A key excerpt:
 
"The discovery of such a high CO flux at the Champagne site, estimated to be about 0.1% of the global MOR carbon flux, suggests that submarine arc volcanoes may play a larger role in oceanic carbon cycling than previously realized. The Champagne field may also prove to be a valuable natural laboratory for studying the effects of high CO concentrations on marine ecosystems."
 
 
This isn't the one we were attempting to track down.
 
But, care to guess why it's called the "Champagne field"?
 
The researchers estimate this one phenomena, alone, could be responsible for one thousandth of the earth's total CO2/carbon atmospheric/oceanic loading.
 
And, this is far, far from the only such vent. Certainly far from the largest.
 
We insist, yet again, that, if coal-to-liquids is the elephant hiding under a lampshade in or living room, then CTL's CO2 emissions are just a pimple on that elephant's butt - compared to Mother Nature's own contributions.
 
But, nevertheless, there are good, constructive, profitable ways to capture and utilize the emissions - if we're willing to quit whining about the problem and put some thought, and effort, into resolving it.
 
 
An informative excerpt:
 
"Much of the buoyant CO2 floats to the top of the chamber and leaks out through the roof, escaping to the atmosphere through surface vents and fumaroles-more than 8,000 tonnes each day."
 
Eight thousand ton(nes) per day of CO2.
 
To frost the cake, the, obviously, British, author wrote "tonnes", which, we think, means that it's ten percent more than would be indicated by our own "tons".
 
Wonder how many similar volcanoes there are in the world? We're checking.
 
Or, would everyone just rather puff some powder over that pimple on the CTL elephant's butt, and get on with it?
 

 
 
One of the many projects funded by our DOE on the practical sequestration and use of CO2 generated by industrial coal processes.
 
An excerpt:
 
"Scientists at Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico are exploring the idea of using concentrated solar energy to turn CO2 into fuel. The Sunshine to Petrol project is testing a prototype device called the Counter Rotating Ring Receiver Reactor Recuperator (called CR5 for short) which turns CO2 into carbon monoxide which could then form part of a liquid fuel."
 
As we've been saying: There are several ways you can use CO2 to make more fuel. It should be seen as a resource, not a pollutant, and therefore a valuable by-product of coal-fired power plants, and coal-to-liquid conversion processes.
 

 
Apparently it's not that far-fetched. Much of this CNN piece duplicates what we sent you previously in the MIT article.
 
Sandia National Labs are at work on it, as are some universities and private companies.
 
One of those companies is Carbon Sciences, whose participation in this arena we've previously documented for you.
 
An excerpt :

"Carbon Sciences believe they have made a breakthrough with their technology, which they say can transform CO2 back into basic fuel building blocks efficiently.

Their biocatalytic process converts CO2 into basic hydrocarbons - C1 (methane) C2 (ethane) and C3 (propane) -- which can then be utilized to make higher-grade fuels like gasoline and jet fuel."

As we've been saying, there are ways to make the by-products of coal use - especially those from CTL conversion processes - valuable as raw materials for other processes.

Another excerpt, concerning one of our own, respected, national laboratories:

"Scientists at Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico are exploring the idea of using concentrated solar energy to turn CO2 into fuel. The Sunshine to Petrol project is testing a prototype device called the Counter Rotating Ring Receiver Reactor Recuperator (called CR5 for short) which turns CO2 into carbon monoxide which could then form part of a liquid fuel."

So, whether or not humans or volcanoes contribute more CO2 to the environment, we don't have to dump any more than we are right now in order to continue using coal, and to broaden it's use as a feedstock for liquid fuel conversion and chemical manufacture.

We can, and should, capture and use the Carbon Dioxide.

 


 
The DOE is at work on one of our suggestions (unsurprisingly, as usual, a lot of people are way ahead of us on all of this):
 
Bubbling the flue gases from coal-fired power and CoalTL plants through bio reactors to grow algae as additional feedstock for liquid fuel factories.
 
The complete title of the project is:
 
"Recovery & Sequestration of CO2 From Stationary Combustion Systems by Photosynthesis of Microalgae".
 
An excerpt from the Project Description:
 
 
The overall objective of this project is to address the following issues: 1. CO2 supply from fuel combustion systems.(a) characterize representative types of industrial flue gas, (b) determine, based on typical gas composition, what separation and clean-up technologies may be necessary, and (c) determine the best techniques to assure maximal dissolution of CO2 in the flue gas into algal growth medium. 2. Selection of microalgae. The participants shall select microalgal species best suited for CO2 sequestration based on (a) their growth rates and rates of carbon fixation, (b) ability to mineralize CO2 into inorganic forms such as carbonates, (c) content of high value products, (Hmm - wonder what that means? - JTM) and (d) ability to withstand noxious components in flue gas mixtures.
 
As we've already noted for you multiple times, you can make suitable diesel and jet fuel from algae, and a number of airlines have already made demonstration flights with it. And, if the right coal conversion process is selected, the algae, with minimal pre-treatment, can be dumped right into the in-box of a CTL plant, along with the coal and some previously-discarded coal mine waste, and forestry and agricultural products/by-products.
 

West Virginia Coal Association - PO Box 3923 - Charleston, WV 25339 | 304-342-4153 | website developed by brickswithoutstraw