Solutions to the Many Dangers of Carbon Sequestration

The Dangers of Carbon Sequestration

“The many disadvantages of this process have far-reaching consequences.

The carbon dioxide gas is compressed into a liquid form and is stored deep under the earth’s surface, in areas which are capable of holding the gas securely and preventing it from leaking out. Even though care is taken to identify the right areas for storing the gas underground, there is always a likelihood of the gas leaking out.

When that happens, a number of deadly changes can transpire:

a) The leaked carbon dioxide gas which is in the liquid form can mix with ground water. This will make the ground water extremely toxic and unsuitable for human consumption.

b) Gas stored below the ocean floor can leak out and increase the carbon dioxide content in the lower layers of the ocean. This makes it difficult for the flora and fauna thriving near the ocean surface to adjust to the changes and as a result, the whole ecosystem is disturbed.

c) Leakage of the carbon dioxide gas from underground reservoirs can lead to the replacement of oxygen gas near the earth’s surface with carbon dioxide, leading to loss of plant and animal life in the area.

High cost of the carbon sequestration process

Apart from the above stated issues, the carbon sequestration process also has another major disadvantage.

To store carbon dioxide gas underground, it has to be compressed into liquid form. This process is extremely expensive and requires a lot of energy. The injected gas also has to be monitored constantly for leakage over long periods of time.

Another major issue is that excessive usage of this method slows down the search for non-polluting sources of energy…”

Assessing the Options

Although the author of the above quoted article (found here) comes to the conclusion that carbon sequestration is a necessity due to our current carbon emissions, I would strongly disagree for a number of reasons. Beyond the danger of contaminating water supplies, food and wildlife; there is also the question of the net energy equation.

Energy Returned on Energy Invested (EROEI) represents the ratio between energy used to obtain and process a fuel versus the energy gained by the fuel produced. If you are putting more energy into the process than you are getting out (like is currently happening with corn-based ethanol) then you are doing much more harm than good. In order to store carbon it must first be liquefied, which is a very energy-intensive process. Beyond this, the containment chambers that must be manufactured also take a huge amount of energy to create, as do the holes that must be dug deep below the earth’s surface (near our water supply.)

Over time, the EROEI ratio of all fossil fuels will continually decrease to the point of being non-viable (ratio: 1/1); and any attempts to sequester carbon will only bring us closer to ‘peak oil’ and eventually even ‘peak coal.’ While it must be our priority to curb carbon emissions, it simply does not make any sense to use ever increasing amounts of carbon in a futile attempt to contain other carbon. Half-measures, piece-meal solutions and taxes proposed by our politicians will do nothing to actually fix the problems we face; what we need are long-term solutions like serious investment in wind and solar, but this will still not solve all of our problems.

The only way to sustain our current way of life and cut back on pollution is to find a better energy source than petroleum, which many say does not exist; but what if it does? Nikola Tesla was dismissed as a crackpot for trying to power the world with wireless energy, but not before he gave us A/C motors and radio transmission (two of his other ideas once scoffed at by his peers.) In 1931, he even drove reporters around in an electric car powered off the ‘ether’ at speeds up to ninety miles an hour; but he was still not taken seriously, only feared for his use of black magic. All of his research was confiscated by the federal government upon his death, and the only current use of his groundbreaking advances in electromagnetics has been the development of our military’s Heat Ray and many more secretive weapons developed and tested at the HAARP facility in Alaska.

Instead of using one billion watts of power for weapons testing (and possible use!), we need leaders with enough intelligence to understand that “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself”; we need a government that will focus on our survival rather than the destruction of our (created) enemies. The technologies pioneered by Nikola Tesla are the necessary backbone of our emerging world economy, and once they are employed they will do more to combat global warming, starvation and conflict than all other efforts combined.

“Let the future tell the truth and evaluate each one according to his work and accomplishments. The present is theirs; the future, for which I really worked, is mine.”

“Our senses enable us to perceive only a minute portion of the outside world. Our hearing extends to a small distance. Our sight is impeded by intervening bodies and shadows. To know each other we must reach beyond the sphere of our sense perceptions. We must transmit our intelligence, travel, transport the materials and transfer the energies necessary for our existence. Following this thought we now realize, forcibly enough to dispense with argument, that of all other conquests of man, without exception, that which is most desirable, which would be most helpful in the establishment of universal peaceful relations is — the complete ANNIHILATION OF DISTANCE.

To achieve this wonder, electricity is the one and only means. Inestimable good has already been done by the use of this all powerful agent, the nature of which is still a mystery. Our astonishment at what has been accomplished would be uncontrollable were it not held in check by the expectation of greater miracles to come. That one, the greatest of all, can be viewed in three aspects: Dissemination of intelligence, transportation, and transmission of power.” -Nikola Tesla, A Means For Furthering Peace (1905)


One Response to Solutions to the Many Dangers of Carbon Sequestration

  1. Pingback: Tesla Motors » Blog Archive » Solutions to the Many Dangers of Carbon Sequestration

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: