This may sound all warm and fuzzy for AGW types, but actually isn't what it appears on the surface.

DOE: New CO2 Enhanced Oil Recovery Technology Could Greatly Boost U.S. Oil Supplies Reports See Another 89-430 Billion Barrels of Oil Through Carbon Dioxide Injection
http://www.fossil.energy.gov/news/techlines/2006/06015-Oil_Recovery_Assessments_Released.html

The DOE's primary agenda is for more fossil fuel recovery, not CO2 removal. They are the Department of Energy after all.

It is good news that this technique is at least being tried out. However, suspect that
it won't be anyhwhere nears economical. That
is not a reason to at least test it out, but the
Detroit press is missing the financial implications.

Iron fertiliztion of the oceans is of course much more pratical and cost effective. All we need are a few more large scale demo's and a political decision by the UN to allow credit to be take for sequesterization of CO2 in the oceans. Cheap and easy.

Which, buy the way, is Natures method of sequestering CO2.

So consumers will have to spend between 30 and 50 percent more on their electric bills just to satisfy this religion of unproven AGW and starve the flora at the same time. Typical liberal thinking.
Logic tells me that China won't be the least bit interested in losing a substantial part of their power plant output to invest in this boondoggle. They will gladly host more of our manufacturing sector who will likewise use logic to determine that investment in China is more economically feasible than trying to jump through ever more expensive and unecessary hoops both here and in Europe.
But again, logic eludes the delusional liberal mind.
The law of unintended consequences will most likely raise it's ugly head and the sooner it happens the better.

Will this new supply of "waste" CO2 make liquid and solid CO2 products dirt cheap now?

all the best,

Aaron

Dangerous Fools!!!! Bury the carbon yes, but bury our oxygen as well? This will upset yet another of nature's finely balanced systems in totally unforeseen ways, and if they keep burying 2 oxygen atoms for every carbon atom, well, I'm speechless. Oxygen is returned to the atmosphere by photosynthesis. I advocate burying the carbon by simply burying the spent plant life. Currently we don't, we let it rot or burn it, allowing bacteria or fire to convert it all back to into carbon dioxide again. Nature made oxygen by burying plants which we now reuse as oil. If they carry this on it will obviously be catastrophic. Words fail me.

Virgin Atlantic carried out the world's first flight of a commercial aircraft powered with biofuel on Sunday in an effort to show it can produce less carbon dioxide than normal jet fuels.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/world/5565531.html

Yes, lets burn down the rain forests, increase atmospheric CO2, and starve people to death - so that we can pretend to be doing something to alleviate the global warming panic. Thank you Sir Richard, for doing something. Anything! Maybe he can also run a long hose out of the back of his planes into a well in Michigan .

As far as the CO2 sequestration plan goes, the main thing which is going to be "bigger" is our utility bills, by 30% to 50% at a minimum. This should drive lots of manufacturing to China and allow Michael Moore another opportunity to do a flick about unemployed people in Flint.

PATRICK HENRY:
Brett is a scientist. He follows the rules are not a scientist may have a science background,but your blogs are amoral,skewed words and right wing rhetoric. As a subscriber to ACCUWEATHER I think that you should restrain yourself from constant blogging.
Your hate for others and there points of view is blatant and ignorant. I have seen people of good minds and beliefs scurry off this blog too often. Your big mouth is hurting this board and your fascist tactics are obscuring reality.
A real Scientist fights for the greater good,TRUTH, and the progress of man. You are not a Scientist. You should sequester yourself, like
the Michigan power plant CO2 until you have learned to relate, not just hate,abuse distort and cheapen this board with your madness.
KIPP

Wow! What a great idea. If we can get enough CO2 stored before the climate changes back to cold soon, we can start releasing it into the air and cause the earth to start warming up again. This is brilliant enough that it could have been initiated by someone who invented the internet. Lets see who claims credit for this one.

Don't you just love irrational thinking?
So then who is going to monitor the OXYGEN concentration if they remove the main component for photosynthesis from the atmosphere? Remember, there is only 400ppm CO2 available to produce 21% O2! Homo sapien is the only species that can deliberately screw up the planet...
"Stupid is as stupid does" (Forrest Gump), or or "Life is tough, but it is even tougher if you are stupid", Sergeant John Stryer, USMC in the Sands of Iwo Jima).
Wouldn't want to be accused of plagiarism!

"Other than the fact that it's a global-warming gas that is warming Earth, CO2 -- which humans breathe out thousands of times daily -- is harmless, Austerberry said. Even if it somehow escaped, it wouldn't harm anyone."

Oh, really!?
Check out this article...
http://volcano.und.edu/vwdocs/volc_images/africa/nyos.html
All it would take is an earthquake to cause a catastrophe.

Great blog Brett

I hope there is a plan to release it again when cooling sets in and we need more CO2 in the atmosphere to prevent crop failures!

Planning for the best circumstances (ie., Global Warming) and ignoring the more devastating alternative of Global Cooling is just plain irresponsible.

Kipp,

That's a very funny post regarding Patrick Henry. Congratulations on one of the most bizarre rants I've seen on this blog.

Aram, that's a good point. I do remember that story. There was a documentary that talked about this. A huge release of CO2 could be devastating to the local area. Super high concentrations literally take your breathe away.

Kipp;
Wow. what a wondrously incoherent spewing of vitriol. Impressive.

As for Carbon sequestration; Bravo.
This will occupy some attention and energy while the whole AGW scam falls apart.
With any luck, it will buy enough time to keep the tree huggers from completely destroying the economy before the truth finally spreads.

Marie:
I wrote to Virgin Atlantic today to tell them that I will not fly wit any airline that uses biofuels as it is morally deplorable to starve people to make fuel.
Perhaps some of you could do the same. They probably mean well, but like so many lefties, they are way off base.

Kipp,

Your comment to PH was your big mouth is hurting this board and your fascist tactics are obscuring reality.

Sir, have you read any of BTs comments? PH is quite tame compared to BT. This man believes that if you are not a scientist (or engineer) you should not be expressing your views on climate change. Unless of course, you believe that CO2 is the end all.

Like you, I am not a scientist. But it doesnt take a scientist to realize that there are FAR more important things to worry about other than 380 ppm of CO2. Come on up to New Hampshire Kipp. There is plenty of global warming up here, despite all of this microscopic CO2. I have had to shovel about 7+ feet of global warming so far this winter and will probably get more before it actually gets warm, from Spring. And you are worried about a couple of degrees? Come on guy, wake up. The planet is not in peril.

BT will probably chime in, call me a yahoo, and try insulting me by teling me to go read up on thermodynamics. And I will probably respond by telling him to stop being a such hypocrite/lunatic and go plant a therapeutic tree somewhere. And the cycle of insults will continue, just like the climate cycle and the solar cycle. The cycle of life; which is part of our round, revolving, orbitting and wobbling planet. Welcome to earth. Try to enjoy your short stay.

"Andrew:
Iron fertiliztion of the oceans is of course much more pratical and cost effective."

Andrew, you can't just add iron.

You will need phosphorus/phosphate also.

Assuming Fe is limiting, adding Fe will just make something else limiting.

Yep, another brilliant bad idea. Carbon Dioxide is not the problem. Other toxic compounds found in industrial smoke stack emmissions are of greater concern to me. Trees and plants breath CO2 and make oxygeen. Zero pollution technolgies might better direct our resouces. Lets reduce or get rid of toxic materials and techniques. Simply using less of everything reduces pollution. We need to have a paradigm shift on a civilization scale to simply use less and do more for ours selves and not trash our planet. High technology comes with a heavy price.

Brett found this. Maybe you would want to post as a new topic or not is up to you.

2008 International Conference on Climate Change

March 2-4 New York,NY

http://www.heartland.org/NewYork08/newyork08.cfm

Hundreds of conferences take place each year on �global warming,� the popular name given to the theory that human activities are causing a potentially catastrophic warming of the Earth�s climate. Most of these conferences are lavishly financed by government agencies or liberal foundations. All of them predict doom and gloom unless mankind takes drastic actions to change its energy use.

But is it true? Is there another side to this important story?

Advocacy groups and most environment reporters claim �the scientific debate is over� and only a �fringe� of scientists or policy experts do not believe global warming is a crisis. But framing the debate in terms of �believing� in global warming is incorrect. Claims that global warming is man-made and will be a crisis are complex arguments that depend on how many other questions are answered.

Hi Kipp Albert,

I do recognize the thinking of the left in you. i.e....

Anyone who disagrees with you is "intolerant" and "hateful." (Tolerance is defined as thinking the same way that you do.) It is OK to openly disparage Americans, whites, men, Christians, Jews, Republicans, heterosexuals and conservatives. On the other hand, Europeans, Muslims and gays are immune to criticism.

This may be the start of something very big re GISS temp
http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2793#comments
The people V NASA

I thought that the carbon dioxide they are burying is the excess from burning fossil fuels and not the carbon dioxide which would be produced naturaly through biological processes. if this is the case then no oxygen produced naturally would be buried with it therefore not upsetting natures natural systems. i do have a concern, is there not a chance that through geological disturbance all of this sequestered Carbon Dioxide will be released into the atmosphere in one go?

Wow Kipp, that's quite the harsh reaction to Patrick Henry for just posting a link to what's been happening all along! And now you would like to see him censored too! Just like BT and Steve Bloom, and Suzuki wanting to throw skeptics in jail, your true colours show quite clearly.
Funny, I don't recall ever hearing any skeptic wanting to silence anybody who believes in AGW.
Typical liberal socialist thinking once again. It's a common theme among the AGW crowd.

Here is something bigger. Wolf Creek Ski Area has had over 40 feet of snow this winter, with the six snowiest weeks of the year yet to come.
http://www.wolfcreekski.com/snow.asp

The climate models warned us that this would(n't) happen. How many stories came out this winter about suffering ski areas in the west?

California ski areas got over five feet of fresh snow this weekend, on top of the ten plus feet they already had on the ground.
http://www.onthesnow.com/CN/67/skireport.html

Why do you guys keep talking about future cooling? It's just a myth. Right?

Haven't you been listening to the overwhelming scientific evidence and the consensus of scientists that mankind has FUNDAMENTALLY changed this planet for the worse by making it warmer? WE HAVE to do something this inefficient and expensive to fix it. I mean the Goreacle and his followers demanded it.

I must say though this well thing is quite effective. The article said it started two weeks ago. Here in Ohio, a neighboring state, for you AGWers, it has been cold the last two weeks and we have gotten lots of snow and ice (compared to the rest of winter). And I have to ask, Bastardi said that winter is coming back with a vengence over the next 4 to 6 weeks, did he KNOW about this well? Or did he just base his ideas on those silly analogue things he always talks about?

I wonder, can I sue this company since I twisted my back shoveling all the global warming that fell last week? And can the people who crashed on icy roads sue them as well for damages. Clearly they are at fault because 3 weeks ago, it wasn't as cold.

LOL.

Hello all - several posters here have mentioned the increase cost in electricity prices & having recently worked on this directly in Canada some of the findings we uncovered are of interest.
A planned 300 Mega watt coal fired plant had to increase in size to 500 Mega watts with the extra 200 ( 66 % ) used in the carbon capture portion of the power plant & not available for sale to consumers. That was a big surprise to me.
Also the initial capital costs of the power plant were sky rocketing throughout the feasibility study ( largely as a result of the booming oil industry & the lack of construction manpower & material in Western Canada ).
The final nail in the coffin came from the oil company who wanted to use the CO2 in a miscible flood of an existing oil pool & their economics wouldn't allow them to pay the price for the CO2 needed by the power company. All parties worked hard to make this fly but had to give up & instead a natural gas power plant will be built.
Being green was not affordable in this case. Personally I was shocked at the power demand of the carbon capture & the necessity to burn 66 % more coal ( not an environmentally friendly situation ) to capture the CO2.

kipp albert,

I'm not sure if you're being completely serious or not, but I have to strongly criticize your character assasination of Patrick Henry.
Now, I am a believer in AGW theory, and I disagree with PH early and often, but your calling him a "fascist" and suggesting he stop blogging on here. As far as I can tell, you dislike PH because he holds a view with which you disagree, and he is obviously hold very strong feelings about it. Sometimes debates with him get a little heated. Well, welcome to free speech. If you can't stand what he has to say, YOU need to quit reading this.
As far as calling him a fascist goes, do you even know the origin of that term? It is a spectacular insult to the millions who were murdered by ACTUAL fascists this century, and the tens of millions who died in the wars that they caused. Last time I checked, Patrick Henry wasn't beating down anyone's door and hurting people because they disagreed with him.
Then again, maybe you're just trolling, to see what kind of reaction you can get. If so, consider yourself having just got a strong reaction.

Hey PH , Sounds like you've hit a nerve with Kipp. Just remember, whenever you stick your head out above the crowd, You're probably going to catch a couple tomatoes. Keep Blogging buddy, and ignore the Tomatoes.

Ahh, you gotta love the Radical Right. They don't want government to, in their words, "tell people what to do." Yet they also have a problem with a guy like Branson doing what he wants with his company. LOL.

And suddenly the Radical Right cares about w