It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lethal CO2 to be stored under towns and villages to prevent climate change

page: 4
13
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 15 2009 @ 07:11 PM
link   
What I don't follow is why. Why even bother.

Co2 has been around for a long time. It's not dangerous in open spaces, so now we're going to find a way to stick it all in one place, under villages. Where people live.

I realize now that they're just yanking our chain. Tptb are just messing with us.

Even if the theory of global rise in co2 from manufacturers was correct, wouldn't storing it and building it up make less sense then allowing it to be processed through the air the way it has for..well since forever.

If you want to lower co2, maybe plant more trees?




posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 01:36 AM
link   
Reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


I am amazed at the levels of stupidity filling ATS and society in general. Any gas at high concentrations will be deadly. This includes oxygen (yes, the stuff you need to breathe or you will die).Too much oxygen can kill you. Carbon dioxide, neon (or any inert gases), nitrogen (which the majority of our atmosphere consists of) will also be deadly at high concentrations. This is a stupid argument. Want to find a cause to believe in? Look into the real issue: pollution of our water supply.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 02:31 AM
link   
First CO2 has been injected into declining oil fields for more than 40 years, to increase oil recovery.
So far with no problems.

Many of the plans call for Mineral sequestration where the CO2 is chemically trapped by the rocks its injected into.



en.wikipedia.org...
Mineral sequestration aims to trap carbon in the form of solid carbonate salts. This process occurs slowly in nature and is responsible for the deposition and accumulation of limestone (calcium carbonate) over geologic time. Carbonic acid in groundwater slowly reacts with complex silicates to dissolve calcium, magnesium, alkalis and silica and leave a residue of clay minerals. The dissolved calcium and magnesium react with bicarbonate to precipitate calcium and magnesium carbonates, a process that organisms use to make shells. When the organisms die, their shells are deposited as sediment and eventually turn into limestone. Limestones have accumulated over billions of years of geologic time and contain much of Earth's carbon. Ongoing research aims to speed up similar reactions involving alkali carbonates[46].

One proposed reaction is that of the olivine-rich rock dunite, or its hydrated equivalent serpentinite with carbon dioxide to form the carbonate mineral magnesite, plus silica and iron oxide (magnetite).

Serpentinite sequestration is favored because of the non-toxic and stable nature of magnesium carbonate. The ideal reactions involve the magnesium endmember components of the olivine (reaction 1) or serpentine (reaction 2), the latter derived from earlier olivine by hydration and silicification (reaction 3). The presence of iron in the olivine or serpentine reduces the efficiency of sequestration, since the iron components of these minerals break down to iron oxide and silica (reaction 4).
[edit] Serpentinite reactions

Reaction 1
Mg-Olivine + Carbon dioxide → Magnesite + Silica

Mg2SiO4 + 2CO2 → 2MgCO3 + SiO2 + H2O

Reaction 2
Serpentine + carbon dioxide → Magnesite + silica + water

Mg3[Si2O5(OH)4] + 3CO2 → 3MgCO3 + 2SiO2 + 2H2O

Reaction 3
Mg-Olivine + Water + Silica → Serpentine

3Mg2SiO4 + 2SiO2 + 4H2O → 2Mg3[Si2O5(OH)4

Reaction 4
Fe-Olivine + Water → Magnetite + Silica + Hydrogen

3Fe2SiO4 + 2H2O → 2Fe3O4 + 3SiO2 + 2H2







[mod edit: added Required source link and EX tags]


[edit on 16-11-2009 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheRedneck
It is a bad idea to store CO2 underground, but not because it is deadly in itself. It would also be a bad idea to store helium, neon, nitrogen, or any gas underground in pressurized containers.

TheRedneck


I agree! But they aren't storing helium, neon, nitrogen, or any other gas - they are storing CO2. As far as your statement that CO2 cannot, even in confined spaces, be toxic and deadly - please back up that statement with proof. I've provided mine on the effects of CO2 in confined spaces, please provide yours.



posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 07:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by xman_in_blackx
Reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


I am amazed at the levels of stupidity filling ATS and society in general. Any gas at high concentrations will be deadly. This includes oxygen (yes, the stuff you need to breathe or you will die).Too much oxygen can kill you. Carbon dioxide, neon (or any inert gases), nitrogen (which the majority of our atmosphere consists of) will also be deadly at high concentrations. This is a stupid argument. Want to find a cause to believe in? Look into the real issue: pollution of our water supply.



I am going to pretend that I didn't take your statement above as calling me stupid.


Although I've said it in this thread multiple times, I'll say it again: I AM NOT saying that CO2, in and of itself, is more deadly than these other gases. The thing is, these other gases are not being pumped into the ground below these five towns, now are they? Do you dispute that CO2 is lethal in confined spaces? If so, then please explain how on earth you come to this conclusion. If not, then why are you denigrating me? Oh, I forgot... I was pretending that you didn't call me stupid.

Cheers!



posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 09:00 AM
link   
Geez, whats going on here? Maybe if we put into terms you could all understand?
If you are sleeping in a small room, and i leave 15 pounds of dry ice next to your bed it will sublimate, immediately displacing any lighter gasses in the room(i.e. Nitrogen, Oxygen) and settle as a thick layer of CO2. You will breathe nothing but CO2, then die of asphyxiation. Now imagine your little room is a valley, and i leave millions of pounds of dry ice under your house. Get it?



posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


I am saying that the argument of demonizing CO2 is a stupid argument and that if you place any gas (including oxygen) in high concentrations in a room that the effects will also have fatal outcomes. One cannot say "CO2 is evil" using this argument. Using that argument, one could easily say that WATER was evil. If you drink too much water, you could DIE!
. "The evil scourge water is being pumped into our houses and is poisoning our children. Ban water now before we are all killed!" See? Silly argument. So while we go around arguing how evil something is, the real issues are ignored. There are plenty of other gases and chemicals we should be more worried about.

Is the idea of storing this gas under the towns just as stupid? You bet! Storing ANY gas heavier that oxygen would be just as stupid.

I just refuse to get on board the "CO2 is evil and the cause of all our woes" bandwagon. The people who are on it use bad logic and bad math.

I think you are safe in assuming that the "stupidity" comment was not directed at you unless you are on that wagon smiling and holding a sign that says "CO2 = Satan!"



posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by xman_in_blackx
 


Sorry for my confusion then. I only recall one comment in this thread by someone who considered CO2 itself evil.



posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman

As far as your statement that CO2 cannot, even in confined spaces, be toxic and deadly - please back up that statement with proof. I've provided mine on the effects of CO2 in confined spaces, please provide yours.

I don't believe that I ever said breathing pure CO2 wasn't deadly; it is. But so is breathing pure H2O, pure O2, pure N2, pure Ne, pure He, pure H, pure Ar, pure anything.

That's all I am saying: CO2 is not in and of itself a toxin. It can be an asphyxiant.

The only thing I have issues with in this discussion is when CO2 is called 'toxic' or 'lethal'. It is none of those things, to any greater extent than any other substance. Specifying it as such only serves to increase the present hysteria surrounding CO2 levels.

I do believe another poster has hit on something, though; read on.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by ANNED

ANNED, I do believe you have hit on something here! Yes, indeed, carbonates form minerals! Injecting CO2 into certain minerals would simply alter the minerals into carbonates... a different kind of rock!

I must be getting slow. CO2 sequestration techniques use this very same reaction to remove CO2 from the air and turn hydroxides into carbonate. So why bring the rocks to the CO2, when it might just be possible to bring the CO2 to the rocks?

Of course, this would mean that the resulting CO2 remaining underground is not under pressure. Pressure would only be required to speed up the reactions, not to maintain the chemical equilibria once the reactions have occurred.

None of this changes my base view that CO2 is fine where it is. But if we simply have to move it somewhere to set societal minds at ease, this could be a reasonable method.

Thank you for injecting a healthy shot of knowledge into this discussion.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 18 2009 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 


Chadwickus,

liquid CO2 forms at about 750 psi and a temperature of about 31 degrees C.
pumping that in conventional low carbon steel pipelines would be no problem. liquid nitrogen pumps operate at about -187 degrees C and they work fine.


substitute the gas injection of nitrogen with CO2 and pump it into subsea oil reservoirs until the oil is depleted, plug the well with cement and abandon. job done.

This probably costs more that pumping nitrogen down wells so the oil companies will never go for it.


PEACE,
RK



posted on Nov, 18 2009 @ 02:35 PM
link   
These global elitists come up with the most retarded ideas.. but we're even more retarded for accepting this BS.

I hope their time for reveering themselves will be shortly lived. How much more can they get away with ? I guess the answer to my own question is.. it depends on how much slack we continue to give these ******!




top topics



 
13
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join