CO2 Storage CCS and or CCU CO2 Use, Geological _Applied Earth Science Input,EU-China Geologists Co-operate to Find Onshore CO2 Sinks

There are more questions than answers in this post, sorry.

My friends and colleagues at MW-Materials World have pointed once more to good approaches and co-operation between Geologists in the EU and in China to fully determine sites suitable for CO2 storage and sequestration: Capturing carbon dioxide in China by MW's reporter R. Mehta.

Perhaps as any good interview should MW's R. Mehta report, raises more questions for comment and debate than answers. The conversation between MW's R. Mehta and Mike Stephenson appears to be good news, and it most certainly is. However I deliberately chose the word storage as opposed to sequestration,favoured perhaps by those concerned with geological time scales. Don't get me wrong, experience in high reliability energy materials (aero-engine, nuclear, petrochem..) strongly recommends aiming for the highest standards, the imponderables of practise can lead to a somewhat lower standards. On the other hand, I believe that engineers and policy makers, not to mention the now GW-GHG sensitive, general public would like estimates, orders of magnitudes, of what "significant onshore storage" means and better we would all appreciate hard facts and best "state of the art" decisions. I recently heard that two French Parliamentarians (independently of political bias) already consider, that globally, there are insufficient suitable CO2 storage-sequestration site (I'll check political quotes). They hope to lead a CO2 users "Lobby". I would expect that the French Deputies have consulted our colleagues at BRGM-France's Geological and Mining Research Authority. That being said the fact that BGS_EU-China are concerned with energy generation is also good news. My scant blogged Venn diagramme: 1. Mining, 2. Power Generation, 3. Materials focused on CO2 sequestration (practice) and many IOM3-Maney online publications still indicates that CO2 storage and sequestration is the weak-link in in-situ global main power generation processes(ie. fossil fuel based). I would be pleased of any reaction and further information following this report, interview and conversation. Finally it is good news that the main new main CO2 emitter over-taking USA, (I believe) is getting involved and accepts assistance.

Links are provided on MW's Environment and Sustainability page5, March 2009 .

Further Reading:
1.EU-China CO2-coach programme
2.NZEC
3. BSG-British Geological Survey's Nascent Site
4. EU Scientific Authority for CO2 storage pdf. News Release 16 March2009. and direct link to the site CO2 GeoNet

"Engineering Skills" in Shorter Supply than previously Imagined!

I have just taken a visit to Dave Bradley's Sciencebase site- mostly about chemstry.

It was a worthwhile visit. Of course it usually is. In this instance the added value concerned not chemistry, but engineering policy.

I stumbled upon a checklist entitled " Technological To-Do List " the list of most important engineering challenges by "experts."

Quite eye opening critical comments where made by David.

In particular he points out that since we are so close to engineering solar power, economically (I am translating liberally) why invest so heavily in Nuclear Fusion?
(NB. I am based in France-but not in the favoured South East of France- where the experimental reactor ITER is to be based. Worse, I remember quite clearly the Nobel prize winner the late Pierre-Gilles de Gennes' criticism of the ITER project. In one sentence P-G. de Gennes pointed out that this project lacked not only the resolution of some fundamental physics problems, but also did not respect the basic scaling rules of sound chemical engineering! NB. P-G, another of my mentors, was until his death, the Director of The Paris School of Industrial Physics & Chemistry, (ENSPCI) and member of the Board, for R&D, of several companies, noteably Rhodia)

As for the GHG-Green House Gases-critics, since we are concerned with "safety engineering safely", the only valid question, to my mind, is what engineering can and will be done to alleviate, mitigate, alter the current predicted "unmanageable" climate changes.

I am pleased he was not to harsh with my "mentor" Rob Socolow, source of my "Wedge-a-War" web-log.

Having let-off some steam, body temperature back to normal, I promise to read Dave Bradley (FRSC) Technological To-Do List on Sciencebase as well as R Socolow's comments at Princeton Engineering & Applied Science with more care, and to accept R Socolow's invitation to visit Engineering Challenges[Link]

R Socolow's invitation

Comments suggestions questions on my interpretation welcome.

Wedge-A-War: Any Old Iron?, Corrosion & Natures Processes

Fe(s)+ H2O(l) +CO2(g)=> FeCO3(s) +H2(g)
iron +water+carbon dioxide => iron carbonate + H2
(where s=solid, l=liquid, g=gas.)

Let the Heavenly Steel Chorus hear -
Metallurgists, Steelmakers, Geologists, dear
Chemical Engineers and Ecologist's plea.
From humble steelmaking, sometime war-mongering,
To white knight planet saviour - eco-engineering,
For "Now's the time and now's the hour" for CO2 sinking,
For scientific method and controlled tinkering.
The above corrosive reaction begs the question:
Any old iron?

[Link to poems & more ]

References to CO2 Corrosion and Hydrogen Production:
1. Corrosion Mechanisms and Control in Hydrocarbon Exploration and Production Operations, D. Kirkwood, Journal of the Metallurgical Club N° 27 1992-1993,The University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland.
2. NIMS-National Institute for Materials Science,Japan.[Link]

Full report on environmentally benign engineering [Link] (3.5Mo format Pdf .

3. Why not use iron? .[Link]format pdf