scylis said:
there are a number of big-time, serious investment firms that have looked at Sapphire Energy, looked at their proposal, looked at their data, and decided it was worth investing over $100 million so far based on that data.
scylis said:
there are a number of big-time, serious investment firms that have looked at Sapphire Energy, looked at their proposal, looked at their data, and decided it was worth investing over $100 million so far based on that data.
scylis said:
there are a number of big-time, serious investment firms that have looked at Sapphire Energy, looked at their proposal, looked at their data, and decided it was worth investing over $100 million so far based on that data.
A sucker born every minute, ,
oh, don't sell yourself that short. i mean, you've obviously done something to get a job in Antarctica, you know. so you're obviously... well.. that is... you... um... there's something... that you do. and that's... something. or something.
Would you like to produce an energy and carbon budget for this?
And are you certain that this will not produce colossal amounts of methane, which will come to the surface and be much more of a greenhouse promoter than carbon dioxide?
Methane -- Yes I am, and that is the object of the anoxia. Methane is a product of bacteria that consume organic material, that and production of CO2 are the result of the water having enough oxygen to support the microorganisms that would normally consume the biological matter.
No anoxia, no ocean bottom sequestration of the organic material, so you see the anoxia is needed for this to work, and is how it has worked in nature in the past to end such global warming/ high CO2 events in geologic history.
Energy-carbon balance. The two are directly linked.
From a textbook I have "Combustion", 3rd ed by Irvin Glassman which he filched from the US military's JANNF tables the energy needed to convert CO2 in air to Carbon O2 is 394.39 kJ/mol (gram mol).
Carbon weighs 12 grams per mol. While 44 for CO2.
The heating value may not be the exact number but it will be close enough I think. (we will first make starches then animals will convert it to other stuff then it dies and falls to the bottom of the ocean either as poop, or as once living matter.
Or per kilogram of CO2 we need 1000/44*394.39=8963.4 kJ/kg to convert or
8.9634e 6 J/kg.
Currently the Atmosphere has 380 ppm CO2 (approximately) per this reference CO2 in atm. Also looking at the graph from that reference we are gaining about (380-315=) 65 ppm since 1958 or the last 50 years so the long term average gain is 65/50=1.3 ppm/year and the trend is picking up.
For the sake of argument let us design based on 2ppm/year, as that should cover current rates pretty good.
Then the earth's atmosphere weighs based on the pressure at sea level 101.35 kPa x Area of the earth in square meters. Again the earth has a radius of 6.37e 6 area of a sphere is 4xPIx R^2=5.10e 14, so the weight is 5.17e 19 Newtons divide by 9.81 m/s/s gives 5.27e 18 kg.
CO2 has a molecular weight of 44 grams/mol air has an average mol wt of 28.8, so we have
5.27e 18=.000380*44*X .999620*28.8*X
X=1.829e 17
the weight ofCO2 is .000380*44*X=3.0577e 15 kg
The weight of one PPM of CO2 is that divided by 380 or 8.047e 12 so we must convert twice that amount (2 ppm per year) to stay ahead of the game.
Total amount of energy needed =2 X 8.047e 12 kg X 8.9634e 6 J/kg =
1.443e 19 Joules/ year or 3.95e 16 Joules per day.
Solar flux is as I said about 1366 watts/m^2 at this orbit. Divide by pi for the rotation of the earth, gives 434.8 average over 24 hours, however dig the reference that takes care of clouds and such.
The spot I like is the red one far off the pacific coast of South America where we can count on over 300 W/m^2 per day average. So we use that.
Then 300 Watts X 3600 seconds/hr X 24 hr/day gives 25.9 E 6 Joules/square meter /day
That means with 100% efficiency I need 39.5e 15/25.9e 6= 1.52 e 9 square meters or a circle 44.06 km in diameter.
Obviously the efficiency is not 100%
If we assume 8% then it is 155.7 km
If 4% 220 km , and so on QED (divide the energy per day by the efficency then redo the calc.)
Once you get to 1% the diameter is 440 km but I like to cover my ass
I was in my previous calculations being pretty darn pessimistic about efficiency, which is wise when designing things peoples lives and welfare depend on. I would still set it at or near 1000km to cover the bases.
From your source (scroll all the way down, and it's the first sentence in the last section):
Methanogens are bacteria that produce methane gas. They are very anaerobic (oxygen is toxic to them) and sensitive to pH.
Wait a fucking minute here. You're calling Bill Gates, Bill one of the most intelligent people on the planet Gates, a sucker, and you expect us to take anything you say seriously?
Bill Fucking Gates, a sucker.
What kind of drugs do you take that make you think you're anywhere near, much less more, smart than Bill Gates?
Quit acting like such a dick and take your assholish insanity elsewhere. Quit shitting all over everybody's threads.
Would you like to produce an energy and carbon budget for this?
And are you certain that this will not produce colossal amounts of methane, which will come to the surface and be much more of a greenhouse promoter than carbon dioxide?
Methane -- Yes I am, and that is the object of the anoxia. Methane is a product of bacteria that consume organic material, that and production of CO2 are the result of the water having enough oxygen to support the microorganisms that would normally consume the biological matter.
[spoiler]
No anoxia, no ocean bottom sequestration of the organic material, so you see the anoxia is needed for this to work, and is how it has worked in nature in the past to end such global warming/ high CO2 events in geologic history.
Energy-carbon balance. The two are directly linked.
From a textbook I have "Combustion", 3rd ed by Irvin Glassman which he filched from the US military's JANNF tables the energy needed to convert CO2 in air to Carbon O2 is 394.39 kJ/mol (gram mol).
Carbon weighs 12 grams per mol. While 44 for CO2.
The heating value may not be the exact number but it will be close enough I think. (we will first make starches then animals will convert it to other stuff then it dies and falls to the bottom of the ocean either as poop, or as once living matter.
Or per kilogram of CO2 we need 1000/44*394.39=8963.4 kJ/kg to convert or
8.9634e 6 J/kg.
Currently the Atmosphere has 380 ppm CO2 (approximately) per this reference CO2 in atm. Also looking at the graph from that reference we are gaining about (380-315=) 65 ppm since 1958 or the last 50 years so the long term average gain is 65/50=1.3 ppm/year and the trend is picking up.
For the sake of argument let us design based on 2ppm/year, as that should cover current rates pretty good.
Then the earth's atmosphere weighs based on the pressure at sea level 101.35 kPa x Area of the earth in square meters. Again the earth has a radius of 6.37e 6 area of a sphere is 4xPIx R^2=5.10e 14, so the weight is 5.17e 19 Newtons divide by 9.81 m/s/s gives 5.27e 18 kg.
CO2 has a molecular weight of 44 grams/mol air has an average mol wt of 28.8, so we have
5.27e 18=.000380*44*X .999620*28.8*X
X=1.829e 17
the weight ofCO2 is .000380*44*X=3.0577e 15 kg
The weight of one PPM of CO2 is that divided by 380 or 8.047e 12 so we must convert twice that amount (2 ppm per year) to stay ahead of the game.
Total amount of energy needed =2 X 8.047e 12 kg X 8.9634e 6 J/kg =
1.443e 19 Joules/ year or 3.95e 16 Joules per day.
Solar flux is as I said about 1366 watts/m^2 at this orbit. Divide by pi for the rotation of the earth, gives 434.8 average over 24 hours, however dig the reference that takes care of clouds and such.
The spot I like is the red one far off the pacific coast of South America where we can count on over 300 W/m^2 per day average. So we use that.
Then 300 Watts X 3600 seconds/hr X 24 hr/day gives 25.9 E 6 Joules/square meter /day
That means with 100% efficiency I need 39.5e 15/25.9e 6= 1.52 e 9 square meters or a circle 44.06 km in diameter.
Obviously the efficiency is not 100%
If we assume 8% then it is 155.7 km
If 4% 220 km , and so on QED (divide the energy per day by the efficency then redo the calc.)
Once you get to 1% the diameter is 440 km but I like to cover my ass
I was in my previous calculations being pretty darn pessimistic about efficiency, which is wise when designing things peoples lives and welfare depend on. I would still set it at or near 1000km to cover the bases.
[/SPOILER]
From your source (scroll all the way down, and it's the first sentence in the last section):
Methanogens are bacteria that produce methane gas. They are very anaerobic (oxygen is toxic to them) and sensitive to pH.
My bold.
OK and you seemed to miss the part about them needing products of previous decomposing bacteria to live at all. As in quote from the same source.
Breaking Down a Dead Body:
Saprobic bacteria invade every inch of the dead body, and begin eating and digesting its tissues. There are many types of bacteria that live inside the body. These bacteria are the first to begin the process of decomposition after an organism dies. The initial bacteria start physical break-down of muscles. They tear apart the muscle tissue into individual protein strands. More saprobic bacteria soon move in to help break down the organic matter. Because there are so many bacteria in the soil (about 2 billion in 1 gram of fertile garden soil), decomposition occurs more rapidly after a body is buried. Decay that occurs underground or underwater is known as anaerobic decomposition. One specific type of anaerobic decay that is very important to the carbon cycle is biogas production. This process has three steps: hydrolysis, acidification, and methane formation.
Hydrolysis -- Splitting a Protein:
Proteins are broken down by an enzyme called protease that is secreted by fermentative bacteria. This enzyme separates proteins (polypeptides) into amino acids (peptides). It accomplishes this depolymerization through a process known as hydrolysis. In hydrolysis, a water molecule is inserted between the two amino acids that are bonded together. This breaks the bond between them by capping the free reactive ends with the H and the OH. The protein,therefore, is broken down from long chains into its individual molecules, amino acids.
Acidification -- From Serine to Acetic Acid:
In the next step, a new group of bacteria called acetogens take over. These bacteria decompose amino acids into acetic acid, hydrogen gas, nitrogen gas, and carbon dioxide gas. To do this, they need oxygen which they obtain from O2 dissolved in the body's fluids or bound in the body's structure. While acetogens are anaerobic bacteria, oxygen is not as poisonous to them as to some other anaerobes. The chemical reaction that occurs when acetogens decompose amino acids is:
Because acetogens produce acid, the pH of the organic matter falls to about 4 or 5. This low pH is toxic to the next group of bacteria, the methanogens. As the acetogens die out, however, the pH rises and methanogens become more predominant.
Biogas Formation -- From Acetic Acid to Methane:
Methanogens are bacteria that produce methane gas. They are very anaerobic (oxygen is toxic to them) and sensitive to pH. These bacteria are also very biologically primitive. Methanogens have, therefore, been a part of the carbon cycle for a long time. They combine the acetic acid made by acetogens with hydrogen gas, and carbon dioxide to produce methane gas, water, and carbon dioxide, according to the following equation:
HC2H3O2 4H2 CO2 --> 2CH4 2H2O CO2
acetic acid hydrogen gas carbon dioxide --> methane water carbon dioxide
So to get to the point that those bacteria (Methanogens) can form Methane gas they need the Acetic Acid as a feedstock that was produced by the previous step that needed O2, ,,,
Even though they can live down there, and they can feed on what little Acetic acid is in the undigested biological matter, (not much) they are limited by not having the acetogens convert the decompose amino acids to acetic acid using OXYGEN !!!!!
So by shutting out the oxygen the production of methane is quite limited.
petepolly
Antarctica
August 2008
SEP 24, 2008 08:50 PM