Thanks for this. I heard about Heirloom on NPR's How I Built This on March 9 and thought it sounded like total nonsense. Use limestone to make limestone. I even sat down and sketched out my version of your lime cycle resembling a perpetual motion machine.
Carbon capture is a ridiculous concept. The expenditure far outweighs any benefit, when you look at all of the components, which they never do. Their simplified calculations are the scam.
Not only that, I might’ve mentioned it earlier for the price of quality carbon materials far outweighs per ton, and I mean like 10 to 50 times, far outweighs the monetary value of the sequestration. From carbon fiber, nanotubes, architectural and structural pieces, endless endless endless uses. Along with industrial hemp, could literally save complex life form on the planet.
I’m sorry. You are incorrect on that claim. It is every bit the absolute prerequisite of ending fossil fuel extraction and use. There’s no other way to reset the tipping point of the 400 CO2 ppm equivalent of the methane in the permafrost alone. Which would trigger the 1200 CO2 equivalent methane in the ocean floor to be released. I’m thinking about 2200 CO2 ppm, it only be like 162° on the north pole in January....
It is likely better to inject the emitted carbon dioxide into a fracked basalt formation and have it combine with metals in the basalt, like they do in Iceland, than to do anything with limestone. That does not make sense. It makes even more sense to ride an electric bike for commuting. I have done 16000 miles over the last 5 years (25,744kms) saving 363.6 gallons (1376.4 liters) which emits 3240 kg CO2 or 3.2 tons of carbon dioxide, or 834kg of Carbon. The electricity is from solar panels on my roof. It only takes 4 square feet of panels (0.37m2) to keep it charged. The material cost for the power is relatively low. There is an embodied energy cost for the bike and panels, but that is less than a 1/40th of a Tesla Model 3 and 1/100th of the embodied energy in a Ford Lightning pick-up. These numbers speak for themselves. The hardest part is convincing others to follow this example and ride a bike. Safety is the biggest concern stated publicly anyway, though I think there is a high aversion to exercise. I commute 8 miles one way on hilly terrain and am 69 year old, the excuses run a bit thin with folks less than a third of my age. So Lloyd, how do you convince others to commute on a bike?
We absolutely must sequester carbon from the atmosphere. It’s an absolute along with that zero. And I don’t mean by 2050. It’ll be a miracle if Homosapien sees 2030. The permafrost is melting. That is the tipping point to a positive self sustaining feedback loop. Which will be anything but positive to all complex lifeforms on this rock....
But does it make sense to pursue this as one of multiple ways to address climate change on the principle that there is no one single solution to any aspect of the problem?
Thanks for this. I heard about Heirloom on NPR's How I Built This on March 9 and thought it sounded like total nonsense. Use limestone to make limestone. I even sat down and sketched out my version of your lime cycle resembling a perpetual motion machine.
Carbon capture is a ridiculous concept. The expenditure far outweighs any benefit, when you look at all of the components, which they never do. Their simplified calculations are the scam.
It needs to be a big deal
Electric cars are not the answer. Renewable powered nationwide high-speed rail and local light rail is the answer.
Agree totally, just pointing out that they are a better strategy than this!
And, I’m wide-open to the possibility that you’re referring to the carbon camper proposed by the fossil fuel planet rapists...
Not only that, I might’ve mentioned it earlier for the price of quality carbon materials far outweighs per ton, and I mean like 10 to 50 times, far outweighs the monetary value of the sequestration. From carbon fiber, nanotubes, architectural and structural pieces, endless endless endless uses. Along with industrial hemp, could literally save complex life form on the planet.
I’m sorry. You are incorrect on that claim. It is every bit the absolute prerequisite of ending fossil fuel extraction and use. There’s no other way to reset the tipping point of the 400 CO2 ppm equivalent of the methane in the permafrost alone. Which would trigger the 1200 CO2 equivalent methane in the ocean floor to be released. I’m thinking about 2200 CO2 ppm, it only be like 162° on the north pole in January....
It is likely better to inject the emitted carbon dioxide into a fracked basalt formation and have it combine with metals in the basalt, like they do in Iceland, than to do anything with limestone. That does not make sense. It makes even more sense to ride an electric bike for commuting. I have done 16000 miles over the last 5 years (25,744kms) saving 363.6 gallons (1376.4 liters) which emits 3240 kg CO2 or 3.2 tons of carbon dioxide, or 834kg of Carbon. The electricity is from solar panels on my roof. It only takes 4 square feet of panels (0.37m2) to keep it charged. The material cost for the power is relatively low. There is an embodied energy cost for the bike and panels, but that is less than a 1/40th of a Tesla Model 3 and 1/100th of the embodied energy in a Ford Lightning pick-up. These numbers speak for themselves. The hardest part is convincing others to follow this example and ride a bike. Safety is the biggest concern stated publicly anyway, though I think there is a high aversion to exercise. I commute 8 miles one way on hilly terrain and am 69 year old, the excuses run a bit thin with folks less than a third of my age. So Lloyd, how do you convince others to commute on a bike?
I am 71 and I e-bike too but I used the cars here as an example of the silliness of the scheme, not to value the different modes of transport!
We absolutely must sequester carbon from the atmosphere. It’s an absolute along with that zero. And I don’t mean by 2050. It’ll be a miracle if Homosapien sees 2030. The permafrost is melting. That is the tipping point to a positive self sustaining feedback loop. Which will be anything but positive to all complex lifeforms on this rock....
But does it make sense to pursue this as one of multiple ways to address climate change on the principle that there is no one single solution to any aspect of the problem?