No Subject

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Technology > No Subject

Page 1 of 2

No Subject15-03-2021 11:49
anmb ☆☆☆☆☆ (16)	Is there any company worldwide that sells just sheets/granules/anyformat of carbon capture material that you can experiment with 'using the capture and heat to release' or is better/more effective to make your own using chemical engineering and how is that achieved? can a novice, non scientist, make carbon capture materials?
15-03-2021 12:37
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14401)	anmb wrote:Is there any company worldwide that sells just sheets/granules/anyformat of carbon capture material that you can experiment with 'using the capture and heat to release' or is better/more effective to make your own using chemical engineering and how is that achieved? can a novice, non scientist, make carbon capture materials? There's no commercial market for it. Unless existing demand for beer, soda and paintball were to increase by orders of magnitude, we need all the CO2 in the atmosphere that we can get. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
15-03-2021 14:49
anmb ☆☆☆☆☆ (16)	thanks for the reply but it doesn't answer my question
15-03-2021 15:58
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14401)	anmb wrote: thanks for the reply but it doesn't answer my question I'm not sure what part of your question cannot be answered by my post, but here's one of the valid answers that you don't actually want: Back in November, Drax Power Ltd signed a deal with Shell Catalysts to perform a study on how to engineer a couple of CO2 capture units for Drax Group's power station in North Yorkshire (Selby) in the UK. Talk to them. Maybe you can team with them. .
RE: carbon capture15-03-2021 16:20
anmb ☆☆☆☆☆ (16)	thanks again IBdaMann - I wanted to experiment, not at industrial level, with carbon capture technology and I am not a chemical engineer and do not know about capture, except what I read on the net. I have found references to mof technology and industry using co2 capture in waste/flue gases, and air capture. My query is how do I get any material to experiment with or how can I create my own(extremely low cost, I am not a wealthy guy). I have many questions about such technology and thought if I could experiment myself at home and I could find the answers - that in a nutshell is what I was looking for, a way a novice can experiment/test the technology, performance, its viability, costs and usability PS. finally remembered to include a subject field

15-03-2021 18:59
Swan★★★★★ (5719)	anmb wrote: thanks again IBdaMann - I wanted to experiment, not at industrial level, with carbon capture technology and I am not a chemical engineer and do not know about capture, except what I read on the net. I have found references to mof technology and industry using co2 capture in waste/flue gases, and air capture. My query is how do I get any material to experiment with or how can I create my own(extremely low cost, I am not a wealthy guy). I have many questions about such technology and thought if I could experiment myself at home and I could find the answers - that in a nutshell is what I was looking for, a way a novice can experiment/test the technology, performance, its viability, costs and usability PS. finally remembered to include a subject field Dude every submerged submarine captures co2 all the time or the crew would die. So yes the materials that you are asking about do certainly exist.. ibnottheman is a schizzo who knows nothing that he can not make up
15-03-2021 20:23
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	anmb wrote: Is there any company worldwide that sells just sheets/granules/anyformat of carbon capture material that you can experiment with 'using the capture and heat to release' or is better/more effective to make your own using chemical engineering and how is that achieved? can a novice, non scientist, make carbon capture materials? It's easy to capture CO2. Just get some air, compress the hell out of it, let it cool off, an the first liquid to come from that is CO2. There's probably an industrial plant near you right now doing just exactly that. 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
15-03-2021 20:24
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	IBdaMann wrote: anmb wrote:Is there any company worldwide that sells just sheets/granules/anyformat of carbon capture material that you can experiment with 'using the capture and heat to release' or is better/more effective to make your own using chemical engineering and how is that achieved? can a novice, non scientist, make carbon capture materials? There's no commercial market for it. Unless existing demand for beer, soda and paintball were to increase by orders of magnitude, we need all the CO2 in the atmosphere that we can get. . There is a commercial market for CO2. You just named some of them. 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
15-03-2021 22:03
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14401)	Into the Night wrote:There is a commercial market for CO2. You just named some of them. Not for CO2, ... for home CO2 capture machines. There's a reason there isn't one in every home. . . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
15-03-2021 23:47
Swan★★★★★ (5719)	anmb wrote: Is there any company worldwide that sells just sheets/granules/anyformat of carbon capture material that you can experiment with 'using the capture and heat to release' or is better/more effective to make your own using chemical engineering and how is that achieved? can a novice, non scientist, make carbon capture materials? Here you go Current submarine air revitalization systems use liquid and/or solid amine-based carbon dioxide (CO2) removal technologies. These materials use amine chemistry to capture CO2 at room temperature and the material is regenerated using heat and vacuum to restore its original chemical state for use in subsequent cycles. The legacy hardware, using the liquid amines, is prone to scaling and other complications from the use of a liquid. These solvents also have a short lifetime which requires frequent replacement, and generates hazardous material wastes that are complicated to handle.<br><br>TDA Research proposes to develop a high capacity, water stable nano-engineered adsorbent to remove CO2 from submarine atmospheres. We will screen these materials based on their CO2 capacity, selectivity and removal efficiency. We will show that the sorbent retains its activity for adsorption and regeneration cycles under mild thermal swing, vacuum swing and concentration swing cycles (a minimum of 10,000 cycle test will be carried out in Phase I and another 10,000 cycles during the Option Effort). We will estimate the cost of producing the sorbent, and CO2 scrubbing system as installed on and Ohio-replacement submarine. We will estimate the consumable requirements and parasitic power losses.
16-03-2021 00:47
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	anmb wrote: thanks again IBdaMann - I wanted to experiment, not at industrial level, with carbon capture technology and I am not a chemical engineer and do not know about capture, except what I read on the net. I have found references to mof technology and industry using co2 capture in waste/flue gases, and air capture. My query is how do I get any material to experiment with or how can I create my own(extremely low cost, I am not a wealthy guy). I have many questions about such technology and thought if I could experiment myself at home and I could find the answers - that in a nutshell is what I was looking for, a way a novice can experiment/test the technology, performance, its viability, costs and usability PS. finally remembered to include a subject field There are quite a few papers, and proposals, for carbon capture and sequester. I can't give links, because I didn't bother to save any. CO2, is a trace gas, so atmospheric CO2 capture is pretty much a bogus waste of time, money, and resources. Plant a tree... Even if we could double atmospheric CO2, with the evil, man-made CO2, it still would rise past a trace gas. Takes energy to remove the CO2, compress it for storage. CO2 captured, isn't likely to exceed the CO2 produced to create and power these schemes, in a reasonable life cycle of the devices proposed. But, marketing, can sell all kinds of useless machines, and people are happy to pay for them, and throw them in the landfill. My concern, was that CO2 is a trace gas, but absolutely vital to life on this planet. All life is based on carbon molecules. Plants, are they only things that can take carbon directly from the environment, CO2. Fortunately, plants are very tolerant, and can survive a while, when things aren't ideal for growth, but not forever. They just survive, not grow or mature. We reduce CO2, we reduce our food supply. But hey, it 'might' slow the 'warming' of a couple degrees. Besides, there is always Soylent Green, for all of our nutritional needs...
16-03-2021 18:49
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote:There is a commercial market for CO2. You just named some of them. Not for CO2, ... for home CO2 capture machines. There's a reason there isn't one in every home. That's true. CO2 is just too cheap to buy. 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
16-03-2021 18:52
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	HarveyH55 wrote: anmb wrote: thanks again IBdaMann - I wanted to experiment, not at industrial level, with carbon capture technology and I am not a chemical engineer and do not know about capture, except what I read on the net. I have found references to mof technology and industry using co2 capture in waste/flue gases, and air capture. My query is how do I get any material to experiment with or how can I create my own(extremely low cost, I am not a wealthy guy). I have many questions about such technology and thought if I could experiment myself at home and I could find the answers - that in a nutshell is what I was looking for, a way a novice can experiment/test the technology, performance, its viability, costs and usability PS. finally remembered to include a subject field There are quite a few papers, and proposals, for carbon capture and sequester. I can't give links, because I didn't bother to save any. CO2, is a trace gas, so atmospheric CO2 capture is pretty much a bogus waste of time, money, and resources. Plant a tree... Even if we could double atmospheric CO2, with the evil, man-made CO2, it still would rise past a trace gas. Takes energy to remove the CO2, compress it for storage. CO2 captured, isn't likely to exceed the CO2 produced to create and power these schemes, in a reasonable life cycle of the devices proposed. But, marketing, can sell all kinds of useless machines, and people are happy to pay for them, and throw them in the landfill. My concern, was that CO2 is a trace gas, but absolutely vital to life on this planet. All life is based on carbon molecules. Plants, are they only things that can take carbon directly from the environment, CO2. Fortunately, plants are very tolerant, and can survive a while, when things aren't ideal for growth, but not forever. They just survive, not grow or mature. We reduce CO2, we reduce our food supply. But hey, it 'might' slow the 'warming' of a couple degrees. Besides, there is always Soylent Green, for all of our nutritional needs... This whole idea of capturing CO2 to reduce 'global warming' (what that finally turns out to be) is really just ridiculous. CO2 has NO capability to warm the Earth. The idea stems from 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
RE: carbon capture17-03-2021 21:30
anmb ☆☆☆☆☆ (16)	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 ? I thank you for replies to my post, and take onboard other points of view. I am over 60 and I can remember the past and the weather/atmosphere has changed in my lifetime, why I don't know, but we have been pumping waste industrial gases into the atmosphere for hundreds of years and I am personally sure as hell, it ain't doing us any good.
17-03-2021 22:07
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	anmb wrote: 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 ? I thank you for replies to my post, and take onboard other points of view. I am over 60 and I can remember the past and the weather/atmosphere has changed in my lifetime, why I don't know, but we have been pumping waste industrial gases into the atmosphere for hundreds of years and I am personally sure as hell, it ain't doing us any good. I can remember the weather changing over my lifetime too. It changes every day and every minute of every day. What waste industrial gases are you referring to? CO2? Carbon dioxide is a naturally occurring gas in the atmosphere. Plant life would not be possible without it. CO2 has absolutely no capability to warm the Earth though. 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

17-03-2021 22:30
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14401)	anmb wrote:I am personally sure as hell, it ain't doing us any good. You are greatly mistaken. CO2 is CO2, regardless of what created it. All plants around the world need CO2 and we are all dependent upon plants. The more CO2 we can give global plantlife the better off humans and all other life will be. You might not be aware that greenhouses deploy CO2 to augment the levels within the greenhouse so the plants will thrive. We should be doing that for the entire planet, not trying everything possible to starve the global plantlife. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
RE: carbon capture17-03-2021 22:31
anmb ☆☆☆☆☆ (16)	yes 'into the night' the weather changes everyday/minute, but you know what point I was making and your reply was just silly. It does not matter what man made waste gases are pumped into the atmos, they are not useful to any life as they do not occur naturally. They may exist naturally under the ground, chemically etc. but creating/emitting waste gases that would naturally not occur is hardly what plants/trees were created for. It is a matter of debate as to whether co2 warms or not and I am not going to comment. you can choose your scientist or learned paper and make your own mind up. Now answer my genuine 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 ?
17-03-2021 22:41
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14401)	anmb wrote:yes 'into the night' the weather changes everyday/minute, but you know what point I was making and your reply was just silly. Well, explain it to me. I don't know what point you were making. Make it. Be clear. Be specific. Weather changes every hour, everywhere on earth so if you aren't referring to that then you sound like you are trying to weasel out of clearly stating some stupid belief of yours. I'm standing by for your explanation. anmb wrote: It does not matter what man made waste gases are pumped into the atmos, they are not useful to any life as they do not occur naturally. They may exist naturally under the ground, chemically etc. but creating/emitting waste gases that would naturally not occur is hardly what plants/trees were created for. This comment of yours is stupid. CO2 is CO2. It doesn't come in varieties. All plants need CO2. I think you owe Into the Night an apology. anmb wrote: It is a matter of debate as to whether co2 warms or not Nope. Physics says it does not. There is no debate. You must be scientifically illiterate. anmb wrote: Now answer my genuine 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 ? They are expensive. They are for industrial use. You won't find one in every home in the foreseeable future. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
RE: carbon capture17-03-2021 22:43
anmb ☆☆☆☆☆ (16)	yes 'ibdamann' you are right greenhouses, like growers of illicit crops, add co2 to promote growth. again that's not the question I asked, so helps not at all
RE: carbon capture17-03-2021 22:53
anmb ☆☆☆☆☆ (16)	again 'ibdamann' not answering the question but giving your view of everything. waste gases are not just co2. there are many papers and studies that come to many interpretations of the physics and I will keep my opinion to myself. If you have got nothing helpful/constructive to say then don't say it, just saying its expensive, give up, is NOT constructive as it gives no examples of cost, production or mentions how they are made - which is what I was asking
17-03-2021 23:22
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	IBdaMann wrote: You might not be aware that greenhouses deploy CO2 to augment the levels within the greenhouse so the plants will thrive. We should be doing that for the entire planet, not trying everything possible to starve the global plantlife. . Bingo.
17-03-2021 23:34
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14401)	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. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
17-03-2021 23:59
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14401)	anmb wrote:again 'ibdamann' not answering the question but giving your view of everything. Again anmb cowering in the corner and pissing in his pants. You're a loser. That's the answer to all of your questions. If you weren't so stupid you wouldn't be so confused all the time over simple matters. If you had paid attention in school you would sufficiently understand English such that you could actually read it. anmb wrote:waste gases are not just co2. Irrelevant. They contain CO2. You were asking about CO2. You are an idiot. You apparently cannot decipher the meaning of words. You should have just started a thread begging for help. You should have just asked for someone to help you end your misery. It must suck to be totally functionally illiterate and cognitively inept. Could I possibly persuade you to pick a pursuit that doesn't involve killing all life if you are successful? Dumbass. anmb wrote: there are many papers and studies that come to many interpretations of the physics and I will keep my opinion to myself. Hey dumbass, science isn't a matter of opinion. Who told you it was? Why did you believe him? Is it because you are a total idiot? Nobody's opinion on the matter is of any consequence. Anyone can see what science says ... and it says that no atmospheric gas has the magickal superpower to cause any body of matter to spontaneously increase in temperature without additional energy. Again, it's not a matter of opinion. You should have learned this as a child. Were you sleeping the whole time? anmb wrote: If you have got nothing helpful/constructive to say I will determine what is helpful and what is not, thank you very much. I determine that you are a waste of skin. If all you are going to do here is waste bandwidth then don't post. We are all dumber for you having spewed your industrial strength stupid with reckless abandon. anmb wrote: then don't say it, just saying its expensive, give up, is NOT constructive Just give up. You aren't smart enough to accomplish anything more complicated than making Jell-O. You are heading for massive frustration that cannot end well. It certainly won't end in anything constructive. Just give up. Give up NOW. Dumbass. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
RE: Ibdmann18-03-2021 00:58
anmb ☆☆☆☆☆ (16)	you are a sad sad individual. your elegant use of language, your fabulously reasoned replies show your truly talented word craft. What question did you answer except your own. I will ignore your future ramblings as irrelevant like yourself. See a shrink quick, I am concerned for your well being.
18-03-2021 01:39
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	anmb wrote: yes 'into the night' the weather changes everyday/minute, but you know what point I was making and your reply was just silly. It does not matter what man made waste gases are pumped into the atmos, they are not useful to any life as they do not occur naturally. They may exist naturally under the ground, chemically etc. but creating/emitting waste gases that would naturally not occur is hardly what plants/trees were created for. It is a matter of debate as to whether co2 warms or not and I am not going to comment. you can choose your scientist or learned paper and make your own mind up. Now answer my genuine 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 ? Humans, are a natural part of this planet as well, just another species of mammal. We can change some things, be we can not simply create new elements. It's quite likely that life on this planet existed, long before mankind, and will likely continue after we are all gone. We don't have the capacity to travel through time. We have only observed a brief frame of time. We do know, that the weather often changes. Sometimes it can be very harsh, and extreme. We have a very limited capacity to predict these changes, and not very accurately either. We've observed enough years, to know that there is no 'normal'. There are certain patterns we can expect each season, but no way to predict how pleasant, or extreme.
RE: carbon capture18-03-2021 02:01
anmb ☆☆☆☆☆ (16)	thanks for your reply harveyh55 and yes there has been many climate events before. We have to be sure we don't destroy, or where we live is not destroyed, as there is no plan B. I was trying to get answers to my post about co2 capture because I wanted to experiment for myself to see if the technology works and how it performs.
18-03-2021 03:13
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14401)	anmb wrote: What question did you answer except your own. I answered your question, idiot. If you could read for comprehension then you wouldn't have to ask. anmb wrote:I will ignore your future ramblings as irrelevant like yourself. Only a moron works overtime to get the attention of someone he is trying to ignore. What an idiot. In the time it took you to waste yet more bandwidth, you could have done something to make the world a better place. Instead you chose to try your hand at making us all dumber ... again. Were you just trying to build on your previous success? You never explained whose opinion you believe establishes science. Well, whose? Weren't you ever taught to just gaze upon science yourself? It's free. It's available to everyone. Why seek heroes to worship? . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
18-03-2021 03:22
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	anmb wrote: yes 'into the night' the weather changes everyday/minute, but you know what point I was making and your reply was just silly. You are not making a point. anmb wrote: It does not matter what man made waste gases are pumped into the atmos, they are not useful to any life as they do not occur naturally. They may exist naturally under the ground, chemically etc. but creating/emitting waste gases that would naturally not occur is hardly what plants/trees were created for. So you think they were created? Do you think God that created them would allow us to ** up His planet? You suddenly place limits on God? anmb wrote: It is a matter of debate as to whether co2 warms or not and I am not going to comment. No. CO2 is incapable of warming the Earth. You can't create energy out of nothing. anmb wrote: you can choose your scientist or learned paper and make your own mind up. Science isn't scientists. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. The theory you are ignoring right now is the 1st law of thermodynamics. anmb wrote: Now answer my genuine 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 ? RQAA. 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**
18-03-2021 03:23
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	anmb wrote: yes 'ibdamann' you are right greenhouses, like growers of illicit crops, add co2 to promote growth. again that's not the question I asked, so helps not at all Your question has already been answered. Repetitive Question Already Answered (RQAA). 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
18-03-2021 03:27
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	anmb wrote: again 'ibdamann' not answering the question but giving your view of everything. RQAA anmb wrote: waste gases are not just co2. What else? Why is CO2 a 'waste gas'? Define 'waste gas'. anmb wrote: there are many papers and studies that come to many interpretations of the physics and I will keep my opinion to myself. Science is not papers, pamphlets, books, or websites. It is not a research or a study. It is not 'interpreted'. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. anmb wrote: If you have got nothing helpful/constructive to say then don't say it, just saying its expensive, give up, is NOT constructive as it gives no examples of cost, production or mentions how they are made - which is what I was asking RQAA. Since you seem to have nothing constructive to say, you are costing too much. 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

18-03-2021 03:29
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	anmb wrote: you are a sad sad individual. Inversion fallacy. Someone as illiterate as you is a sad individual. anmb wrote: your elegant use of language, your fabulously reasoned replies show your truly talented word craft. Physics isn't word craft. Mathematics isn't word craft. anmb wrote: What question did you answer except your own. Yours. anmb wrote: I will ignore your future ramblings as irrelevant like yourself. Bulverism fallacy. anmb wrote: See a shrink quick, I am concerned for your well being. Psychoquackery. RQAA. 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
18-03-2021 03:33
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	anmb.The best event was Earth day 1970.The population realized that we can not keep dumping waste in the sea and rivers.Where I live the Swan river had a fellmongery,wool scourer and a paint manufacturing company all on the banks of the Swan at East fremantle and the pipes spewed toxic crap 24/7.Tin roofs in Kwinana were rusting out in 5 years because of the sulpher being spewed out.When it rained my skin tingled from the sulphuric acid while I was fishing at the jetty.Its all been cleaned up.It is your choice to build a CO2 scrubber but consider this.I have purchased a CO2 meter and it is around 400ppm.The big question is do we have the ability to increase this concentration.Probably not.Trees are not only growing faster but are becoming more bug resistant.Check Climate Discussion Nexus.A lot of other questions are covered on this site one of the latest being how GISS are fudging the measurements.
18-03-2021 07:58
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	duncan61 wrote: anmb.The best event was Earth day 1970. Meh. duncan61 wrote: The population realized that we can not keep dumping waste in the sea and rivers. Define 'waste'. Define 'pollution'. duncan61 wrote: Where I live the Swan river had a fellmongery,wool scourer and a paint manufacturing company all on the banks of the Swan at East fremantle and the pipes spewed toxic crap 24/7. Define 'toxic crap'. duncan61 wrote: Tin roofs in Kwinana were rusting out in 5 years because of the sulpher being spewed out. When it rained my skin tingled from the sulphuric acid while I was fishing at the jetty.Its all been cleaned up. Wasting sulfur eh? It's better to trap it and sell it than waste it like that. Guess what? Earth day had nothing to do with it. duncan61 wrote: It is your choice to build a CO2 scrubber but consider this.I have purchased a CO2 meter and it is around 400ppm.The big question is do we have the ability to increase this concentration.Probably not.Trees are not only growing faster but are becoming more bug resistant.Check Climate Discussion Nexus. Why is it the big question? CO2 had absolutely no capability to warm the Earth. duncan61 wrote: A lot of other questions are covered on this site one of the latest being how GISS are fudging the measurements. There are no measurements of the temperature of the Earth to fudge. 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: Ibdmann and into the night18-03-2021 09:29
anmb ☆☆☆☆☆ (16)	sad sad morons
18-03-2021 12:54
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14401)	anmb wrote:sad sad morons Does this mean you won't be wasting anymore bandwidth here? . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
RE: carbon capture18-03-2021 14:12
anmb ☆☆☆☆☆ (16)	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 ?
18-03-2021 22:23
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	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. Bulverism fallacy. Psychoquackery. anmb wrote: nuff said Cliche fallacy. anmb wrote: 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 ? RQAA. Your question has already been answered. You are just repeating yourself senselessly. 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 18-03-2021 22:23
RE: into the night18-03-2021 23:00
anmb ☆☆☆☆☆ (16)	meh
18-03-2021 23:31
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14401)	anmb wrote: meh Wow! You never learned how to ignore someone. Responding to posts is not ignoring them. Way too funny! When I called you a "moron" I truly did not realize just how much I was understating the problem. I apologize if I inadvertently gave you a shred of hope that yours was somehow an easy fix. So, while I have you, whose opinion establishes science? You still haven't said. You were very clear that you draw your science from the opinions of others, as though science is a subjective matter of someone's opinion. Whose opinion exactly? . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
19-03-2021 00:44
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	Been a while, but think the capture part was pretty easy, not so expensive. Extracting the man made CO2, compressing it for storage, got expensive an complicated. Depends on what you plan to do with the CO2. It's not a real big deal to fill tanks for commercial use. The capture and sequester schemes, or angling toward a basic setup, that will run pretty much by itself, for years and years. Which is what got me curious. CO2 levels aren't consistent worldwide, or even seasonal. If reducing CO2 ever starts happening, they are going to need to shut these machines off, when the come close to their target. CO2 is vital for all life, they go too low, and will kill us all. They will need many thousands of these machines, since CO2 is a trace gas, spread out through a very large volume.

Page 1 of 2

Join the debate No Subject:

Threads	Replies	Last post
Seems WW3 is a touchy subject.	3	28-08-2023 13:20
No Subject	1	05-06-2023 18:24
No Subject	0	16-03-2020 03:12
No Subject	2	09-02-2020 06:44
Gravity because it's a heavy subject	0	22-10-2019 08:44