Remember me
▼ Content

No Subject



Page 2 of 2<12
19-03-2021 01:39
James___
★★★★★
(5166)
anmb wrote:
No I will keep wasting bandwidth and ignore ibdmann and into the night - abusive loonies, nothing useful to say and nothing to contribute, see a shrink you 2 really are VERY strange.

nuff said


question:
From the web, it seems recent capture tech can be done using Metal–organic frameworks , can you get these easily/cheaply specifically for air capture co2 ? or are they difficult/expensive to manufacture ?



You should be nice when you talk about ISn't and IBNotDaMann. They have feelings you know.
What you're asking about is probably expensive. One issue I have with some research is they ignore the fact that innovation is supposed to reduce the cost of doing business. Kind of why people would want to invest in new ideas.
The question should be how can we make carbon capture affordable? Most concepts aren't economically feasible. This is where a balance between environmentalism and a sustainable economy needs to be allowed for.
And now they'll know that I'm 1/2 Norwegian those ba$tards. See what you've done now? They're simply not concerned about sustainability because they're "REAL" Americans.

p.s., the specific sources of CO2 really hasn't been made known. Saying "lower" CO2 levels is a pretty vague statement. Is their a specific source that needs to be targeted or just everything? Different sources requires different solutions.


p.s.s., as to you "REAL" Americans, I feel better now. Sustainability between an economy and the environment is verßieten. WOW! and in Norske it's forby. It's cooler in German! Oops! I meant in Deutsche!

Edited on 19-03-2021 02:00
RE: carbon capture19-03-2021 10:25
anmb
☆☆☆☆☆
(16)
thanks HarveyH55 I realise that presently it will be expensive to compress/store and find a use for the gas you collect. The challenge is to start somewhere and over time hope that better solutions can be found, if a problem exists.

My plan was to at least experiment with some capture as for me it will answer some of my many many questions that I have about the technology and how suitable it is. Anyone can read the claims on the internet but how true are they? that is why I wanted to see for myself.

MOF technology looks interesting from my own searching of the web and I wanted to test some materials but I am not a chemical engineer and do not know how to, which is one reason I asked the question.
RE: carbon capture19-03-2021 10:46
anmb
☆☆☆☆☆
(16)
Thanks james
You should be nice when you talk about ISn't and IBNotDaMann. They have feelings you know.

they/he are just strange sad man/men/bot that swamp your post with insults, gibberish, in fact anything contra to what you trying to say, and should be ignored.

One of the reasons I was trying to experiment for myself was to look at the economics of capture and whether it was an investable idea or currently not worth doing.

For me the best way to achieve it would be to experiment creating and testing some device/material. I have many questions about the technology and wondered why some 'heavy hitters' are investing time and money in the tech.
and currently I am interested in the mof tech. and how to produce capture material or purchase some manufactured sheets/beads.

In the future governments may introduce carbon taxation that requires a negative co2 lifestyle, so co2 will be an even bigger political issue.
19-03-2021 11:23
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16189)
anmb wrote:
Thanks james
You should be nice when you talk about ISn't and IBNotDaMann. They have feelings you know.

they/he are just strange sad man/men/bot that swamp your post with insults, gibberish, in fact anything contra to what you trying to say, and should be ignored.

Bulverism fallacy. Insult fallacy. Science isn't gibberish. Neither is mathematics. You deny them both.
anmb wrote:
One of the reasons I was trying to experiment for myself was to look at the economics of capture and whether it was an investable idea or currently not worth doing.

Liquifaction plants already exist. Invest in one of them. Try Praxair for example.
anmb wrote:
For me the best way to achieve it would be to experiment creating and testing some device/material. I have many questions about the technology and wondered why some 'heavy hitters' are investing time and money in the tech.

You can make money by selling CO2 and other gases.
anmb wrote:
and currently I am interested in the mof tech. and how to produce capture material or purchase some manufactured sheets/beads.

To what end? Why do you want to capture CO2?
anmb wrote:
In the future governments may introduce carbon taxation that requires a negative co2 lifestyle, so co2 will be an even bigger political issue.

Define 'negative CO2 lifestyle'.


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
19-03-2021 11:56
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1380)
Bidens government have pledged 500 billion dollars a year in climate funding.Grab some of that before Tesla snare it all in electric car research.
19-03-2021 23:20
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
IBdaMann wrote:
anmb wrote: yes 'ibdamann' you are right greenhouses ... add co2 to promote growth.

Great! ... so you understand that much.

anmb wrote:again that's not the question I asked, so helps not at all

Hey ashwipe, I answered your question. The complete answer is that you are a scientifically illiterate moron who apparently seeks to kill all life on earth in the name of saving the planet. You also cannot read English for comprehension because although I have answered your question, you sit there with the stunned "deer in the headlights" confusion. You also have control issues in that you cannot handle viewpoints that do not align with your Global Warming religion and you try to bully them into silence.

Go suck an egg.



I'll feel free to post whatever I wish to post and you can blow me if you don't like it. You should probably try posting on YAP, it's your kind of safe space. I've been banned from there so you won't have to worry about running into my answers to your questions there.

Coward.

.


Nice selfie
RE: carbon capture19-03-2021 23:36
anmb
☆☆☆☆☆
(16)
thank you
20-03-2021 00:00
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
anmb wrote:
thank you


Don't mention it
20-03-2021 03:10
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1380)
Carbon dioxide can be removed from the air chemically using soda lime (sodium hydroxide and calcium hydroxide) in devices called scrubbers. The carbon dioxide is trapped in the soda lime by a chemical reaction and removed from the air. ... Finally, filters are used to remove particulates, dirt and dust from the air.Not sure if this helps
20-03-2021 03:28
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10053)
duncan61 wrote:
Carbon dioxide can be removed from the air chemically using soda lime (sodium hydroxide and calcium hydroxide) in devices called scrubbers. The carbon dioxide is trapped in the soda lime by a chemical reaction and removed from the air. ... Finally, filters are used to remove particulates, dirt and dust from the air.Not sure if this helps

Duncan, anmb imagines himself a Climate superhero who will save the planet. While your suggestion works chemically, anmb cannot feasibly use your method to extract all the CO2 from the earth's atmosphere and kill all the plant life.

Yes, you answered the question that was asked but not the question that is actually on his mind. He will thank you for the response but it doesn't help him in his quest.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
20-03-2021 03:40
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(3699)
anmb wrote:
thanks HarveyH55 I realise that presently it will be expensive to compress/store and find a use for the gas you collect. The challenge is to start somewhere and over time hope that better solutions can be found, if a problem exists.

My plan was to at least experiment with some capture as for me it will answer some of my many many questions that I have about the technology and how suitable it is. Anyone can read the claims on the internet but how true are they? that is why I wanted to see for myself.

MOF technology looks interesting from my own searching of the web and I wanted to test some materials but I am not a chemical engineer and do not know how to, which is one reason I asked the question.


It's not so much that people are investing their own money, but taking advantage of 'free money' being handed out, to research mitigating climate change. They really don't care about our 'carbon-sins', just the free money, and grabbing all they can. Whatever they develop, doesn't really have to do much of anything at all, just appear to work. Well, actually, just have some potential of actually working, so they can continue to get more free money. Research is expensive. You need a place to work, equipment, machinery, tools, employees... Free grants, buy all that, legally, and you get to keep it all, even if your proposal doesn't pan out. You have the option of using all that free stuff, anyway you want, after the grants run out, even lease your free stuff, to somebody else, who scored free money... Of course, if you can produce a convincing product to sell, you can make some quick cash as well.

There is a lot of competition, to get in on the free money, and that's where an education helps out a great deal. You have to sell an idea, that appears better than what others are trying to sell. Cheaper, simpler, more efficient, higher yield... It's not so much the idea, just how you sell it to the people passing out the grants. You aren't really selling an actual product, just an idea, that needs research and development.
RE: Mod technology20-03-2021 11:27
anmb
☆☆☆☆☆
(16)
Thanks Duncan but I was concentrating on mof tech as from surfing the net it seemed to be one of the current best methods for capture.

Harvey55 I realise there is a lot of free money sloshing about, but without a university education I am unlikely to get any so I have to rely on doing the experimentation, making any substance, and its cost myself.

If I could get the relevant information as to how to produce or how to economically purchase some capture material I would be able to make up my own mind and filter some of the noise about carbon capture.
20-03-2021 12:34
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(3699)
anmb wrote:
Thanks Duncan but I was concentrating on mof tech as from surfing the net it seemed to be one of the current best methods for capture.

Harvey55 I realise there is a lot of free money sloshing about, but without a university education I am unlikely to get any so I have to rely on doing the experimentation, making any substance, and its cost myself.

If I could get the relevant information as to how to produce or how to economically purchase some capture material I would be able to make up my own mind and filter some of the noise about carbon capture.


It's really about where, and how you submit your proposal. They teach that in college. Something you will have to learn eventually. College people have a head start on you, as far being taught what they need to put in a proposal, and what to avoid. Even if you do your own R&D, and get a product ready, you will still need to present it properly, to get any attention. College was about 40 years ago for me, and never need that sort of learning, just remember being taught stuff of no interest or use at the time.
Page 2 of 2<12





Join the debate No Subject:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
No Subject016-03-2020 03:12
No Subject209-02-2020 06:44
Gravity because it's a heavy subject022-10-2019 08:44
No Subject228-04-2019 20:13
No Subject027-03-2015 14:11
▲ 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