This is ron ingman's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following ron ingman's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
ron ingman
What's the big picture/ Let's not get distracted
Interests: Optimization
Recent Activity
Look, over the time frame of concern for global warming, 50, 100, 150 years ANY carbon that is not fixed in the soil will evolve into the atmosphere. So sludge, food waste, farm waste etc.... will not all remain fixed in the soil. It will degrade, mineralize and RELEASE CO2. IF ( big if ) these biofuel processes supplant carbon based oil which is removed ( fixed already ) from buried fossil fuel deposits then it is a win. These biofuel precursors would otherwise degrade over the timeframe of concern, releasing CO2. Yes replace electrical grid energy sources with non polluting tech. Yes replace industrial processes with net zero tech. ( Steel, fertilizer ). Yes replace ICE transport with electrical tech. Start with tech that gives the biggest bang ( err.. you know what I mean )
.......test a variety of potential explanations How about....... EV's are expensive. Expensive items are purchased by the rich. The rich don't work. Those that don't work, don't drive. a 6% lithium oxide (LiO2) concentrate.. Or have it processed down under, value adding, in Auz, then run 1/20 the number of ships....
Bounty hunting season:) or Mind if I smoke.... your wallet? or Rolling coal? ? Write me a cheque!! or Lock em up
Double speak, half truths, truthiness.,,, Keep it simple.. just call it a lie. And while we are having fun what about "Every IONITY charging station consists of an average of four charging points." No. Every means each station, and each one cannot have an "average" anymore than my head can have an average of 2 eyes. But I'll finish with I support their efforts, many other do not try at all. Keep up the good work.
Help me understand the big picture here... Whereas we have multiple GHG sources sectors( transport, Electrical generation, materials production...) and multiple generation tools ( nuclear/ wind/ solar/geothermal).... just which sector can do these two things:? 1. lower GHG emission more than nuclear power. 2. practically capture CO2 for further use. Not Electrical generation, Not ground transport ( cannot capture CO2 practically) Not industrial materials production. So why bark up the wrong tree? Is there a clear roadmap( or hierarchical statement ) which identifies a sector that can show a longterm benefit from carbon capture? And be careful in you answer, because keeping carbon in the ground is the most effective carbon capture AND displacing fossil fuel markets, with say nuclear energy, has got to be more effective in the short term, and long term. ( hey it already is in use) Any concise rational on the ultimate benefits of carbon capture?
ron ingman is now following The Typepad Team
Feb 12, 2020