Kennedy McEwen wrote:
In article , Norman Wells
writes
Kennedy McEwen wrote:
In article , Java Jive
writes

Unless it's fed by gravity, like the Chatsworth one that was
mentioned, and does not use mains water that is thereby wasted,
which instead you could have drunk or used to shower, it is, as
you say, not strictly necessary, and is consuming CO2.


Isn't consuming CO2 meant to be a GOOD THING? ;-)

We need more consumption of CO2!

Carbon Capture is the way to go and it is the ONLY way that Britain
will make a significant difference.

No, sadly, it just joins the list of other things where Britain can
make no difference whatsoever.

Nope. Atmospheric extraction and carbon capture is an area where the
UK could make a significant impact.

Atmospheric extraction is totally unfeasible. Have you _any_ idea how big
the atmosphere is, and how small in comparison any man-made extractor would
be?

How many would we need do you think?

And wouldn't it be better to use trees as we always have?

The atmosphere tends to have a
habit of circulating on a global scale, so our small geographic area
eventually accesses all of the planet's atmosphere. Indeed, any
atmospheric extraction plant in any country would be insignificantly
smaller than the UK, so our limited size is not an issue. The UK has
extracted so much of its underground resources that there are many
suitable voids for the indefinite storage of liquid and solid carbon
deposits.
However, any small country could, with the right technology,
investment and political will (which is the most likely barrier in
the UK), punch well above its weight with carbon capture. Indeed,
with the appropriate carbon trading agreements in place, it could be
as profitable a business as any currently vomiting CO2 across the
planet.

Sadly, no it won't.