Run that for a century and replace all the fossil fuel in the world with
new stocks!


Simples!


Its so easy to pronounce on scientific matters when you haven't a clue
about science isn't it?

Oh dear, it is startlingly clear that you haven't read Prof. Liao's
paper and that you are determinedly refusing even to consider his ideas.
The hubris demonstrated by your response is awe-inspiring.

Prof. Liao is only holding out an idea for the potential for energy
storage, based upon his research into electro-biological mechanisms.
This is leading edge and very recent research. Nobody is suggesting
that conversion efficiency will even be significant, let alone anything
approaching 100%. Nobody is suggesting that all CO2 captured from power
stations can be converted into alcohol. I would have thought that was
obvious to most, but apparently it passed by you.

If you would only pause for one moment to consider his paper on its
merits for its potential for converting *some* CO2 into alcohol using an
electromicrobial mechanism (his description), as a means both of
disposal of *some* CO2 and at the same time storage of *some* electrical
energy in a chemical form, then I might have more respect for your
opinions. Even a small conversion of CO2, if there is temporary excess
energy available on the grid, might be more useful than pumping it down
wells? Who knows if further development down the years can help Prof.
Liao's ideas evolve with significant efficiencies, perhaps even
approaching those of pumped storage schemes, but isn't it worth asking
the questions? Simply to dismiss his ideas out of hand is unworthy,
especially of someone who implies having undertaken academic research
for himself in the past.

Hopefully, somebody with an open and enquiring mind will be along
shortly. With luck, it will be somebody who is able to contemplate and
respond to unfamiliar ideas without being unnecessarily offensive.


Well lets hope that Greene King don't get wind of it else it really
will be wind and **** they sell;!...
--
Tony Sayer