h a l f b a k e r yNot from concentrate.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
There are large areas in the ocean which have been rendered anaerobic, presumably by fertilizer runoff. This fertilizer sustains huge algal blooms which then sink, decompose, and in doing so strip all the oxygen from the water. These "deadzones" do not have multicellular life, but are populated by
anaerobic bacteria which thrive in the absence of O2. I propose that this situation could be used to sequester and fix CO2.
These zones are already anaerobic, so deterimental effects because of water acidification would not occur. It is probably already fairly acidic. Large regions of these areas might sustain anaerobic bacteria which could fix the CO2 in the absence of light, so one would not need to rely on surface photosyntheic plankton. Also, strategies to increase open ocean CO2 fixation using iron enrichment already run the risk of turning any such stretch of ocean into a dead zone, because of the resulting algal bloom. If the zone is already dead, no further harm would be done!
Finally, it is my hope that CO2 would ultimately be reduced to CH4 in these anaerobic conditions. The methane would form methane clathrates and accumulate on the ocean floor in twining crystalline castles inhabited by worms and crabs. Al Gore would lead tours of these castles using a fleet of small submersibles.
Here's a link fo ya
http://dissertation...keulen/titlecon.pdf
Sorry, I can't find an English translation. [methinksnot, May 05 2007]
Baked
http://www.planktos.com/About/About.html
If you use the planktos plan in a dead zone you get exactly what you say. There are restaurants in San Francisco calling themselves 'green' becaues of investment into this company already. (the Cliff House) [mylodon, Nov 02 2007]
[link]
|
| |
//Finally, it is my hope that CO2 would ultimately be reduced to CH4 in these anaerobic conditions.// Of course, methane is a far more effective greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, so when the clathrates melt (sublime? whatever) because of rising global temperature, we'll be worse off than ever. |
|
| |
//anaerobic bacteria which could fix the CO2 in the absence of light//
What's the source of energy? |
|
| |
//Al Gore would lead tours of these castles
using a fleet of small submersibles.// Plus
for this at least. |
|
| |
/What's the source of energy?/ |
|
| |
My understanding is that the bugs which could live in these conditions use chemical reactions with metals, or sulfur, or hydrogen for their energy sources. They are chemoautotrophs and unfortunately I could not find a good online article which summarizes their sweet and funky biologies. |
|
| |
Eet mor chiken. Maek less MH4. |
|
| |
How do you intend to collect, insert, and retain the CO2 in these oceanic brown fields? (-) |
|
| |
//They are chemoautotrophs//
You often find those around black smokers, using sulfides as an energy source. But those aren't dead zones, for anywhere you find chemoautotrophs, you find a whole food chain built up around them. If you mixed the CO2 with chemoautotrophs and an energy source, and pumped that down into the ocean, then you might have something. |
|
| |
I hate this idea. It's another form of landfill, taking a waste product and piling it somewhere where no one can see it and saying it's "gone." I hated it the first time I read about it, years ago in Scientific American or some such, and I still hate it. You generate even more CO2 running the machinery to pump the CO2 down to the levels where it's cold and heavy enough to keep the clathrates solid and dense. |
|
| |
You want to get global CO2 levels down? Okay, step one: kill off five billion humans. It's extreme, but necessary. |
|
| |
Step two: turn off everything. Walk everywhere. Eet mor chiken. |
|
| |
Step three: everyone plant some trees. Don't mow the yard. |
|
| |
Repeat each step as often as conditions demand. |
|
| |
Don't anaerobic bacteria produce CO2? Also, wouldn't there be a risk of giant CO2 bubbles floating up and killing people (Lake Monoun) or sink ships and stall planes like the methane deposits in the Bermuda triangle? |
|
| |
A better idea would be to capture CO2, make hydrogen from nuclear power, and then run them through a Fischer-Tropsch type catalyst to make Butanol, then we can run our cars on it and it would be carbon neutral. |
|
| |
We could also tweak the process to produce ethylene from CO2 and hydrogen which we can turn into polyethylene and build stuff with it instead of releasing it into the atmosphere. |
|
| |
//methane deposits in the Bermuda triangle//
I've never heard him called that before. |
|
| |