Comments on: High Hopes for Pond Scum

By: Breast Augmentation

Breast Augmentation — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 12:05:00 +0000

With consumer confidence at such low points do you think consumers are still getting breast augmentation at such high rates?

By: triticale

triticale — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 15:29:40 +0000

Besides, if one is producing large quantities of CO2, this provides value to what otherwise would be a waste product since concentrated CO2 takes less work for plants to exploit than the usual atmospheric concentrations.

A quick google of – hydroponics co2 – generates a third of a million hits. High intensity growers (many of whom are not after the strong fiber and oilseed their crop produces) go to considerable lengths to increase co2 levels in their grow rooms. Some even brew beer there.

By: RTOnline

RTOnline — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 21:04:24 +0000

Hear your points, Karl and Stephen. I’ve sorta made global warming a sideline for my evening surfs. I’ve taken the CO2 question at face value for the last several years and just sort of filed away contrarian research (like CO2 lags climate change and does not lead it, solar activity as the real driver, CO2 is not the dominant greenhouse gas therefore …, etc.). Meanwhile some of the stuff being connected to the global warming issue has made me, well, wince. Personal favorite was the study released in Italy associating depression and suicide in Italy with global warming. I always wondered precisely how they established causality, especially since their sample data did not include the age of the individual study group members. So I’ve been sensing the forming of an intellectual “bubble”. Further, I sense that global warming is actually a proxy for other matters (some possible valid)

Anyway that aside, I’m surfing around and noted the UK Channel 4 video piece. Its promo is hyped in the finest British tradition. But the content was pretty comprehensive. Strikingly so.

I think the global warming thing needs a whole lot more science transparency. But anyway here’s the link (it didn’t show up in my earlier post). Would be interested in your reactions. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4520665474899458831&q=great+global+warming+swindle&hl=en

By: Stephen Gordon

Stephen Gordon — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:13:15 +0000

RTOnline:

With global warming there are two big questions: 1. Is the Earth getting warmer? 2. If so, is human activity a significant factor?

Most climate scientists probably accept both 1 and 2.

I accept #1. I’m not so sure on #2. As Phil pointed out long ago in an early FastFoward Radio show, Mars is getting warmer too. Certainly we didn’t have anything to do with that.

There’s no reason that global warming couldn’t be caused by both natural and human factors. Perhaps the Earth is warming because of an increase in the Sun’s output AND because of a human-caused increase in greenhouse gases.

Anyway, IF we accept that the Earth is warming AND we agree that this is a bad thing, then sequestering greenhouse gas is a good idea even if human activity isn’t a biggest reason for global warming.

And then there’s Karl’s point. Finding a way to make waste CO2 profitable is good for everybody. Global warming skeptics have no reason to argue in favor of releasing CO2 into the atmosphere.

By: Karl Hallowell

Karl Hallowell — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 07:25:12 +0000

While there is a lot of hysteria around global warming, I still see genuine evidence that atmospheric CO2 levels are at their highest point in hundreds of thousands of years, that this is due almost solely to human activity, and that these high levels of atmospheric CO2 have contributed to an increase in global temperatures and shifts in the seasons.

By: RTOnline

RTOnline — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 05:40:57 +0000

For such a science oriented crowd, why the assumption that CO2 is worth fussing about? I was pretty surprised by this Youtube thing …

By: Karl Hallowell

Karl Hallowell — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 00:16:46 +0000

They can also produce food which is another energy intensive product. The spirulina above for example produces a lot of protein including all amino acids that the human body needs (and I think a couple it doesn’t).

By: Bob Keyes

Bob Keyes — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:26:27 +0000

You can grow algae with any carbon dioxide source whatsoever, obviously. But the growth might be too slow to be worthwhile. First thing to do is to tap all those chimneys belching out CO2 and make it do something useful. Coal could even come back into vogue. This is something of a topic I am very interested in, and it’s good to see it getting coverage. Also, it’s not just biodiesel that is the end-result of algaal growth – they can produce hydrogen, and even chemicals similar to those in Petroleum, and these chemicals can be modified into exact replacement for fossil fuels such as gasoline and jet fuel. It’s really cool. See the URL I posted for a general interest site on biodiesel that also has a forum section on biodiesel from algae.

By: Stephen Gordon

Stephen Gordon — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:26:42 +0000

Karl:

Thanks! I found the above picture at the site you linked.

By: Karl Hallowell

Karl Hallowell — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 14:31:02 +0000

CO2 output from power plants can be used as well. Also, as I understand it, even without water recycling algae use less water per acre than most food crops. My feeble google efforts didn't turn that up though here's a firm specializing in spirulina.