A new one that looks to be topical. As always, share and share alike.
Articles
The Register - Brown gov will make 'big commitment' to carbon capture - Big as in small - Nowt like backing a winner!
Greenbang - Carbon capture as much use a chocolate teapot: Greenpeace - Bless
Guardian - Can technology save the climate?
Indy - UK's climate change plans incoherent, says scientist - Oi, Gordon, I think a tabloid has another plastic bag opp for you to devote your energies to.
Greenbang - Think tank gives roadmap for carbon capture in the UK - So the technology is sound...phew. It's just how it gets specified, used, subsidised, traded and all round abused by the cabal of dodgy pols and venal corporates after a quick target-tick and/or short-term £reebie that are the problem.
So I can see all that changing right away. Not.
Gizmag - Carbon Capture: a bridging technology too far?
Guardian - Wicks: All is lost on global warming without clean coal - Feeling secure, are we?
Times - How carbon capture and storage (CCS) could make coal the fuel of the future - Ah, 'could' it?
Greenbang - Is carbon storage really all good? -
FT - EU split on carbon capture intensifies
Guardian - Live Q&A: George Monbiot on clean coal - While I might query the 'leading green commentator' bit, it's a debate, and may be worth following.
FT - The carbon-capture challenge
FT - NEW - Carbon capture and storage in very, very expensive shock
Information
Junkk.com promotes fun, reward-based e-practices, sharing oodles of info in objective, balanced ways. But we do have personal opinions, too! Hence this slightly ‘off of site, top of mind' blog by Junkk Male Peter. Hopefully still more ‘concerned mates’ than 'do this... or else' nannies, with critiques seen as constructive or of a more eyebrow-twitching ‘Oh, really?!' variety. Little that’s green can be viewed only in black and white.
Friday, October 30, 2009
1 comment:
I believe in freedom of speech. But I also don't like bullies on blogs, even verbal ones, as they can drive away those with something valid to say... or offer.
Subjective is fine, but well argued and substantiated is even better. Calm and polite tops. Anything that crosses my personal line will not go up. There may be reasons given, but not guaranteed.
I'm not too keen on 'Anon' as a handle (and the content usually explains why), so if that's what you opt for it may not make it. Sorry.
This caught my eye (below) - some researcher in the US using computational modelling to screen ionic solvents as CO2 capturing molecules. Will probably be a lot more efficient/easier than using conventional solvents like monoethanolamine (MEA).
ReplyDeleteSee:-
http://www.energyefficiencynews.com/i/2290/