Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard
AGW, like slavery, is a choice.
I believe [but cite needed] it was Scott Adams that said sequestering all the CO2 would cost $2 trillion compared to a total US debt of $21 trillion. Do those numbers sound right?
Considering it's a global problem, whoever fixes that would gain a lot of prestige.
|
Went looking and found this:
Re.,'Can we capture all of the world's carbon dioxide emissions?'
Ramez Naam,Mar 31,2011,Guest Blog,Scientific American
*just skimming the article,he infers that there are only 'proposals',no one has done it,which might imply that they don't know how,or know that they can't do it at any price.
*The article is large enough that one would want to read all of it,and in its proper context.
*He does present some $/ton CO2 figures.
*As some fossil fuel energy sources are already non-competitive in the energy market,it's almost just an academic excercize.
*If fossil can't compete as it is,with the added cost of capture and sequestration,how does that position it without artificial price supports/subsidies? (numerical inferiority)
*We do know that ending combustion would do it,by default.
*Some authors suggest that this would be the end goal.