if we could build one of these suckers per week, that would only take us … hang on, let’s see … carry over what sums to greater than 9, divide by pi, take the square root, allow for Cook’s Factor, this math stuff is tough … that would only take us 19,231 years to complete the project.

(lihav. alkup.)

Mutta pahinta on tämä:

And how much energy does it require? The builders are VERY tight-lipped about this, but typically such plants require about 2 MWh of electricity per tonne of CO2 captured. Let’s call it 1.5 MWh per tonne to be conservative.

So to capture all of our emissions would require about 50 petawatt-hours of electricity per year …
… and to close the circle and return to the question of perspective, that’s about twice the current total annual global electricity consumption.

This CO2-capture project is nothing but pathetic climate virtue signaling.

(lihav. alkup.)

[Heikki Jokipii]

Tässä Suomen ilmastopaneelin jäsen suosittelee juuri sitä keinoa:

Ihmiskunnan täytyy poistaa valtava määrä hiilidioksidia

Lukijan mielipide | Karkeasti voidaan sanoa, että lähes kaikki tästä hetkestä eteenpäin ilmakehään päästämämme hiilidioksidi tulisi tulevaisuudessa myös poistaa, jos pyritään puolentoista asteen lämpenemiseen.
[..]
Karkeasti voidaan sanoa, että lähes kaikki tästä hetkestä eteenpäin ilmakehään päästämämme hiilidioksidi tulisi tulevaisuudessa myös poistaa, jos pyritään puolentoista asteen lämpenemiseen. Hiilidioksidia voidaan poistaa ilmakehästä luonnon hiilinieluja kasvattamalla. Myös teknologista hiilidioksidin poistoa yhdistettynä geologiseen varastointiin tullaan tarvitsemaan globaalisti vuosittain tuhansia tai jopa kymmeniä tuhansia megatonneja 2040–2050-luvuilta alkaen. Nykyisin hiilidioksidia poistetaan teknologisin keinoin globaalisti vuosittain vasta alle 2 megatonnia.

Em. tarkoittamattomia seurauksia hän ei käsittele. Ainoastaan sitä, että siinä on keino hillitä ilmaston lämpenemistä. Ja siitä, keinon tehosta hän on varma.

[Heikki Jokipii]

Jep. Tässä oikein kuvan kanssa:

Tailpipes and Chimneys Greening Gardens and Forests

Yes, the CO2 effluent of tailpipes and industrial flues are good for plants and all of life, contrary to the alarming tales that make this invisible gas an environmental bogeyman. Increasing CO2 concentrations are literally making the world greener, and in many cases, it’s sending crop production to record levels.

A 2020 study, funded by Cooperative Research Program for Agriculture Science & Technology Development, reported that potatoes grown in an atmosphere of elevated CO2—similar to what might be expected in coming decades—didn’t just survive but thrived!

The plants yielded a “distinct increase in growth and development and canopy net photosynthetic rate during tuber initiation and bulking. Consequently, biomass and canopy net photosynthesis increased, and tuber yield increased by 20.3%,” the researchers wrote.

This isn’t just good news for potato farmers. The CO2 fertilization effect plays a role in the photosynthesis of all plants, and an increase in the gas acts as a kind of turbo boost. Significant increases in yields are seen in wheat, rice, soybeans and maize—all staple crops that feed billions.

Kirjoittajana jo täällä esille tullut Vijay Jayaraj.

[Heikki Jokipii]

WUWT:

Let’s Make CO2 Great Again

Guest essay by Gregory Wrightstone

As the love affair with so-called green energy cools and “net zero” commitments to eliminate “carbon emissions” wane, we see glimmers of acknowledgment for the benefits of carbon dioxide. That’s right: More people are beginning to understand that the gas – widely demonized as a pollutant endangering Earth with excessive heat – is a life-giving substance needed in greater amounts.

U.S. voters know that President-elect Donald Trump has declared the Green New Deal a “scam” and promises to return common sense to environmental regulations and energy development. His return to office rests partly on that pledge.

In Europe, German politicians whose green fetish has produced economic decline face serious electoral challenges. And developing countries like India ignore “decarbonization” promises to aggressively develop coal mines and import more of the fuel to spur growth and eradicate poverty.

Less frequently reported is the story of carbon dioxide emissions greening the Earth and boosting crop production. Educating the public on the benefits of carbon dioxide is the mission of the CO2 Coalition, which I lead. We sponsor speakers and publish scientifically based materials for adults and children. Much of the information is about the role of CO2 as a beneficial greenhouse gas in moderating the extremes between daytime and nighttime temperatures and as a photosynthetic plant food.

“Fossil Fuels Are the Greenest Energy Sources” by Dr. Indur Goklany is an example of our work. Did you know that up to 50% of the globe has experienced an increase in vegetation and that 70% of the greening is attributed to plant fertilization by carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels? Or that nearly 200,000 square kilometers of the southern Sahara have been converted to a lush grassland from desert?

Few have heard that doubling atmospheric CO2 from its current concentration of 420 ppm would significantly increase agricultural productivity and have little effect on the climate.
[..]
To paraphrase Donald Trump: Let’s make CO2 great again.

Paradoksaalinen mahdollisuus koko ajan on, ettemme edes pysty lisäämään sen pitoisuutta.

[Heikki Jokipii]

Skeptistä tiedettä:

New Research Uses Chemistry To Poke Holes In The CO2-Induced Climate Alarm Narrative

Joka lähtee tästä:

According to a new study, the notion that we can and must reduce atmospheric CO2 so as to avoid climate catastrophe (e.g., runaway global warming or ocean acidification) does not withstand probing academic scrutiny.

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is a mitigation strategy proposing to sequester CO2 underground to reduce emissions to “net zero” by 2050. The practice is poised to cost tens of trillions of dollars over the coming decades. New analysis suggests high or ambitious CCS scenarios are presumed to mitigate about half of today’s emissions by 2050. But these economically draconian CCS scenarios are projected to cost US$30 trillion more than those that only mitigate about one-tenth of today’s emissions. Either way, the costs of CCS are astronomical.

But can CCS actually do what is intended and reduce atmospheric CO2 concentrations? Chemistry says no, CCS “will not reduce the atmospheric concentration of CO2 at all.”

“The crux of the issue is that, unlike photosynthesis by plants, perfect sequestration of CO2 will no magically release the O2 that has effectively been ‘sequestered’ in the CO2 and H2O molecules produced by combustion.”

“If the fuel was made of pure carbon, then the net result in the composition of the atmosphere would be a slight reduction in the O2 concentration…and a slight concomitant increase in the CO2 concentration due to the slight shrinking of the denominator.”