So, on NPR last Friday they talked about Carbon Dioxide cap and trade schemes. It got me thinking about an idea that I have had for a long time and I've decided to fling it to the blogging world for the voluminous feedback that I always recieve.
You see, we are releasing so much carbon dioxide into the world by burning everything we can lay our hands on that of course global warming is all our fault. The earth has a fever and is going to die.
So here is my solution. You set up a huge pipe line running straight out of the ocean, through a desalinization plant, and into the Sahara. You begin growing trees on the most remote part of the desert so that you can purchase millions of acres on the cheap. Then you start selling "carbon credits" to the industrial countries for all of your new grown jungle. Heck to get the project running you could presale the credits to beat future carbon emission limitations. They get to keep burning their fossil fuels. You get to terraform a useless chunk of the world into a huge carbon sink that undoubtedly would generate piles of tourist cash. The Al Gore's of the world name you the hero of the planet. They'll probably name the new river that forms in the desert after you.
In theory once the terraformed area is large enough and wet enough, it would become a self sustaining habitat.
Genius.
Please send your save the planet checks to:
About Me
- Papa J
- Latter-Day Saint. 10 hour work days, daily scripture reading, rusty Italian, underdeveloped Spanish, working on my MBA, six children who fill up my life, wonderful wife who anchors us all. Great church full of true friends and followers of Christ.
The Fam
Me, My Wife, and My Clan
I see you peeking
10 comments:
I think it's a great idea!! I say go for it, PJ!
Maybe you can sell the idea to Gore.
Yeah, and we can then build a giant air pump and put all the ground level ozone back into the ozone hole in the atmosphere. Do you think that just maybe both these ideas are silly because they would create more pollution then they could ever recover, LET ALONE pollution credits from someone elses pollution?
And you're a Geologist?
Incognito - I don't think Gore is in the practice of listening to Plebians.
Greenwashed - So negative, I think you're just jelous you didn't think of it. If the idea of pollution credit seems impossible to you I suggest you listen to the NPR program I linked. Finally, yes, my undergraduate degree is in Geology. Therefore, I prefer real science to political voodoo science.
Are you sure Gore is in the habit of listening to anyone?
Well my grand plan brother, not trying to rain on your parade but it has been shown that the darker color of trees actually increases the absorption of heat more than the cooling benifits of any CO2 that tree may consume and transform. Particularly when you are vegetating the highly reflective feldspar and quartz sands instead of some temperate zone dark soil. Your "plan" would fail on the cost of desalinating the water alone ($4-6 per 1000 gallons), considering the inefficiencies of growing anything in sand, and the massive amounts of CO2 you would have produce to desalinate the water. The current Cap-and-trade model could not economically support it.
Although I share your skepticism of global warming I am also a skeptic of your plan. Sorry bro.
Jealous? That's it? That's your reply to my simple point about the amount of time, money, resources, and pollution that would go into such an idea as to render it useless? You know, with my double major in Environmental Studies and Planning, and Biology, I could have never come up with such a hairbrained scheme because all that education would get in the way of such a fantasy.
There is no such thing as voodoo science. As you SHOULD know the process is simple. You have an idea, you publish it, it gets reviewed. If it has errors, your peers will point them out and maybe your data will be more accurate or maybe your whole theory will be shot to hell.
I think we should just develop the Oil Sands and the shale oil deposits in colorado and make it mandatory that every man women and child drive 1970 vintage Cadillacs.
Well, I say we ban all cars go back to riding horses, and with all that manure the greenhouse gases will really increase and then..we'll have global warming for sure. :-)
Perry - You would have to power your pumps and desalinators by non-CO2 generation technologies and cost is soon going to be a very minor issue as all of the coal burning powerplants will be paying for every ton of CO2 they produce. Then, on your reflective versus absorbing infrared energy argument, by that logic we should strip the whole planet in the hope of reflecting some more energy back into space? I think the biggest hurdles are pumping and fertilizing the soils. Hurdles though, not road blocks.
Greenwashed - See, my brother puts up a better fight then you do and he doesn't believe global warming is caused by man. Don't throw your degrees at me, throw some math at me.
BCF - Now your just being silly :)
Incognito - Not horses! Bicycles!
Now brother, don't misstate my stance on this issue. I said I was skeptical, not that I don't believe in Global Warming. There is warming going on and the levels of CO2 are higher now than they have been for melenia. I think it is perhaps naive to think humans are having NO impact, however, I think the human impact pales in comparison to the other factors and hence humans can do little to alter the course. Kind of like asking a guy with a paddle to turn the Titanic so it won't hit the iceberg. Not to mention that one good volcanic eruption and the iceberg moves on ya! Of course then you get some good ol particulate to block out the sun for a while. Maybe we need to bring back some good ol dust emissions and enhance the global dimming we have reduced over the past 20-25 years.
As for your responses to my comments...The CO2less powerplant (solar,wind,tide,or nuclear) to run this thing might do more to benifit the environment than your plan itself. Studies have shown that Temperate Zone revegitation is net benificial, it is the equitorial, particularly desert, environments that have been shown to reflect more warmth than any benifit vegitation CO2 consumtion could provide.
Also, your comment that cost won't be an issue once all the coal plants have to buy their carbon credits is unrealistic. Last year I was working with a Consultant that helped develop the original Cap and Trade program for England and was one of the founding consultants for the Chicago exchange. His exact quote to me was "The fastest way to kill Kyoto is for the US to sign it. Once the other countries see how much they will have to pay for carbon credits, they will pull out so fast it will make your head spin. The only reason many nations signed it was because they knew the US never would."
Post a Comment