A dash of lime -- a new twist that may cut CO2 levels back to pre-industrial levels

July 21, 2008

Scientists say they have found a workable way of reducing CO2 levels in the atmosphere by adding lime to seawater. And they think it has the potential to dramatically reverse CO2 accumulation in the atmosphere, reports Cath O'Driscoll in SCI's Chemistry & Industry magazine published today.

Shell is so impressed with the new approach that it is funding an investigation into its economic feasibility. 'We think it's a promising idea,' says Shell's Gilles Bertherin, a coordinator on the project. 'There are potentially huge environmental benefits from addressing climate change – and adding calcium hydroxide to seawater will also mitigate the effects of ocean acidification, so it should have a positive impact on the marine environment.'

Adding lime to seawater increases alkalinity, boosting seawater's ability to absorb CO2 from air and reducing the tendency to release it back again.

However, the idea, which has been bandied about for years, was thought unworkable because of the expense of obtaining lime from limestone and the amount of CO2 released in the process.

Tim Kruger, a management consultant at London firm Corven is the brains behind the plan to resurrect the lime process. He argues that it could be made workable by locating it in regions that have a combination of low-cost 'stranded' energy considered too remote to be economically viable to exploit – like flared natural gas or solar energy in deserts – and that are rich in limestone, making it feasible for calcination to take place on site.

Kruger says: 'There are many such places – for example, Australia's Nullarbor Plain would be a prime location for this process, as it has 10 000km3 of limestone and soaks up roughly 20MJ/m2 of solar irradiation every day.'

The process of making lime generates CO2, but adding the lime to seawater absorbs almost twice as much CO2. The overall process is therefore 'carbon negative'.

'This process has the potential to reverse the accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere. It would be possible to reduce CO2 to pre-industrial levels,' Kruger says.

And Professor Klaus Lackner, a researcher in the field from Columbia University, says: 'The theoretical CO2 balance is roughly right…it is certainly worth thinking through carefully.'

The oceans are already the world's largest carbon sink, absorbing 2bn tonnes of carbon every year. Increasing absorption ability by just a few percent could dramatically increase CO2 uptake from the atmosphere.

This project is being developed in an open source manner. To find out more, please go to http://www.cquestrate.com , a new website, launched today.

Source: Society of Chemical Industry

3.8 /5 (140 votes)  

Filter


Move the slider to adjust rank threshold, so that you can hide some of the comments.


Display comments: newest first

Lord_jag
Jul 21, 2008

Rank: 2.4 / 5 (11)
uh huh... and what happens to sea life when we change the oceans ph?
earls
Jul 21, 2008

Rank: 3.6 / 5 (9)
...

"adding calcium hydroxide to seawater will also mitigate the effects of ocean acidification, so it should have a positive impact on the marine environment.'"

Lets give it a shot.
deatopmg
Jul 21, 2008

Rank: 3.2 / 5 (14)
as a chemist it sounds like more smoke and mirrors to me.

CaCO3 heat ---> CO2 Ca(OH)2 [lime]
Ca(OH)2 2C02 ---> Ca(HCO3)2

why not? CaCO3 CO2 ---> Ca(HCO3)2

which is the same thing w/out the initial expenditure of energy but that may not be patentable. both are really obvious to those skilled in the art.

Problem is that the pH of seawater is above 8 and Ca(HCO3)2 is below 7. AND what about the massive amounts of limestone exposed to seawater already?

therefore; more smoke and mirrors
thinking
Jul 21, 2008

Rank: 2.5 / 5 (12)
Someone save us from the wacky environmentalists.... they will destroy the earth trying to save it..... I though we want to stop pollution.... adding stuff to the oceans purposly sounds dangerous....
LuckyExplorer
Jul 21, 2008

Rank: 3.5 / 5 (10)
Nonsense?
1. According to: The process of making lime generates CO2, but adding the lime to seawater absorbs almost twice as much CO2. The overall process is therefore 'carbon negative'. -->

To absorb 1kg CO2 from fossil fuel we have to produce another kg CO2 by adding lime. --> That also means we need twice as much energy than today! Crazy!

2. We today know that the ocean cannot absorb as much CO2 as we would like without risk for the ecology. -->
This is not a solution! This is just - stupid how we men are - shifting one problem to another, without knowledge about the sequences!
Fritz
Jul 21, 2008

Rank: 2.1 / 5 (11)
I think when we really begin to burn up -- which I suspect isn't that far away -- we will be desparate to try anything. This sounds like a desparate measure.
Ebrads
Jul 21, 2008

Rank: 3.6 / 5 (13)
I'll reserve my judgment until I see more information, but my gut says it's a bad idea.
MikeB
Jul 21, 2008

Rank: 2.3 / 5 (19)
The climate crisis isn't really about CO2 anyway. It is about controlling you and collecting more money from you. So anything that might really help will be vetoed by Gore and his companions.
That's why nuclear is also a very very bad thing.
ShadowRam
Jul 21, 2008

Rank: 3.6 / 5 (9)
This is a very idiotic idea...
Lets not fix things by adding...

Lets fix things by taking away whats causing the problem...
Mercury_01
Jul 21, 2008

Rank: 2.9 / 5 (14)
This is all pure bologna anyway. Ive tried this experiment countless times in my own home. C02 levels remained the same in 100% of all rum and cokes after adding lime.
orlandorr
Jul 21, 2008

Rank: 2.5 / 5 (8)
Mmmm... I have a bad feeling about this idea :/
mattytheory
Jul 21, 2008

Rank: 3 / 5 (7)
^I agree.

It is obvious, from how we "solve problems" historically, that there are going to be unforeseen consequences from this action. In the past, we shift problems from one thing to another, and, in the process, tend to make things much worse overall. The ocean is a major driving factor of the food chain and the global environment. If we are going to mess around with it, then we had better understand EXACTLY what it is we are changing and what the consequences of those changes could be. We are already in a time of environmental distress and any miscalculation could severely exacerbate existing problems. No half-assing this, for I believe that the (possibly immediate) future of life on this planet depends heavily on our actions now.

I think ShadowRam has it right: "This is a very idiotic idea... Lets not fix things by adding... Lets fix things by taking away whats causing the problem..."
vlam67
Jul 21, 2008

Rank: 2.2 / 5 (6)
IN a nutshell, they are proposing a CO2 transfer mechanism from the air to the ocean. Gosh, as if the problem of acidifying the ocean and its consequences are not bad enough as it already is...And when the balance is tipped, marine life is going to hell, then the acidic soup under the heat input from the sun will release the CO2 back again...for a mega greenhouse effect!
dbren
Jul 21, 2008

Rank: 1.9 / 5 (13)
I'm still waiting for Gore to propose banning pop and beer.
drmaxx
Jul 21, 2008

Rank: 3.3 / 5 (6)
This just might work IF the lime added does not precipiate as calciumcarbonate (limestone!). So either
* the water is acidic enough to keep the limestone soluble, then you also can add powdered limestone and it will dissolve with the same effect = no energy input needed
OR
* the water is not acidic enough to keep the calciumcarbonate above the solubilityproduct then you precipitate limestone.

So something is fishy about the proposition and these people obviously have no clue about aqatic chemistry!
CWFlink
Jul 22, 2008

Rank: 2.1 / 5 (7)
"So something is fishy about the proposition and these people obviously have no clue about aqatic chemistry!"

...so they are perfectly qualified to become leaders of the world and earn a Nobel Prize!

When will we learn that there is a big difference between being able to spot a mess and being able to clean it up ????

P.S. ...anyone notice that if we had not done such a great job cleaning up particulate pollution the increased cloud cover would have compensated for the higher CO2 levels by reflecting more of the sun's radiation back into space???? This lime (lame?) solution would NOT be the first time our intervention resulted in unfortunate unintended consequences.
jeffsaunders
Jul 22, 2008

Rank: 1.3 / 5 (6)
OK lets hope someone involved in this project / concept / idea reads our reactions to the idea expressed in these comments.

Mad scientists it seems are NOT just the product of horror stories - they seem to be REAL.

Lets hope that the idea gets added to the other ideas including the ones that include tying a rope to South America and dragging it back across the Atlantic and joining it up with Africa.
nealjking
Jul 22, 2008

Rank: 4.3 / 5 (7)
Well, I'm not good in chemistry, so I won't comment on the technical details.

However, according to Hansen, we're already above the 350 ppm of CO2 that he thinks is dangerous. If that's right, we have to go carbon-negative eventually. How do we do that? Turn everything into forests again?

Chemistry may be the right answer.
menkaur
Jul 22, 2008

Rank: 1.6 / 5 (12)
well, now crazy co2 haters can shut up and start mixing water and lame and let everyone else live in peace. this occupation would perfectly fit their qualification anyway
by the way, if you're preferring banning all of the possible co2 sources, you probably should stop breathing... that's producing co2
MattJ
Jul 22, 2008

Rank: 2.6 / 5 (8)
The comments so far accomplish one thing: illustrate why humanity as a whole, is not at all likely to solve the problem before global warming destroys civilization.

So few of the comments show any understanding of the basic issues! But then again, this is to be expected, when the article itself shows no better than an elementary understanding of high school chemistry, and none at all of the "law of unintended consequences".

Come on now! We do NOT know what the effect of all this added lime will be on aquatic life. It is incredibly arrogant and presumptuous to state -- as this article did -- that it will be good.
minimegamonkeyman
Jul 22, 2008

Rank: 2.8 / 5 (4)
What happens when the ocean goes from high concentrations of acidic substances to high concentrations of alkaline substances? We'd have to stop adding lime... and we'd be right back where we started! This proposal constitutes a quick fix, with high potential for unintended consequences or unforeseen circumstances which would force us to give it up. The underlying problem remains the same: that we need to slow down our carbon emissions.
Plurk
Jul 22, 2008

Rank: 4.8 / 5 (4)
The premise of the article is to conduct a feasibility study. There is nothing wrong with investigating this emergency measure. Emphasis on 'emergency measure'. Implementing it is a whole other matter.
barakn
Jul 22, 2008

Rank: 4.4 / 5 (9)
The source of the smoke and mirrors appears to be deatompg.
CaCO3 heat ---> CO2 Ca(OH)2 [lime] is nonsense. It is instead
CaCO3 heat ---> CO2 CaO [quicklime] They won't bother to hydrate the quicklime because: 1. They're in a desert 2. They don't need extra weight while transporting it 3. They're going to be dumping it in water anyway.

"why not? CaCO3 CO2 ---> Ca(HCO3)2"
Because the ocean is basic, and CaCO3, a.k.a. limestone, is insoluble in a basic solution. This is also not a balanced reaction, as the source of the H is not even mentioned. There's also no valid reason to state "the pH of seawater is above 8 and Ca(HCO3)2 is below 7," apparently a reference to the pK1 of carboxylic acid, but that refers to the equilibrium between carboxylic acid and bicarbonate, whereas at the pH of seawater the main species are bicarbonate and carbonate, with a pK of 10.33, Another relevant reaction in the seawater pH range is CO2 H2O -> H HCO3-, pK 7.82.

What's really going on?
CaO H2O -> Ca2 2OH-

OH- HCO3- -> CO32- H2O

Ca2 CO32- -> CaCO3(s)
___________________________

= CaO HCO3- -> CaCO3(s) OH- (reaction 1)

Thus the added calcium precipitates out, taking one CO2 equivalent with it.

Also:

CO2(g) -> CO2(aq)

CO2(aq) H2O -> H HCO3-
____________________________

= CO2(g) H2O -> H HCO3- (reaction 2)

This is where the extra hydroxide from reaction 1 comes into play. It reacts with and removes the H from the RHS of reaction 2. This drives the equilibrium of the reaction to the right, pulling CO2 out of the air and converting it into aqueous bicarbonate.
barakn
Jul 22, 2008

Rank: 4 / 5 (3)
Real nice of the physorg comment system to filter out stray pluses and minuses. Makes chemical reactions really easy to read. Not.
Mercury_01
Jul 23, 2008

Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
This idea in only slightly better than covering the arctic ocean with billions of rolls of sea ice-inducing saran wrap.
deatopmg
Jul 23, 2008

Rank: 5 / 5 (3)
The source of the smoke and mirrors appears to be deatompg.
CaCO3 heat ---> CO2 Ca(OH)2 [lime] is nonsense. It is instead
CaCO3 heat ---> CO2 CaO [quicklime] They won't bother to hydrate the quicklime because: 1. They're in a desert 2. They don't need extra weight while transporting it 3. They're going to be dumping it in water anyway.

"why not? CaCO3 CO2 ---> Ca(HCO3)2"
Because the ocean is basic, and CaCO3, a.k.a. limestone, is insoluble in a basic solution. This is also not a balanced reaction, as the source of the H is not even mentioned. There's also no valid reason to state "the pH of seawater is above 8 and Ca(HCO3)2 is below 7," apparently a reference to the pK1 of carboxylic acid, but that refers to the equilibrium between carboxylic acid and bicarbonate, whereas at the pH of seawater the main species are bicarbonate and carbonate, with a pK of 10.33, Another relevant reaction in the seawater pH range is CO2 H2O -> H HCO3-, pK 7.82.

What's really going on?
CaO H2O -> Ca2 2OH-

OH- HCO3- -> CO32- H2O

Ca2 CO32- -> CaCO3(s)
___________________________

= CaO HCO3- -> CaCO3(s) OH- (reaction 1)

Thus the added calcium precipitates out, taking one CO2 equivalent with it.

Also:

CO2(g) -> CO2(aq)

CO2(aq) H2O -> H HCO3-
____________________________

= CO2(g) H2O -> H HCO3- (reaction 2)

This is where the extra hydroxide from reaction 1 comes into play. It reacts with and removes the H from the RHS of reaction 2. This drives the equilibrium of the reaction to the right, pulling CO2 out of the air and converting it into aqueous bicarbonate.

Thanks!
thku4grace
Jul 26, 2008

Rank: 1 / 5 (3)
I find it quite interesting that anyone would propose a solution to a perceived dilemma without having considered whether sunspot activity or underwater volcanoes will cooperate with this hypothetical solution.
GuruShabu
Jul 26, 2008

Rank: 2.3 / 5 (3)
Absolutely crap.
Gore's power, nuclear power money greed with nothing scientific.
The Earth is very healthy as it was and it will be.
State of fear petty politics.
And btw, talking about Earth's healthy is what "they" want us to do. The temperatures, the concentration of CO2 are NOT maximum or minimum that have not been reached in past and nare (1000s of years) in future, so why all this fuss?
$$$$$$$! and Power!
Enthalpy
Jul 26, 2008

Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Converting carbonate to bicarbonates, why not. Other people suggested to convert silicates to silica and carbonates, which may need more energy.

I don't see neither why the extra step through CaO is useful. Is the direct reaction with CaCO3 too difficult? Increasing reaction surfaces looks easier to me than providing the energy to split CaCO3.

But why the hell use the Ocean for that mess? Dump the bicarbonates in the same Nullarbor plain! Anyone having seen the reaction of CaO with water would answer: do it somewhere else.

The very same bicarbonates (which are separated from the Ca ions as soon as they're dissolved) are already increasing in seawater, making it more acid (or less alkaline) and dissolving the shell of marine organisms.

O yes, I've heard bicarbonates are unstable in air and go back to carbonates and CO2, that's how stalactites form. Isn't there any better idea than an ocean to stabilize bicarbonates?
GrayMouser
Jul 26, 2008

Rank: not rated yet
Some questions:
1) Wouldn't adding lime to the oceans would be polluting them?

2) Are these organic limes?
Cyril
Jul 27, 2008

Rank: 4 / 5 (1)
Converting carbonate to bicarbonates, why not. Other people suggested to convert silicates to silica and carbonates, which may need more energy.

O yes, I've heard bicarbonates are unstable in air and go back to carbonates and CO2, that's how stalactites form. Isn't there any better idea than an ocean to stabilize bicarbonates?


Magnesium silicates offer a promising solution, in particular olivine seems suitable. Doesn't require any energy, except that for mining, crushing and bringing it to the sea, which is quite acceptable.

http://www.google...ch?hl=nl&q=olivine sequestration&meta=

Cyril
Jul 30, 2008

Rank: not rated yet
Link doesn't work, hmm! Physorg is buggy.

Just google 'olvine sequestration'
Cyril
Aug 04, 2008

Rank: not rated yet
er, 'olivine sequestration'
Modernmystic
Aug 21, 2008

Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
A few well placed rather large bombs in the Sahara per year will solve the "problem" too....
Rank 3.8 /5 (140 votes)
Tags

Relevant PhysicsForums posts

More news stories

As strong as an insect's shell

Harvard researchers at the Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering have come up with a tough, low-cost, biodegradable material inspired by insects’ hard outer shells. The material’s ...

Chemistry / Materials Science

created 14 hours ago | popularity 5 / 5 (4) | comments 0

Economizing chemistry, atom by atom

In chemistry, downsizing can have positive attributes. Reducing the number of steps and reagents in synthetic reactions, for example, enables chemists to boost their productivity while reducing their environmental ...

Chemistry / Materials Science

created 13 hours ago | popularity not rated yet | comments 0

Scientists rediscover self-healing silicone mechanism from the 1950s

(PhysOrg.com) -- Research in self-healing organic polymers has grown recently, but one simple self-healing mechanism from more than 60 years ago has been nearly forgotten until now. Using this mechanism, which ...

Chemistry / Polymers

created Jan 30, 2012 | popularity 4.4 / 5 (21) | comments 10 | with audio podcast report

Study proves plausibility of new pathway to life's chemical building blocks

For decades, chemists considered a chemical pathway known as the formose reaction the only route for producing sugars essential for life to begin, but more recent research has called into question the plausibility of such ...

Chemistry / Biochemistry

created Jan 31, 2012 | popularity 5 / 5 (5) | comments 6 | with audio podcast

Plant power: The ultimate way to 'go green'?

Researchers are turning to plants and solar power in the search for new sources of renewable and sustainable energy that can support the transition from rapidly depleting fossil fuels to a bio-based society. An article published ...

Chemistry / Biochemistry

created Feb 02, 2012 | popularity 3.5 / 5 (2) | comments 0 | with audio podcast


Amazon fungi found that eat polyurethane, even without oxygen

(PhysOrg.com) -- Until now polyurethane has been considered non-biodegradable, but a group of students from Yale University in the US has found fungi that will not only eat and digest it, they will do so even in the absence ...

Scientists chart high-precision map of Milky Way's magnetic fields

(PhysOrg.com) -- Scientists at the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) are part of an international team that has pooled their radio observations into a database, producing the highest precision map to date of ...

Whole exome sequencing identifies cause of metabolic disease

Sequencing a patient's entire genome to discover the source of his or her disease is not routine – yet. But geneticists are getting close.

Hearing metaphors activates brain regions involved in sensory experience

When a friend tells you she had a rough day, do you feel sandpaper under your fingers? The brain may be replaying sensory experiences to help understand common metaphors, new research suggests.

Renowned physicist invents microscope that can peer at living brain cells

(PhysOrg.com) -- Ever since scientists began studying the brain, they’ve wanted to get a better look at what was going on. Researchers have poked and prodded and looked at dead cells under electron microscopes, ...

New kind of high-temperature photonic crystal could someday power everything from smartphones to spacecraft

A team of MIT researchers has developed a way of making a high-temperature version of a kind of materials called photonic crystals, using metals such as tungsten or tantalum. The new materials — which ...