What-If 0088: "Soda Sequestration"

What if there was a forum for discussing these?

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

Nicias
Posts: 168
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 4:22 pm UTC

Re: What-If 0088: "Soda Sequestration"

Postby Nicias » Thu Mar 20, 2014 8:23 pm UTC

It's not just the impurities. You have to force three electrons onto each atom of Aluminum. They really don't want to be there. Apparently a can of coke has a carbon footprint of 340 grams of carbon (dioxide) if made from fresh aluminum. Most cans are half recycled. So by two orders of magnitude sequestration in cans is a terrible idea.

Futhermore, the electrons you shove onto the aluminum atoms come (at least partially) from a carbon anode. So, yeah, that is more CO2 released there, again about as much as the mass of the can, order of 10 grams.

rmsgrey
Posts: 3634
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: What-If 0088: "Soda Sequestration"

Postby rmsgrey » Thu Mar 20, 2014 8:33 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
NotAllThere wrote:
rto wrote:In addition to everything else, I believe that aluminum production is an extremely intense carbon-generating process. You’d be fighting a losing battle just manufacturing the cans.
That's one of the reasons why aluminium recycling is actually effective. It takes less energy than making a new one.
Isn't basically all metal recycling like this? Making something out of new metal first requires that you melt it down and get rid of impurities, which ore has a lot more of than the already pretty pure metal sent in to be recycled.

It's probably an even bigger difference with aluminum, though, because of how much electricity it takes for new stuff.


The main problem is that the impurities in ore are generally much simpler than the impurities in finished products - a barrel of shredded drinks cans will contain more aluminium than a barrel of high-grade bauxite, but the latter can be processed to almost pure aluminium, while the former not infrequently requires the addition of pure(r) aluminium to dilute the impurities to desired levels. The same applies to other metals - it's generally easier to process ore than mixed alloys to get a relatively pure metal...

Recycling is still economical, but you need a supply of the raw metal to maintain the quality of the product.

User avatar
keithl
Posts: 661
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 3:46 pm UTC

Re: What-If 0088: "Soda Sequestration"

Postby keithl » Thu Mar 20, 2014 9:02 pm UTC

Mikeski wrote:Well, "CO2 in the atmosphere at a particular place" is a measure of... CO2 in the atmosphere at that place. Picking axes that make it look like you want is the entirety of the misdirection, there. (Not that I think picking axes that make the seasonal cycle apparent is a "misdirection". It's "clarity" in this case.)

The graph - again - is the Keeling curve, a plot of data from some very careful measurements initiated by Charles David Keeling taken at the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii starting in the late 1950s. A special aspect of Mauna Loa is that it is far from local variance like cities and factories and agricultural regions; it is one of the "least worst" places to get a feel for global trends.

CO2 does indeed vary over time, locally, just like temperature and water level and everything else. I'm told (I haven't measured this myself) that the drop in CO2 is dramatic a meter or two over a corn field when the sunlight suddenly increases, say from sunrise over a mountain or a parting of the clouds. But that is no place to extrapolate long term trends, or get an accurate estimate of the gigatons of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Just like you can't measure "sea level" by looking at the water near shore with a prevailing wind; the estimate is more complex, and is done to establish a datum against which surface topology is measured worldwide. We have 4-digit accurate measurements for the height of Everest relative to this datum, which is far from the sea. If you've ever traveled in an airplane through IFR flight conditions, you are here to continue this conversation because a lot of scientists and metricians and surveyors did a lot of very careful measurements used by pilots for safe navigation.

If we could somehow control just the tiny fraction of CO2 above the stratopause, and dial it to any value we wanted anywhere we wanted, then we could adjust surface temperatures over regions by tens of degrees. Perhaps someday, some genius will figure out a cheap way to do that. But in 2014, with the physics and atmospheric behavior we know, CO2 diffuses from your tailpipe to the entire planet, from the surface of the sea to the top of the atmosphere, and until we figure out a clever way to contain emissions or not make them, then your emissions are everybody's business, and their emissions are yours. The fact that some garbage is invisible doesn't make it OK to dump willy nilly.

Now to drive to the library and the ReStore for house hardware. I'm not without sin, either.

User avatar
Flumble
Yes Man
Posts: 2249
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 9:35 pm UTC

Re: What-If 0088: "Soda Sequestration"

Postby Flumble » Thu Mar 20, 2014 11:57 pm UTC

keithl wrote:If we could somehow control just the tiny fraction of CO2 above the stratopause, and dial it to any value we wanted anywhere we wanted, then we could adjust surface temperatures over regions by tens of degrees.

We need balloons and plants*. Loads of 'em. Multiple fucktons.
Then we let the balloons float to an altitude of 50km with the plants attached and watch the magic.


*Alternatively you could use algae, but sending plants to space sounds all the more bad-ass. 8-)

capefeather
Posts: 98
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2008 4:23 am UTC

Re: What-If 0088: "Soda Sequestration"

Postby capefeather » Fri Mar 21, 2014 3:57 pm UTC

If all it takes to "lie with statistics" is to present data that appears to conform to somebody's opinion, then pray tell, what would telling the truth with statistics look like? I looked at this thread expecting yet another polarized political "discussion" and I was not disappointed. As we all know, if you accept human-caused climate change, you're basically an anti-capitalist hippie, just like how everyone who identifies as religious is an Islamic terrorist.

User avatar
firesoul31
Posts: 93
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 10:30 pm UTC

Re: What-If 0088: "Soda Sequestration"

Postby firesoul31 » Sat Mar 22, 2014 5:53 am UTC

capefeather wrote:If all it takes to "lie with statistics" is to present data that appears to conform to somebody's opinion, then pray tell, what would telling the truth with statistics look like? I looked at this thread expecting yet another polarized political "discussion" and I was not disappointed. As we all know, if you accept human-caused climate change, you're basically an anti-capitalist hippie, just like how everyone who identifies as religious is an Islamic terrorist.

a) Data tables
b) The graph in question that is lying actually has a data point out of place. The 8.6 is level with the 9.0s, not below the 8.8s
c) Maybe political, slightly, but not polarized
d) See, I don't think anyone has actually said that here
Pronouns: she/her/hers or they/them please.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5450
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: What-If 0088: "Soda Sequestration"

Postby Pfhorrest » Sat Mar 22, 2014 6:56 am UTC

Yeah actually I'm pleasantly surprised at how reasonable everyone here has been about the climate change topic. I half expected to ignite (or pour fuel onto the sparks of) a flamewar with my comment on it, but then the people I expected might have the strongest reaction to it... just added some well-founded caveats and counterpoints to the table and we moved on.

Hurray for reason and civility!
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: What-If 0088: "Soda Sequestration"

Postby gmalivuk » Sat Mar 22, 2014 10:04 am UTC

firesoul31 wrote:The graph in question that is lying actually has a data point out of place.
No, the graph in question is not lying and is the one about CO2 levels. The unemployment graph was posted as an unambiguous example of lying with statistics, in response to the claim that the CO2 graph in the comic was lying because the scale didn't start at 0.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

rmsgrey
Posts: 3634
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: What-If 0088: "Soda Sequestration"

Postby rmsgrey » Sat Mar 22, 2014 8:41 pm UTC

firesoul31 wrote:
capefeather wrote:just like how everyone who identifies as religious is an Islamic terrorist.

d) See, I don't think anyone has actually said that here

Though I do quite like the idea of describing the Westboro Baptists as Islamic terrorists...

jpvlsmv
Posts: 85
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:43 pm UTC

Re: What-If 0088: "Soda Sequestration"

Postby jpvlsmv » Mon Mar 24, 2014 4:16 pm UTC

cellocgw wrote:
rmsgrey wrote:The time axis doesn't start from zero either


Cue the AD vs. CE and 3 billion vs. 6000 wars. :twisted:

Besides, time zero was apparently about 1e-35 seconds prior to the beginning of inflation! Better use a log scale.


log scale? Bah, you just need to use more paper.

--Joe

OP Tipping
Posts: 258
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 6:23 am UTC

Re: What-If 0088: "Soda Sequestration"

Postby OP Tipping » Mon Apr 07, 2014 2:06 am UTC

By pouring out the carbonated beverages, you release the CO2 anyway.
a) Please explain the specific MEDICAL reason for ordering this MEDICATION !
b) Please state the nature of your ailment or injury.
c) One a scale of one to ten, how would you rate your pain?
d) Please state the nature of the medical emergency.


Return to “What If?”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests