Remember me
▼ Content

Nitrate Reduction - Powerful Greenhouse Gas Emission AND Alkalinity



Page 2 of 3<123>
14-03-2022 09:55
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
sealover wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

Carbon dioxide has no labels.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Carbon dioxide can be "labeled", using the distinct isotopes of carbon.

Nope. Isotopes are not a label.
sealover wrote:
About 99% of the earth's carbon is in the stable 12-C carbon isotope.

Argument from randU fallacy. You are making up a number. It is not possible to measure this.
sealover wrote:
About 1% of the earth's carbon is in the stable 13-C carbon isotope.

Argument from randU fallacy. You are making up a number. It is not possible to measure this either.
sealover wrote:
13-C is ever so slightly heavier than 12-C.

So?
sealover wrote:
The other carbon isotope is not so stable. 14-C.

So?
sealover wrote:
Carbon 14 is radioactive.

So?
sealover wrote:
Carbon 14 was at only the tiniest concentrations in the earth's atmosphere (as 14-C CO2) for most of earth's history up until a little more than 60 years ago.

How do you know? Did you measure it yourself? Where do you keep your time machine and global measuring equipment?
sealover wrote:
Nuclear weapons testing "labeled" a whole bunch of atmospheric carbon by turning it into radioactive carbon 14.

An isotope is not a label.
sealover wrote:
As "labeled" carbon goes, carbon 14 is most familiar.

An isotope is not a label.
sealover wrote:
You don't need a fancy instrument to determine it's there because it weighs the tiniest bit more than the rest of the carbon.

Assuming you know it's carbon in the first place with no impurities.
sealover wrote:
You just need to measure radioactivity to measure the labeled carbon.

Carbon isn't a label. Radioactivity isn't a label either.
sealover wrote:
13-C is a harder one to measure, but a safer one to work with.

There is nothing unsafe about carbon-14. The beta radiation is emits is extremely weak.
sealover wrote:
If you label the carbon in plants in a greenhouse with 100% 13-C CO2, you can track the carbon in them later because it has been labeled.

An isotope is not a label.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
14-03-2022 09:56
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
duncan61 wrote:
I always thought alkaline is a measurement of substance or can you buy a bottle of alkaline?

You can always buy Alka-seltzer.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
14-03-2022 09:57
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
sealover wrote:
duncan61 wrote:
I always thought alkaline is a measurement of substance or can you buy a bottle of alkaline?


Yes, this is a common misconception.

It's the BATTERIES.

Alkaline batteries.

Alkalinity is how much voltage they put out.

Not how a battery works, dude. I guess you don't know electrochemistry either.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
14-03-2022 10:10
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
sealover wrote:
Black Powder - Two kinds of reductants

To clarify the reaction between S zero (yellow, elemental sulfur) and nitrate I did not include the fact that black carbon was also a reductant.

Neither is.
sealover wrote:
I also didn't clarify what all the NOxs or SOxs were.

Void argument fallacy.
sealover wrote:
I would have had to show too many reactions and two many products. I just wanted to make the point that nitrate is a powerful oxidant.

Maybe, maybe not.
sealover wrote:
Second only two oxygen as the one most coveted by microorganisms to get the most energy from oxidizing organic C.

Carbon isn't organic. Try English.
sealover wrote:
So, nitrate provide all the oxidant. All the oxygen that might attach to carbon or sulfur.

Maybe, maybe not.
sealover wrote:
Sulfur and carbon are the two reductants. Sulfur is the far stronger reductant.

Neither is.
sealover wrote:
Partial list of products - carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, sulfur trioxide, nitric oxide, nitrous oxide, nitrogen gas.

Maybe, maybe not. Not all black powder has sulfur in it.
sealover wrote:
I was trying to keep it simple and I neglected to bring the black part of the black powder.


Okay. What happens if you throw potassium nitrate, charcoal, and sulfur together in a pile and set light to it?

Nuthin' much. A fizzle is about the best you're going to get.

Guess how I know.

I actually do this demonstration from time to time to show people that just these chemicals don't necessarily make an explosion.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
RE: So, math is the Achiles heel14-03-2022 10:13
sealover
★★★☆☆
(803)
Into the Night wrote:
sealover wrote:
duncan61 wrote:
I always thought alkaline is a measurement of substance or can you buy a bottle of alkaline?


Yes, this is a common misconception.

It's the BATTERIES.

Alkaline batteries.

Alkalinity is how much voltage they put out.

Not how a battery works, dude. I guess you don't know electrochemistry either.


-----------------------------------------------------------

There is very little need to define terms if numbers are being used in familiar equations.

You've got your data. Your formula. A way everyone has agreed to calculate it.

I'll bet I won't get one decent rebuttal to any chemistry-related math question.

Even though all terms are very unambiguously defined.

It's all just a bluff, isn't it?

You don't actually understand any of this from what i can tell.

The numbers don't lie. But you do.
14-03-2022 10:26
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
sealover wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
sealover wrote:
duncan61 wrote:
I always thought alkaline is a measurement of substance or can you buy a bottle of alkaline?


Yes, this is a common misconception.

It's the BATTERIES.

Alkaline batteries.

Alkalinity is how much voltage they put out.

Not how a battery works, dude. I guess you don't know electrochemistry either.


-----------------------------------------------------------

There is very little need to define terms if numbers are being used in familiar equations.

Lie. You must define your terms. Random equations mean nothing.
sealover wrote:
You've got your data. Your formula. A way everyone has agreed to calculate it.

What data? What formula? Math is not a voting bloc.
sealover wrote:
I'll bet I won't get one decent rebuttal to any chemistry-related math question.

You deny chemistry.
sealover wrote:
Even though all terms are very unambiguously defined.

Nope. You haven't defined any terms, or even a formula. You are making a void argument fallacy.
sealover wrote:
It's all just a bluff, isn't it?

It isn't poker.
sealover wrote:
You don't actually understand any of this from what i can tell.

'I' is always capitalized. Understand what? You aren't talking about anything.
sealover wrote:
The numbers don't lie. But you do.

What numbers?


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
RE: Numbers for alkalinity14-03-2022 10:52
sealover
★★★☆☆
(803)
Into the Night wrote:

There is very little need to define terms if numbers are being used in familiar equations.

Lie. You must define your terms. Random equations mean nothing.
sealover wrote:
You've got your data. Your formula. A way everyone has agreed to calculate it.

What data? What formula? Math is not a voting bloc.
sealover wrote:
I'll bet I won't get one decent rebuttal to any chemistry-related math question.

You deny chemistry.
sealover wrote:
Even though all terms are very unambiguously defined.

Nope. You haven't defined any terms, or even a formula. You are making a void argument fallacy.
sealover wrote:
It's all just a bluff, isn't it?

It isn't poker.
sealover wrote:
You don't actually understand any of this from what i can tell.

'I' is always capitalized. Understand what? You aren't talking about anything.
sealover wrote:
The numbers don't lie. But you do.

What numbers?[/quote]

-----------------------------------------------------------------

The closest I got to a meaningful response about units for alkalinity always came back to "pH".

Many many data tables have been compiled for alkalinty because it is so commonly measured in aqueous samples.

They all use units to report the values for alkalinity.

pH is NEVER among the units ever used as ANY measure of ALKALINITY.

pH CAN tell you if something is "alkaline" (pH > 7), but that has virtually nothing to do with its measurable alkalinity.

I have given you the units repeatedly and shown you how to convert them.

Alkalinity.

You could have Googled it to learn the units days ago.

Ignoramus phallicy.
14-03-2022 17:51
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
sealover wrote:

The closest I got to a meaningful response about units for alkalinity always came back to "pH".

Many many data tables have been compiled for alkalinty because it is so commonly measured in aqueous samples.

They all use units to report the values for alkalinity.

pH is NEVER among the units ever used as ANY measure of ALKALINITY.

pH CAN tell you if something is "alkaline" (pH > 7), but that has virtually nothing to do with its measurable alkalinity.

I have given you the units repeatedly and shown you how to convert them.

Alkalinity.

You could have Googled it to learn the units days ago.

Ignoramus phallicy.

Google is not God, nor is it chemistry. Void reference fallacy. Buzzword fallacy.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 14-03-2022 17:53
RE: operationally defined chemical measure16-03-2022 00:02
sealover
★★★☆☆
(803)
So, lignin and tannin are two very important components of plants.

Neither is a "carbohydrate" by any definition.

But what is their "definition"?

Well, their measurement is operationally defined.

It's hard to measure tannin.

Tannin is polyphenol. Phenolics have chemical reducing power.

"Total phenolic content" is operationally defined by how much ferric iron the tannins can reduce to ferrous iron.

In my favorite old school measure, "Prussian Blue", when the phenolic groups reduce ferric iron to ferrous iron, they form a deep blue ferricyanide product.

This can be measured spectrophotometrically at 720 nm.

The absorbance is directly proportional to ferricyanide concentration.

That absorbance would then be translated to "tannic acid equivalents" using a purified tannic acid standard.

Prussian Blue doesn't actually measure tannin. It is the operationally defined measure of iron-reducing power, regardless of what the reductant is.

Alkalinity is operationally defined as acid neutralizing capacity, regardless of what the proton acceptors are.

Any questions?

I mean, anything that counts as a legitimate question?
________________________________________________________
Into the Night wrote:
sealover wrote:

The closest I got to a meaningful response about units for alkalinity always came back to "pH".

Many many data tables have been compiled for alkalinty because it is so commonly measured in aqueous samples.

They all use units to report the values for alkalinity.

pH is NEVER among the units ever used as ANY measure of ALKALINITY.

pH CAN tell you if something is "alkaline" (pH > 7), but that has virtually nothing to do with its measurable alkalinity.

I have given you the units repeatedly and shown you how to convert them.

Alkalinity.

You could have Googled it to learn the units days ago.

Ignoramus phallicy.

Google is not God, nor is it chemistry. Void reference fallacy. Buzzword fallacy.
16-03-2022 01:26
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
sealover wrote:
So, lignin and tannin are two very important components of plants.

Neither is a "carbohydrate" by any definition.

But what is their "definition"?

Well, their measurement is operationally defined.

It's hard to measure tannin.

Tannin is polyphenol. Phenolics have chemical reducing power.

"Total phenolic content" is operationally defined by how much ferric iron the tannins can reduce to ferrous iron.

In my favorite old school measure, "Prussian Blue", when the phenolic groups reduce ferric iron to ferrous iron, they form a deep blue ferricyanide product.

This can be measured spectrophotometrically at 720 nm.

The absorbance is directly proportional to ferricyanide concentration.

That absorbance would then be translated to "tannic acid equivalents" using a purified tannic acid standard.

Prussian Blue doesn't actually measure tannin. It is the operationally defined measure of iron-reducing power, regardless of what the reductant is.

Alkalinity is operationally defined as acid neutralizing capacity, regardless of what the proton acceptors are.

Any questions?

I mean, anything that counts as a legitimate question?


Just one:

Why are you wasting time wandering randomly from topic to topic in this post with no apparent coherency?


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
RE: "Science isn't facts" WTF?20-03-2022 02:46
sealover
★★★☆☆
(803)
"Science isn't facts. Science is a set of falsifiable theories."

Thank you for helping us get that one straight.

"What is a greenhouse gas?"

Most people already have some idea what the answer might be before they join a website called climate-debate.com

Perhaps a more appropriate forum would be reality-debate.com

"Are you using those terms because everybody knows what they mean?"

I'm using those terms because they are the same ones that other scientists already understand with no requirement for "unambiguous definition".

We can actually understand each other when we use these terms.

I'm sorry if you then feel left out of the conversation because you have no idea what we are talking about.

But you have no right to stop the conversation because of it.

I would like to believe that someone with a little scientific aptitude might learn what they mean, if they didn't already know, from my use of them in proper context.

"Science isn't facts"

Yes it is.

"You deny science and chemistry"

No, I don't.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Into the Night wrote:
sealover wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
sealover wrote:Nitrate reduction by bacteria under low oxygen conditions generates alkalinity and it generates nitrous oxide, a powerful greenhouse gas.

What is a greenhouse gas" Specifically, what makes one greenhouse gas more powerful than another?

sealover wrote:Denitrification and dissimilatory reduction

Are you using these terms because everybody knows what they mean?

sealover wrote:Both pathways generate alkalinity

How is alkalinity generated?

Great trivia. Keep it coming.


--------------------------------------------------------------

Some basic scientific facts were presented.

Science isn't facts. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.
sealover wrote:
Many questions might be asked.

How large are the global fluxes of alkalinity generation or nitrous oxide emission from nitrate reduction?

You cannot generate alkalinity. You cannot reduce a nitrate. It's already reduced.
sealover wrote:
Why would these basic scientific facts matter?

Science isn't facts. You deny chemistry and science. Void question based on buzzword.
sealover wrote:
No, wait... Define your terms, define your terms, define your terms.

Do so. Still waiting for you to define 'climate change', 'greenhouse gas', etc.
sealover wrote:
I want to encourage you to improve the quality of your questions.

Inversion fallacy. Take your own advice.
20-03-2022 08:28
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
sealover wrote:
"Science isn't facts. Science is a set of falsifiable theories."

Thank you for helping us get that one straight.

You're welcome, though you still deny it.
sealover wrote:
"What is a greenhouse gas?"

A magick gas that somehow warms the Earth, despite the 1st law of thermodynamics. Of course, no such gas exists. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth.
sealover wrote:
Most people already have some idea what the answer might be before they join a website called climate-debate.com

You don't get to speak for most people. You only get to speak for you. Omniscience fallacy .
sealover wrote:
Perhaps a more appropriate forum would be reality-debate.com

Define 'reality'.
sealover wrote:
"Are you using those terms because everybody knows what they mean?"

I'm using those terms because they are the same ones that other scientists already understand with no requirement for "unambiguous definition".

There isn't one. Define 'climate change'.
sealover wrote:
We can actually understand each other when we use these terms.

No. A buzzword is meaningless. Void argument fallacy.
sealover wrote:
I'm sorry if you then feel left out of the conversation because you have no idea what we are talking about.

But you have no right to stop the conversation because of it.

You are not having a conversation.
sealover wrote:
I would like to believe that someone with a little scientific aptitude might learn what they mean, if they didn't already know, from my use of them in proper context.

No context is necessary. Science has no overall context.
sealover wrote:
"Science isn't facts"

Yes it is.

No. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Learn what 'fact' means. It does not mean 'proof' nor Universal Truth.
sealover wrote:
"You deny science and chemistry"

No, I don't.

Yes you do. You already have. You deny the 1st law of thermodynamics. You deny the 2nd law of thermodynamics. You deny the Stefan-Boltzmann law. You deny acid-base chemistry. You deny organic chemistry.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
RE: "Oxygen has no anionic charge to transfer to carbon during oxidation."22-03-2022 22:48
sealover
★★★☆☆
(803)
"Oxygen has no anionic charge to transfer to carbon during oxidation." - -
- Ignoramus

So, how does this oxyanions as the source of all acid neutralizing capacity thing work, anyway?

Let's start by making sure what an oxyanion is.

A whole lot of words you hear all the time also happen to be oxyanions.

Carbonate, bicarbonate, hydroxide, sulfate, nitrate, phosphate, citrate, acetate, and the list is very very very long.

Only a few of the really matter in the alkalinity of the ocean and its depletion.

Nitrate is an oxyanion with one negative charge.

Nitrate is a compound comprised of one nitrogen and three oxygen atoms. NO3-

Nitrate is a negatively charged oxyanion. It is oxidized nitrogen.

When microorganisms used nitrate as oxidant to get energy from oxidation of organic carbon, the oxygen from the nitrate is attached to the carbon.

The anion charge, carried on the oxygen, was also attached to the carbon.

The inorganic carbon oxidized product is an oxyanion, like bicarbonate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



















Into the Night wrote:
sealover wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
sealover wrote:Nitrate reduction by bacteria under low oxygen conditions generates alkalinity and it generates nitrous oxide, a powerful greenhouse gas.

What is a greenhouse gas" Specifically, what makes one greenhouse gas more powerful than another?

sealover wrote:Denitrification and dissimilatory reduction

Are you using these terms because everybody knows what they mean?

sealover wrote:Both pathways generate alkalinity

How is alkalinity generated?

Great trivia. Keep it coming.


-----------------------------------------------------------------
Defining some terms

The term "greenhouse gas" came from the term "greenhouse effect".

Void definition. You cannot define a buzzword with another buzzword.
sealover wrote:
Remember the movie "Soylet Green"?

In the opening scene it is mentioned in the dialog how "greenhouse effect" had created such conditions of climate change.

Define 'climate change'. What is actually changing? Climate has no value associated with it.
sealover wrote:
To the point that humanity had unknowingly already resorted to cannibalism!

A "greenhouse" allows visible light in, but not much infrared.

Sure it does. Now you are ignoring Plank's laws.
sealover wrote:
It doesn't let much infrared escape either.

Sure it does. Now you are ignoring the Stefan-Boltzmann law.
sealover wrote:
Much of the visible light entering the greenhouse is transformed into heat when
it is absorbed by a surface of low albedo.

Heat is not energy. You cannot create or destroy energy. Light absorption does not necessarily convert to thermal energy.
sealover wrote:
The heat in the form of infrared radiation does not escape the greenhouse.

Infrared light easily passes through the walls and ceilings of a greenhouse.
sealover wrote:
It is much warmer in the greenhouse than it is outside.

Because a greenhouse reduces heat.
sealover wrote:
How alkalinity generated?

You can't generate alkalinity.
sealover wrote:
Well, let's start by defining alkalinity itself.

Alkalinity is acid neutralizing capacity.

There's that wacky phrase again. Buzzword fallacy. You still have no clue what an acid or an alkaline is.
sealover wrote:
The alkalinity generated by nitrate reduction is anionic inorganic carbon.

You can't generate alkalinity. You can't reduce a nitrate. It's already reduced. A nitrate doesn't have carbon.
sealover wrote:
When organic carbon is oxidized by microrganisms, it is transformed into carbon dioxide or into inorganic carbon anions, depending on the oxidant.

Carbon isn't organic. A microorganism isn't an oxidizer (I think what you mean by 'oxidant').
sealover wrote:
When nitrate, like with sulfate, is used as oxidant, their anionic charge cannot simply disappear. The oxidized carbon product becomes an anion.

Neither nitrate nor sulfate has carbon.
sealover wrote:
Oxygen has no anionic charge to transfer to organic carbon during oxidation.

Carbon isn't organic. You cannot oxidize oxygen.
sealover wrote:
Carbon dioxide is not an anion.

It's unusual, but there's no real reason it couldn't be.
RE: "Carbon isn't organic. You cannot oxidize oxygen."22-03-2022 23:32
sealover
★★★☆☆
(803)
"Carbon isn't organic. You cannot oxidize oxygen." - Ignoramus

YES IT IS!

At least all the carbon that isn't INORGANIC.

YES YOU CAN!

At least all the oxygen that isn't already oxidized, such as the oxygen in the atmosphere.

Organic carbon, the compounds of which are the specialization of organic chemistry is, um... well, duh?

Inorganic carbon, though? That's carbon when it has been oxidized.

Inorganic carbon is carbon with oxygen attached. Carbon dioxide, bicarbonate, and carbonate.

The OXYGEN in carbon dioxide is chemically reduced. The oxygen in carbon dioxide is not oxidized. The carbon in carbon dioxide is oxidized.

During photosynthesis, the oxygen in the water molecule is OXIZIDED, releasing oxygen gas.

In the water molecule, H2O, hydrogen is oxidized and oxygen is reduced.

In the products of photosynthesis, the hydrogen is reduced and the oxygen is oxidized.

Photosynthesis generates impressive voltage to yank an electron off H2O.

It generates a pretty powerful oxidant gas. O2. Oxidized oxygen.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

sealover wrote:
"Oxygen has no anionic charge to transfer to carbon during oxidation." - -
- Ignoramus

So, how does this oxyanions as the source of all acid neutralizing capacity thing work, anyway?

Let's start by making sure what an oxyanion is.

A whole lot of words you hear all the time also happen to be oxyanions.

Carbonate, bicarbonate, hydroxide, sulfate, nitrate, phosphate, citrate, acetate, and the list is very very very long.

Only a few of the really matter in the alkalinity of the ocean and its depletion.

Nitrate is an oxyanion with one negative charge.

Nitrate is a compound comprised of one nitrogen and three oxygen atoms. NO3-

Nitrate is a negatively charged oxyanion. It is oxidized nitrogen.

When microorganisms used nitrate as oxidant to get energy from oxidation of organic carbon, the oxygen from the nitrate is attached to the carbon.

The anion charge, carried on the oxygen, was also attached to the carbon.

The inorganic carbon oxidized product is an oxyanion, like bicarbonate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



















Into the Night wrote:
sealover wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
sealover wrote:Nitrate reduction by bacteria under low oxygen conditions generates alkalinity and it generates nitrous oxide, a powerful greenhouse gas.

What is a greenhouse gas" Specifically, what makes one greenhouse gas more powerful than another?

sealover wrote:Denitrification and dissimilatory reduction

Are you using these terms because everybody knows what they mean?

sealover wrote:Both pathways generate alkalinity

How is alkalinity generated?

Great trivia. Keep it coming.


-----------------------------------------------------------------
Defining some terms

The term "greenhouse gas" came from the term "greenhouse effect".

Void definition. You cannot define a buzzword with another buzzword.
sealover wrote:
Remember the movie "Soylet Green"?

In the opening scene it is mentioned in the dialog how "greenhouse effect" had created such conditions of climate change.

Define 'climate change'. What is actually changing? Climate has no value associated with it.
sealover wrote:
To the point that humanity had unknowingly already resorted to cannibalism!

A "greenhouse" allows visible light in, but not much infrared.

Sure it does. Now you are ignoring Plank's laws.
sealover wrote:
It doesn't let much infrared escape either.

Sure it does. Now you are ignoring the Stefan-Boltzmann law.
sealover wrote:
Much of the visible light entering the greenhouse is transformed into heat when
it is absorbed by a surface of low albedo.

Heat is not energy. You cannot create or destroy energy. Light absorption does not necessarily convert to thermal energy.
sealover wrote:
The heat in the form of infrared radiation does not escape the greenhouse.

Infrared light easily passes through the walls and ceilings of a greenhouse.
sealover wrote:
It is much warmer in the greenhouse than it is outside.

Because a greenhouse reduces heat.
sealover wrote:
How alkalinity generated?

You can't generate alkalinity.
sealover wrote:
Well, let's start by defining alkalinity itself.

Alkalinity is acid neutralizing capacity.

There's that wacky phrase again. Buzzword fallacy. You still have no clue what an acid or an alkaline is.
sealover wrote:
The alkalinity generated by nitrate reduction is anionic inorganic carbon.

You can't generate alkalinity. You can't reduce a nitrate. It's already reduced. A nitrate doesn't have carbon.
sealover wrote:
When organic carbon is oxidized by microrganisms, it is transformed into carbon dioxide or into inorganic carbon anions, depending on the oxidant.

Carbon isn't organic. A microorganism isn't an oxidizer (I think what you mean by 'oxidant').
sealover wrote:
When nitrate, like with sulfate, is used as oxidant, their anionic charge cannot simply disappear. The oxidized carbon product becomes an anion.

Neither nitrate nor sulfate has carbon.
sealover wrote:
Oxygen has no anionic charge to transfer to organic carbon during oxidation.

Carbon isn't organic. You cannot oxidize oxygen.
sealover wrote:
Carbon dioxide is not an anion.

It's unusual, but there's no real reason it couldn't be.
22-03-2022 23:54
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
sealover wrote:
"Oxygen has no anionic charge to transfer to carbon during oxidation." - -
- Ignoramus

So, how does this oxyanions as the source of all acid neutralizing capacity thing work, anyway?

Let's start by making sure what an oxyanion is.

A whole lot of words you hear all the time also happen to be oxyanions.

Carbonate, bicarbonate, hydroxide, sulfate, nitrate, phosphate, citrate, acetate, and the list is very very very long.

Only a few of the really matter in the alkalinity of the ocean and its depletion.

Nitrate is an oxyanion with one negative charge.

Nitrate is a compound comprised of one nitrogen and three oxygen atoms. NO3-

Nitrate is a negatively charged oxyanion. It is oxidized nitrogen.

When microorganisms used nitrate as oxidant to get energy from oxidation of organic carbon, the oxygen from the nitrate is attached to the carbon.

The anion charge, carried on the oxygen, was also attached to the carbon.

The inorganic carbon oxidized product is an oxyanion, like bicarbonate.

A whole lot of nothin'. Spamming. No argument presented.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
23-03-2022 00:04
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
sealover wrote:
"Carbon isn't organic. You cannot oxidize oxygen." - Ignoramus

YES IT IS!

No. Carbon is an element. It is not organic.
sealover wrote:
At least all the carbon that isn't INORGANIC.

YES YOU CAN!

At least all the oxygen that isn't already oxidized, such as the oxygen in the atmosphere.

Oxidizing oxygen???????!?
sealover wrote:
Organic carbon, the compounds of which are the specialization of organic chemistry is, um... well, duh?

Void argument fallacy.
sealover wrote:
Inorganic carbon, though? That's carbon when it has been oxidized.

Carbon dioxide is not organic. Sodium bicarbonate is not organic. Potassium carbonate is not organic.
sealover wrote:
Inorganic carbon is carbon with oxygen attached. Carbon dioxide, bicarbonate, and carbonate.

Nope. Simple salts of carbon are not organic.
sealover wrote:
During photosynthesis, the oxygen in the water molecule is OXIZIDED, releasing oxygen gas.

You cannot oxidize oxygen. It's already oxygen.
sealover wrote:
In the water molecule, H2O, hydrogen is oxidized and oxygen is reduced.

In the products of photosynthesis, the hydrogen is reduced and the oxygen is oxidized.

You cannot oxidize oxygen.
sealover wrote:
Photosynthesis generates impressive voltage to yank an electron off H2O.

How much? 720 kV? 400V? 1v? 12v? How does a plant not electrocute itself?
sealover wrote:
It generates a pretty powerful oxidant gas. O2. Oxidized oxygen.

You cannot oxidize oxygen.

Denial of chemistry. Denial of photosynthesis. Buzzword fallacies.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 23-03-2022 00:05
RE: It must be fun to be a biogeochemistry genius.23-03-2022 00:30
sealover
★★★☆☆
(803)
It must be fun to be a biogeochemistry genius.

Just look at the cool things you get to teach people.

This is a most fascinating field of science, is it not?

It must be fun to be a biogeochemistry genius.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
IBdaMann wrote:
sealover wrote: ...nitrate reduction by bacteria is an acid neutralizing process. It generates alkalinity in much the same way that sulfate reduction by bacteria generates alkalinity.

Aaaaah, because you are the consummate chemistry genius, you totally understand that adjusting a solution's pH towards 7.0 is "alkalinization" and not as laymen refer to it colloquially as "neutralizing" ... just as you were taught that the adjustment of sea water pH towards 7.0 is correctly called "acidification" and not as laymen refer to it colloquially as "neutralizing" ...

Right? Of course one can "generate alkalinity", it just takes the right wording, that's all. I really wish Into the Night would get on board.
23-03-2022 04:32
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
sealover wrote:
It must be fun to be a biogeochemistry genius.

Just look at the cool things you get to teach people.

This is a most fascinating field of science, is it not?

It must be fun to be a biogeochemistry genius.

Buzzword fallacy. Mockery. Trolling. No argument presented.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
RE: Anammox bacteria and ammonium nitrate18-04-2022 08:34
sealover
★★★☆☆
(803)
Anammox bacteria and ammonium nitrate

Nitrate reducing bacteria generate nitrous oxide as a by product of nitrate reduction.

Some nitrate reducing bacteria use organic carbon as reductant, and nitrate as oxidant. These include denitrifiers, which produce nitrogen gas as the primary reduced nitrogen product. They also include bacteria that perform dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonia.

Other nitrate reducing bacteria use AMMONIUM as reductant, and nitrate as oxidant. These are the anammox bacteria often employed in wastewater treatment. They generate nitrogen gas as the reduced nitrogen product. And they generate nitrous oxide as a by product.

Ammonium and nitrate can react in an energy releasing oxidation reduction reaction without the help of bacteria.

The port of Galveston, the port of Beirut, and the Oklahoma City federal building are proof that nitrate CAN be reduced using ammonium as reductant.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

sealover wrote:
Nitrate reduction by bacteria under low oxygen conditions generates alkalinity and it generates nitrous oxide, a powerful greenhouse gas.

Denitrification and dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium are the two major pathways of microbiological nitrate reduction.

Both pathways use nitrate as oxidant to get energy from oxidation of organic carbon.

Both pathways generate alkalinity, rather than carbon dioxide, as the oxidized inorganic carbon product.

Both pathways generate nitrous oxide as a by product.

Denitrification transforms nitrate-nitrogen into nitrogen gas. For better or worse, that nitrogen leaves the system.

Dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium transforms the highly mobile and easily leached nitrate-nitrogen into ammonium, which can be adsorbed to cation exchange sites and held in place against leaching. Furthermore, ammonium cannot be lost from the system by denitrification.
RE: Correction - Dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to AMMONIUM18-04-2022 08:40
sealover
★★★☆☆
(803)
Correction - Dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to AMMONIUM.

It mistakenly says dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonia. Wrong.

Easier to write DRNA, this process turns out to be much more important in terrestrial ecosystems than previously known. It preserves nitrogen in the ecosystem in the form of ammonium, rather than emitting it to the atmosphere as nitrogen gas.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

sealover wrote:
Anammox bacteria and ammonium nitrate

Nitrate reducing bacteria generate nitrous oxide as a by product of nitrate reduction.

Some nitrate reducing bacteria use organic carbon as reductant, and nitrate as oxidant. These include denitrifiers, which produce nitrogen gas as the primary reduced nitrogen product. They also include bacteria that perform dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonia.

Other nitrate reducing bacteria use AMMONIUM as reductant, and nitrate as oxidant. These are the anammox bacteria often employed in wastewater treatment. They generate nitrogen gas as the reduced nitrogen product. And they generate nitrous oxide as a by product.

Ammonium and nitrate can react in an energy releasing oxidation reduction reaction without the help of bacteria.

The port of Galveston, the port of Beirut, and the Oklahoma City federal building are proof that nitrate CAN be reduced using ammonium as reductant.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

sealover wrote:
Nitrate reduction by bacteria under low oxygen conditions generates alkalinity and it generates nitrous oxide, a powerful greenhouse gas.

Denitrification and dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium are the two major pathways of microbiological nitrate reduction.

Both pathways use nitrate as oxidant to get energy from oxidation of organic carbon.

Both pathways generate alkalinity, rather than carbon dioxide, as the oxidized inorganic carbon product.

Both pathways generate nitrous oxide as a by product.

Denitrification transforms nitrate-nitrogen into nitrogen gas. For better or worse, that nitrogen leaves the system.

Dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium transforms the highly mobile and easily leached nitrate-nitrogen into ammonium, which can be adsorbed to cation exchange sites and held in place against leaching. Furthermore, ammonium cannot be lost from the system by denitrification.
18-04-2022 17:40
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(4239)
Is there even on thread where you haven't had to correct yourself? Most of your corrections are silly nonsense anyway. Who the hell really cares? Nothing you've been posting is earth-shattering.

You aren't even posting anything that supports mankind destroying the planet. Or that the ecosystem isn't able to accommodate our filthy habits. Your posts just illustrate how our planet is self-healing, and we don't need to do anything to help it. If it ain't broken, don't fix it. You risk actually breaking something.
18-04-2022 20:44
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
sealover wrote:
Anammox bacteria and ammonium nitrate

More random cut and paste mixed with BS.
sealover wrote:
Nitrate reducing bacteria generate nitrous oxide as a by product of nitrate reduction.

You cannot reduce a nitrate. It's already reduced.
sealover wrote:
Some nitrate reducing bacteria use organic carbon as reductant, and nitrate as oxidant.

Carbon is not organic. Nitrate is not a chemical.
sealover wrote:
These include denitrifiers, which produce nitrogen gas as the primary reduced nitrogen product. They also include bacteria that perform dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonia.

Nitrate is not a chemical. Buzzword fallacies.
sealover wrote:
Other nitrate reducing bacteria use AMMONIUM as reductant,

Ammonium is not a chemical either.
sealover wrote:
and nitrate as oxidant.

Nitrate is not a chemical.
sealover wrote:
These are the anammox bacteria often employed in wastewater treatment.

Nah. No one pays them.
sealover wrote:
They generate nitrogen gas as the reduced nitrogen product. And they generate nitrous oxide as a by product.

Nitrogen gas is not a product of nitrogen gas.
sealover wrote:
Ammonium and nitrate can react in an energy releasing oxidation reduction reaction without the help of bacteria.

Not chemicals.
sealover wrote:
The port of Galveston, the port of Beirut, and the Oklahoma City federal building are proof that nitrate CAN be reduced using ammonium as reductant.

Not chemicals.
sealover wrote:
Nitrate reduction by bacteria under low oxygen conditions generates alkalinity and it generates nitrous oxide, a powerful greenhouse gas.

Buzzword fallacies. NO gas or vapor is capable of warming the Earth. You cannot create energy out of nothing.
sealover wrote:
Denitrification and dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium are the two major pathways of microbiological nitrate reduction.

Not chemicals.
sealover wrote:
Both pathways use nitrate as oxidant to get energy from oxidation of organic carbon.

Carbon is not organic.
sealover wrote:
Both pathways generate alkalinity, rather than carbon dioxide, as the oxidized inorganic carbon product.

Buzzword fallacies.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
18-04-2022 20:46
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
sealover wrote:
Correction - Dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to AMMONIUM.

Get your cut and paste wrong?
These are not chemicals.
sealover wrote:
It mistakenly says dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonia. Wrong.

Not a chemical. What is 'it'? The place you are cut and pasting from?
sealover wrote:
Easier to write DRNA, this process turns out to be much more important in terrestrial ecosystems than previously known. It preserves nitrogen in the ecosystem in the form of ammonium, rather than emitting it to the atmosphere as nitrogen gas.

Not a chemical.
Buzzword fallacies.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
18-04-2022 20:47
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Is there even on thread where you haven't had to correct yourself? Most of your corrections are silly nonsense anyway. Who the hell really cares? Nothing you've been posting is earth-shattering.

You aren't even posting anything that supports mankind destroying the planet. Or that the ecosystem isn't able to accommodate our filthy habits. Your posts just illustrate how our planet is self-healing, and we don't need to do anything to help it. If it ain't broken, don't fix it. You risk actually breaking something.

He does attempt to mention nitrous oxide as a 'greenhouse gas' from time to time, as well as carbon dioxide. Neither, of course, is capable of warming the Earth at all.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
RE: Nitrate Reducing Bacteria as NOx Scavengers or Generators18-04-2022 21:21
sealover
★★★☆☆
(803)
Nitrate Reducing Bacteria as NOx Scavengers or Generators

It has been noted that nitrate reducing bacteria of all kinds can generate nitrous oxide as a byproduct during nitrate reduction.

Nitrous oxide, N2O, is just one of the NOx's that nitrate reducers can generate.

Nitric oxide, NO, is another gaseous NOx byproduct of microbial nitrate reduction.

However, nitrate reducing bacteria are viewed as beneficial because they also REMOVE NOxs.

This is not the time for the full description, but a VERY IMPORTANT biogeochemical interaction is the manner in which nitrate reducing bacteria can scavenge for NOxs and metabolize them.

There are ways to manipulate conditions so that these guys MINIMIZE their generation of nitrous oxide, nitric oxide, etc., emitted to the atmosphere and MAXIMIZE their effectiveness at REMOVING NOxs from solution. This in, in turn, ensures that these NOxs cannot be emitted to the atmosphere.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

sealover wrote:
Correction - Dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to AMMONIUM.

It mistakenly says dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonia. Wrong.

Easier to write DRNA, this process turns out to be much more important in terrestrial ecosystems than previously known. It preserves nitrogen in the ecosystem in the form of ammonium, rather than emitting it to the atmosphere as nitrogen gas.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

sealover wrote:
Anammox bacteria and ammonium nitrate

Nitrate reducing bacteria generate nitrous oxide as a by product of nitrate reduction.

Some nitrate reducing bacteria use organic carbon as reductant, and nitrate as oxidant. These include denitrifiers, which produce nitrogen gas as the primary reduced nitrogen product. They also include bacteria that perform dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonia.

Other nitrate reducing bacteria use AMMONIUM as reductant, and nitrate as oxidant. These are the anammox bacteria often employed in wastewater treatment. They generate nitrogen gas as the reduced nitrogen product. And they generate nitrous oxide as a by product.

Ammonium and nitrate can react in an energy releasing oxidation reduction reaction without the help of bacteria.

The port of Galveston, the port of Beirut, and the Oklahoma City federal building are proof that nitrate CAN be reduced using ammonium as reductant.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

sealover wrote:
Nitrate reduction by bacteria under low oxygen conditions generates alkalinity and it generates nitrous oxide, a powerful greenhouse gas.

Denitrification and dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium are the two major pathways of microbiological nitrate reduction.

Both pathways use nitrate as oxidant to get energy from oxidation of organic carbon.

Both pathways generate alkalinity, rather than carbon dioxide, as the oxidized inorganic carbon product.

Both pathways generate nitrous oxide as a by product.

Denitrification transforms nitrate-nitrogen into nitrogen gas. For better or worse, that nitrogen leaves the system.

Dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium transforms the highly mobile and easily leached nitrate-nitrogen into ammonium, which can be adsorbed to cation exchange sites and held in place against leaching. Furthermore, ammonium cannot be lost from the system by denitrification.
18-04-2022 22:55
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
...deleted talking to yourself...
sealover wrote:
Nitrate Reducing Bacteria as NOx Scavengers or Generators

More cut and paste with your usual BS.
sealover wrote:
It has been noted that nitrate reducing bacteria of all kinds can generate nitrous oxide as a byproduct during nitrate reduction.

Nitrate is not a chemical.
sealover wrote:
Nitrous oxide, N2O, is just one of the NOx's that nitrate reducers can generate.

Nitric oxide, NO, is another gaseous NOx byproduct of microbial nitrate reduction.

However, nitrate reducing bacteria are viewed as beneficial because they also REMOVE NOxs.

Paradox. Irrational statements. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox.
sealover wrote:
This is not the time for the full description, but a VERY IMPORTANT biogeochemical interaction is the manner in which nitrate reducing bacteria can scavenge for NOxs and metabolize them.

Paradox.
sealover wrote:
There are ways to manipulate conditions so that these guys MINIMIZE their generation of nitrous oxide, nitric oxide, etc., emitted to the atmosphere and MAXIMIZE their effectiveness at REMOVING NOxs from solution. This in, in turn, ensures that these NOxs cannot be emitted to the atmosphere.

Nitrous oxide is a naturally occurring gas in the atmosphere.
Nitric oxide is a naturally occurring gas in the atmosphere.

NO gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth. You are STILL ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 18-04-2022 22:56
RE: Rethinking Wastewater Treatment to Generate Alkalinity.30-04-2022 06:01
sealover
★★★☆☆
(803)
Rethinking Wastewater Treatment to Generate Alkalinity.

Wastewater treatment requires, at some point, removing nitrate before effluent can be discharged.

The bacteria employed are typically denitrifiers (2 species for 2 steps) or annamox bacteria.

Annamox can be used when both nitrate and ammonium are present. The two are combined to make nitrogen gas released from the water to the atmosphere.

Denitrifiers are used when all the ammonium is oxidized to nitrate. One species reduces nitrate to nitrate, using organic carbon oxidation as energy source. The second species reduces nitrite to nitrogen gas released from the water to the atmosphere.

What if we rethink it a bit and exploit wastewater treatment as a source of alkalinity for the sea AND a source of useful nitrogen fertilizer?

Another kind of nitrate reducing bacteria perform dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium (DNRA), using organic carbon oxidation as energy source.

The alkalinity they generate could go to the sea in the treated effluent.

The ammonium could be captured by ion exchange or other means to use as fertilizer, rather than lost to the atmosphere as nitrogen gas.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

sealover wrote:
Nitrate reduction by bacteria under low oxygen conditions generates alkalinity and it generates nitrous oxide, a powerful greenhouse gas.

Denitrification and dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium are the two major pathways of microbiological nitrate reduction.

Both pathways use nitrate as oxidant to get energy from oxidation of organic carbon.

Both pathways generate alkalinity, rather than carbon dioxide, as the oxidized inorganic carbon product.

Both pathways generate nitrous oxide as a by product.

Denitrification transforms nitrate-nitrogen into nitrogen gas. For better or worse, that nitrogen leaves the system.

Dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium transforms the highly mobile and easily leached nitrate-nitrogen into ammonium, which can be adsorbed to cation exchange sites and held in place against leaching. Furthermore, ammonium cannot be lost from the system by denitrification.
30-04-2022 18:13
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(11757)
squeal over wrote: Rethinking Wastewater Treatment to Generate Alkalinity.

For warmizombies, the non-existent catastrophic Climate Change threat is Global Warming. Obviously there is no reasoning with warmizombies on this point; it is a religious conviction to an unfalsifiable dogma. No amount of physics to the contrary can dissuade them from their delusion.

For squeal over, the non-existent catastrophic Climate Change threat is ocean alkalinity depletion. One has to wonder where he even got the idea in the first place, let alone become convinced that there is some sort of problem. He has never measured the ocean's alkalinity; nobody can. There is no way he or anybody can know what is occurring with the ocean's alkalinity, yet he, like tmiddles, is playing the "omniscience" card and concocting ever-confusing loads of convoluted gibber-babble to keep himself fooled. Obviously there is no reasoning with squeal over on this point; it is a religious conviction to an unfalsifiable dogma. No amount of chemistry to the contrary can dissuade him from his delusion.

squeal over provided some interesting trivia:Wastewater treatment requires, at some point, removing nitrate before effluent can be discharged.

The bacteria employed are typically denitrifiers (2 species for 2 steps) or annamox bacteria.

Annamox can be used when both nitrate and ammonium are present. The two are combined to make nitrogen gas released from the water to the atmosphere.

Denitrifiers are used when all the ammonium is oxidized to nitrate. One species reduces nitrate to nitrate [meant "nitrite"], using organic carbon oxidation as energy source. The second species reduces nitrite to nitrogen gas released from the water to the atmosphere.

Thank you. This is not my everyday trivia but it's good stuff.

squeal over wrote:What if we rethink it a bit and exploit wastewater treatment as a source of alkalinity for the sea AND a source of useful nitrogen fertilizer?

What if we rethink it a bit as a Christian might and exploit wastewater treatment as an opportunity to glorify God AND as source of useful nitrogen fertilizer?

squeal over wrote:Another kind of nitrate reducing bacteria perform dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium (DNRA), using organic carbon oxidation as energy source. The alkalinity they generate could go to the sea in the treated effluent.

How much would it cost to deliver carbonate and bicarbonate to the ocean? How would the effect be anything but negligible, effectively equating to zero effect? Are you saying that it's not the gift that matters but the thought that counts?
01-05-2022 01:54
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
sealover wrote:
Rethinking Wastewater Treatment to Generate Alkalinity.

Buzzword fallacy.
sealover wrote:
Wastewater treatment requires, at some point, removing nitrate before effluent can be discharged.

No, it doesn't. Nitrate is not a chemical.
sealover wrote:
The bacteria employed are typically denitrifiers (2 species for 2 steps) or annamox bacteria.

Annamox can be used when both nitrate and ammonium are present. The two are combined to make nitrogen gas released from the water to the atmosphere.

No such chemicals. Ammonium nitrate is not nitrogen gas.
sealover wrote:
Denitrifiers are used when all the ammonium is oxidized to nitrate. One species reduces nitrate to nitrate, using organic carbon oxidation as energy source. The second species reduces nitrite to nitrogen gas released from the water to the atmosphere.

No such chemicals.
sealover wrote:
What if we rethink it a bit and exploit wastewater treatment as a source of alkalinity for the sea AND a source of useful nitrogen fertilizer?

Buzzword fallacy.
sealover wrote:
Another kind of nitrate reducing bacteria perform dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium (DNRA), using organic carbon oxidation as energy source.

Carbon isn't organic. No such chemicals as nitrate or ammonium.
sealover wrote:
The alkalinity they generate could go to the sea in the treated effluent.

Buzzword fallacy.
sealover wrote:
The ammonium could be captured by ion exchange or other means to use as fertilizer, rather than lost to the atmosphere as nitrogen gas.

No such chemical as ammonium.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
RE: Sulfate and Nitrate - Two big sources of alkalinity via microbial reduction07-05-2022 04:50
sealover
★★★☆☆
(803)
Sulfate and Nitrate - Two big sources of alkalinity via microbial reduction.

The post below was the first one of this thread.

It will make far more sense to the new visitor to this website if they go to the very first post, rather than scroll backwards in time from this most recent post.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

sealover wrote:
Nitrate reduction by bacteria under low oxygen conditions generates alkalinity and it generates nitrous oxide, a powerful greenhouse gas.

Denitrification and dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium are the two major pathways of microbiological nitrate reduction.

Both pathways use nitrate as oxidant to get energy from oxidation of organic carbon.

Both pathways generate alkalinity, rather than carbon dioxide, as the oxidized inorganic carbon product.

Both pathways generate nitrous oxide as a by product.

Denitrification transforms nitrate-nitrogen into nitrogen gas. For better or worse, that nitrogen leaves the system.

Dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium transforms the highly mobile and easily leached nitrate-nitrogen into ammonium, which can be adsorbed to cation exchange sites and held in place against leaching. Furthermore, ammonium cannot be lost from the system by denitrification.
07-05-2022 12:04
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(4239)
Why does alkalinity matter to you so much? Most everything on the planet is not neutral. It's part of what allows everything to interact. Most of the manure you're spreading, doesn't involve lethal-levels of anything. It balances out in nature, more or less, but never settles in as neutral. Some lifeforms prefer alkalinity, others prefer acidity, and will find a place on this planet that feeds their needs.
07-05-2022 20:19
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
sealover wrote:
Sulfate and Nitrate - Two big sources of alkalinity via microbial reduction.

The post below was the first one of this thread.

It will make far more sense to the new visitor to this website if they go to the very first post, rather than scroll backwards in time from this most recent post.

No such chemicals. Buzzword fallacies.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
07-05-2022 20:19
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Why does alkalinity matter to you so much? Most everything on the planet is not neutral. It's part of what allows everything to interact. Most of the manure you're spreading, doesn't involve lethal-levels of anything. It balances out in nature, more or less, but never settles in as neutral. Some lifeforms prefer alkalinity, others prefer acidity, and will find a place on this planet that feeds their needs.

Alkalinity is just a buzzword for him.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
RE: Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you've got nothing new to say. - Grateful Dead07-05-2022 23:18
sealover
★★★☆☆
(803)
Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you've got nothing new to say - Grateful Dead.

And you've got nothing new to say...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Into the Night wrote:
sealover wrote:
Sulfate and Nitrate - Two big sources of alkalinity via microbial reduction.

The post below was the first one of this thread.

It will make far more sense to the new visitor to this website if they go to the very first post, rather than scroll backwards in time from this most recent post.

No such chemicals. Buzzword fallacies.
07-05-2022 23:40
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(11757)
sealover wrote:
Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you've got nothing new to say - Grateful Dead.

And you've got nothing new to say...

He doesn't need anything new to say. At this point we're giving you rope enough to hang yourself. There's no need to worry any jury, newcomers can see for themselves. Like in the Twenty-third Psalm, reserve me a table for three,
down in the Valley of the Shadow, it's you, Im a BM and me.

I hope you have the sense to run.
07-05-2022 23:48
SwanProfile picture★★★★☆
(1220)
Into the Night wrote:
sealover wrote:
Rethinking Wastewater Treatment to Generate Alkalinity.

Buzzword fallacy.
sealover wrote:
Wastewater treatment requires, at some point, removing nitrate before effluent can be discharged.

No, it doesn't. Nitrate is not a chemical.
sealover wrote:
The bacteria employed are typically denitrifiers (2 species for 2 steps) or annamox bacteria.

Annamox can be used when both nitrate and ammonium are present. The two are combined to make nitrogen gas released from the water to the atmosphere.

No such chemicals. Ammonium nitrate is not nitrogen gas.
sealover wrote:
Denitrifiers are used when all the ammonium is oxidized to nitrate. One species reduces nitrate to nitrate, using organic carbon oxidation as energy source. The second species reduces nitrite to nitrogen gas released from the water to the atmosphere.

No such chemicals.
sealover wrote:
What if we rethink it a bit and exploit wastewater treatment as a source of alkalinity for the sea AND a source of useful nitrogen fertilizer?

Buzzword fallacy.
sealover wrote:
Another kind of nitrate reducing bacteria perform dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium (DNRA), using organic carbon oxidation as energy source.

Carbon isn't organic. No such chemicals as nitrate or ammonium.
sealover wrote:
The alkalinity they generate could go to the sea in the treated effluent.

Buzzword fallacy.
sealover wrote:
The ammonium could be captured by ion exchange or other means to use as fertilizer, rather than lost to the atmosphere as nitrogen gas.

No such chemical as ammonium.


The chemical formula for ammonium is NH4, and please sniff some

Ammonium is derived from ammonia by combination with a hydrogen ion and known in compounds (such as salts) that resemble in properties the compounds of the alkali metals.
08-05-2022 00:54
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(11757)
Swan wrote:The chemical formula for ammonium is NH4,

That is certainly the formula for ammonium in modern chemistry.

What definition of "chemical" are you using? Is it the same definition you are using for "amphibious"? Just curious.
08-05-2022 04:33
SwanProfile picture★★★★☆
(1220)
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:The chemical formula for ammonium is NH4,

That is certainly the formula for ammonium in modern chemistry.

What definition of "chemical" are you using? Is it the same definition you are using for "amphibious"? Just curious.


Is this really a worthwhile use of your talents?
Do you do everything that you are told because the other guys will not ridicule themselves as you do?

Is this getting you to your goals?

PS I use the same chemical formulas as all PHD chemist, what definition do you use?
08-05-2022 05:01
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
Swan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
sealover wrote:
Rethinking Wastewater Treatment to Generate Alkalinity.

Buzzword fallacy.
sealover wrote:
Wastewater treatment requires, at some point, removing nitrate before effluent can be discharged.

No, it doesn't. Nitrate is not a chemical.
sealover wrote:
The bacteria employed are typically denitrifiers (2 species for 2 steps) or annamox bacteria.

Annamox can be used when both nitrate and ammonium are present. The two are combined to make nitrogen gas released from the water to the atmosphere.

No such chemicals. Ammonium nitrate is not nitrogen gas.
sealover wrote:
Denitrifiers are used when all the ammonium is oxidized to nitrate. One species reduces nitrate to nitrate, using organic carbon oxidation as energy source. The second species reduces nitrite to nitrogen gas released from the water to the atmosphere.

No such chemicals.
sealover wrote:
What if we rethink it a bit and exploit wastewater treatment as a source of alkalinity for the sea AND a source of useful nitrogen fertilizer?

Buzzword fallacy.
sealover wrote:
Another kind of nitrate reducing bacteria perform dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium (DNRA), using organic carbon oxidation as energy source.

Carbon isn't organic. No such chemicals as nitrate or ammonium.
sealover wrote:
The alkalinity they generate could go to the sea in the treated effluent.

Buzzword fallacy.
sealover wrote:
The ammonium could be captured by ion exchange or other means to use as fertilizer, rather than lost to the atmosphere as nitrogen gas.

No such chemical as ammonium.


The chemical formula for ammonium is NH4, and please sniff some

Ammonium is derived from ammonia by combination with a hydrogen ion and known in compounds (such as salts) that resemble in properties the compounds of the alkali metals.

Not a chemical.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
08-05-2022 05:04
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18410)
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:The chemical formula for ammonium is NH4,

That is certainly the formula for ammonium in modern chemistry.

What definition of "chemical" are you using? Is it the same definition you are using for "amphibious"? Just curious.


Is this really a worthwhile use of your talents?

Jealous of his talents?
Swan wrote:
Do you do everything that you are told because the other guys will not ridicule themselves as you do?

He isn't told to do anything.
Swan wrote:
Is this getting you to your goals?

PS I use the same chemical formulas as all PHD chemist, what definition do you use?

You are not a PhD or a chemist. Hallucination. You are a nothing, like sealover.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Page 2 of 3<123>





Join the debate Nitrate Reduction - Powerful Greenhouse Gas Emission AND Alkalinity:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Restoring Alkalinity to the Ocean18312-05-2022 18:52
Fossil Fuel Substitution for reduced emission of CO2, mercury, lead, arsenic, cadmium..7107-05-2022 20:14
Gargantuan sluice gate in Gulf Stream to warm Europe, lower nat gas need2926-04-2022 18:14
Donald J. Trump -- gas prices1012-03-2022 01:23
This is How the European Commission Classifies Nuclear Energy and Gas to Be 'Green'205-02-2022 04:07
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact