Don't think I'm An Idiot But....
09-12-2009, 12:36 PM
#1
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Don't think I'm An Idiot But....
Is there a way to reclaim carbon out of the atmosphere and turn it into carbon products (such as carbon fiber) - seems like there would be an endless supply...
Just trying to be creative...
Just trying to be creative...
09-12-2009, 02:03 PM
#3
Out Of Control!!
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: OC
Posts: 18,677
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes
on
9 Posts
a quarter mile at a time
Anything is possible with enough money and resources.
It's just not cost effective to turn CO2 (carbon di-oxide) which eco-****'s feel that they can call "carbon", into the molecular structure of carbon fiber.
I won't even go into how much of a sham it is to think humans cause global warming.
It's just not cost effective to turn CO2 (carbon di-oxide) which eco-****'s feel that they can call "carbon", into the molecular structure of carbon fiber.
I won't even go into how much of a sham it is to think humans cause global warming.
09-12-2009, 02:19 PM
#4
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NoVa
Posts: 1,071
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2004 S55 (SOLD, miss it every day), 2009 GL550
09-12-2009, 02:49 PM
#5
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Anything is possible with enough money and resources.
It's just not cost effective to turn CO2 (carbon di-oxide) which eco-****'s feel that they can call "carbon", into the molecular structure of carbon fiber.
I won't even go into how much of a sham it is to think humans cause global warming.
It's just not cost effective to turn CO2 (carbon di-oxide) which eco-****'s feel that they can call "carbon", into the molecular structure of carbon fiber.
I won't even go into how much of a sham it is to think humans cause global warming.
Last edited by AMGTTV8; 09-12-2009 at 02:51 PM.
09-12-2009, 02:51 PM
#6
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
09-12-2009, 03:58 PM
#7
Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Romania
Posts: 157
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Audi A4 1.9 TDI 2002, MB C200 CDI 2004, MB C220 CDI 2009
Our world is based on carbon, no need to take it from the air.
The carbon fiber you know is made of textured carbon fibers and some hardening synthetic resin.
The high price is coming from the texture, which is costly to manufacture and of course from the hand work to be done after the mold has hardened.
The carbon fiber you know is made of textured carbon fibers and some hardening synthetic resin.
The high price is coming from the texture, which is costly to manufacture and of course from the hand work to be done after the mold has hardened.
Trending Topics
09-12-2009, 04:28 PM
#9
No, it's not really possible to capture atmospheric carbon dioxide and strip the bonded dioxide molecules to create a carbonite. Most carbon sequestering processes involve storing it in gas pockets underground, and carbon dioxide bonds with water to create carbonic acid, which is probably going to be a bigger problem than atmospheric CO2.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/31/sc...h/31ocean.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/31/sc...h/31ocean.html
09-12-2009, 04:48 PM
#10
MBWorld Fanatic!
Effects of Arctic warming seen as widespread
By RANDOLPH E. SCHMID (AP) – 2 days ago
WASHINGTON — Arctic warming is affecting plants, birds, animals and insects as ice melts and the growing season changes, scientists report in a new review of the many impacts climate change is having on the far north.
As the global climate changes, the Arctic Circle has been warming faster than other regions and scientists have documented a series of affects on wildlife in the region.
Indeed, just last week researchers reported that the Arctic is warmer than it's been in 2,000 years, even though it should be cooling because of changes in the Earth's orbit that cause the region to get less direct sunlight.
"The Arctic as we know it may soon be a thing of the past," Eric Post, an associate professor of biology at Penn State University, said in a statement.
Post led a research team that studied the Arctic during the International Polar Year, which ended in 2008. Their findings are reported in Friday's edition of the journal Science.
Snow cover has declined steadily in recent years and in the last two to three decades the minimum sea ice coverage declined sharply, a change that affect animals like polar bears that depend on the ice for habitat and hunting.
"Species on land and at sea are suffering adverse consequences of human behavior at latitudes thousands of miles away," Post said. "It seems no matter where you look — on the ground, in the air, or in the water — we're seeing signs of rapid change."
In addition, he added, the Arctic is very complex and "not all populations within a given species respond similarly to warming because physical and landscape features that interact with climate can vary tremendously from site to site."
For example, migratory caribou in Greenland and elsewhere are declining, the researchers said, since the animals have not been able to adjust their calving season to keep it synchronized with changes in plant growth.
As a result, the time when the females need the most food no longer matches the time when the most food is available, and fewer calves survive. In addition, warmer weather can produce more insects and parasites to prey on the caribou.
On the other hand, wild reindeer on the Norwegian islands of Svalbard appear to have benefited from the earlier seasonal loss of snow cover. These animals don't migrate and the longer growing season and less snow cover means more food for them.
The researchers found that with warmer conditions red foxes are moving north, displacing Arctic foxes from their territories.
Also expanding their territories to the north are the winter moth, which defoliates mountain birch forests, and species of Arctic trees and shrubs.
Having more shrubs can provide food for reindeer and musk oxen grazing, and their trampling and defecation encourages the growth of grasses, which in turn attract geese.
And, as if to help prove the case, the U.S. Geological Survey reported separately that the Pacific brant, a small sea goose, has shifted northward from areas such as Mexico to sub-Arctic areas as Alaska's climate has warmed over the last four decades.
Before 1977 only about 3,000 brant were detected wintering in Alaska, while now that has jumped to as many as 40,000 birds.
The changing Arctic climate appears related to changes in the availability and abundance of eelgrass, the primary food of brant in their nonbreeding season, survey researchers said.
Post's research was funded by Aarhus University in Denmark, the Danish Polar Center and the U.S. National Science Foundation. In addition to the U.S. Geological Survey, funding for its study came from the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
By RANDOLPH E. SCHMID (AP) – 2 days ago
WASHINGTON — Arctic warming is affecting plants, birds, animals and insects as ice melts and the growing season changes, scientists report in a new review of the many impacts climate change is having on the far north.
As the global climate changes, the Arctic Circle has been warming faster than other regions and scientists have documented a series of affects on wildlife in the region.
Indeed, just last week researchers reported that the Arctic is warmer than it's been in 2,000 years, even though it should be cooling because of changes in the Earth's orbit that cause the region to get less direct sunlight.
"The Arctic as we know it may soon be a thing of the past," Eric Post, an associate professor of biology at Penn State University, said in a statement.
Post led a research team that studied the Arctic during the International Polar Year, which ended in 2008. Their findings are reported in Friday's edition of the journal Science.
Snow cover has declined steadily in recent years and in the last two to three decades the minimum sea ice coverage declined sharply, a change that affect animals like polar bears that depend on the ice for habitat and hunting.
"Species on land and at sea are suffering adverse consequences of human behavior at latitudes thousands of miles away," Post said. "It seems no matter where you look — on the ground, in the air, or in the water — we're seeing signs of rapid change."
In addition, he added, the Arctic is very complex and "not all populations within a given species respond similarly to warming because physical and landscape features that interact with climate can vary tremendously from site to site."
For example, migratory caribou in Greenland and elsewhere are declining, the researchers said, since the animals have not been able to adjust their calving season to keep it synchronized with changes in plant growth.
As a result, the time when the females need the most food no longer matches the time when the most food is available, and fewer calves survive. In addition, warmer weather can produce more insects and parasites to prey on the caribou.
On the other hand, wild reindeer on the Norwegian islands of Svalbard appear to have benefited from the earlier seasonal loss of snow cover. These animals don't migrate and the longer growing season and less snow cover means more food for them.
The researchers found that with warmer conditions red foxes are moving north, displacing Arctic foxes from their territories.
Also expanding their territories to the north are the winter moth, which defoliates mountain birch forests, and species of Arctic trees and shrubs.
Having more shrubs can provide food for reindeer and musk oxen grazing, and their trampling and defecation encourages the growth of grasses, which in turn attract geese.
And, as if to help prove the case, the U.S. Geological Survey reported separately that the Pacific brant, a small sea goose, has shifted northward from areas such as Mexico to sub-Arctic areas as Alaska's climate has warmed over the last four decades.
Before 1977 only about 3,000 brant were detected wintering in Alaska, while now that has jumped to as many as 40,000 birds.
The changing Arctic climate appears related to changes in the availability and abundance of eelgrass, the primary food of brant in their nonbreeding season, survey researchers said.
Post's research was funded by Aarhus University in Denmark, the Danish Polar Center and the U.S. National Science Foundation. In addition to the U.S. Geological Survey, funding for its study came from the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
