View Single Post
  #5  
Old June 19th 18, 12:36 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default Maybe OT Tesla

On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 02:55:29 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
wrote:

On Saturday, 9 June 2018 02:53:41 UTC+1, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 08:51:13 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
wrote:

On Friday, 8 June 2018 10:58:24 UTC+1, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jun 2018 23:49:45 -0400, Ron C wrote:

Even so, I doubt anyone believes pollution is a good thing.

One problem is CO2 is not a pollutant.

If there's too much it's bad for animal life the planet might be OK.


Too much is a hell of a lot


it's not that much, it's not like the air would need to be filled with CO2.


Please quote a percentage.


- a way more than thee is at the present.


about 150 times moire which isn't that much more.


Life on earth almost entirely
requires CO2 for its existence and present levels (even the elevated
levels are much closer to extinguishing life than is really
comfortable.

In Stargate universe they had problems and needed a CO2 scrubber.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-44396781

I think the global CO2 emissions is about 30G tonnes


i.e 3x10^10 tons, per year I presume.


Yes depends who's counting and how I suppose.


The article you cited above gives a cost of less than $100/ton. Cost
of removal therefore is less than $3x10^12 per year.


That's a hell of a lot of $ far more than most countries GPD.




Then there is
the cost of converting this to fuel. :-(


Yes and then burning it all over again.

--

Regards,

Eric Stevens