If these technologies really have the potential to be transformational then it's sad to see such paltry funding. But better than nothing.

Cryogenic Carbon Capture.. doesn't a thermo law make CO2 -> solid uneconomical?

Before the usual CO2 Cassandra’s cry about using CO2 for oil recovery we are carbon negative it takes more CO2 in liquid form to push a barrel of oil out than the oil will release when burned and since oil reservoirs are always covered with a impermeable cap rock which by definition is impermeable to gases and liquids the CO2 is locked there for all time if the natural gas that is almost always found capping oil deposits has not leaked out in 50 million years the CO2 will stay in the space left over for just as long.

My point is there is already a paying market for high pressure liquid CO2 in bulk, we get ours in 9000 gallon tanker trucks or rail cars depending on our site locality relative to rail lines and if we have the right of ways to lay temporary surface CO2 pipelines from a rail terminus to our site. CO2 is liquid at 10 MPA & <300K above that it’s a supercritical fluid its easy to store as a fluid supercritical or not. 300K is 80’F 9bar is ~1200 psi

Ideally it would be nice to have a pipeline from a large coal plant to our sites this would slash our transportation costs for bulk CO2. As for the physics they have 3rd party verification and technical spec available for those who are willing to sigh none disclosure agreements and an investing prospectus arm chair scientists need not apply. I got an immediate reply, as we are a target market for them and I am a licensed Geoscientist in my state. The elegance of this technologies is leveraging the advances in heat exchanger and adiabatic compressor technologies of the last 5 years to eliminate a large portion of the energy necessary to extract and “liquefy” CO2 it comes down to the entropy of phase change for CO2 from gas to solid with a small amount of pumping of a liquid not a gas to final storage pressure elegant is just the right wording. Now if this ever going to go commercial is a matter of political will to capture CO2 not the technologies needed to do it. I don’t drink the koolaid for AGW but any source of cheap CO2 helps my bottom line and I’m all for that.

With all the debate over stimulous and govt spending,the current govt is apparently targetting 'roads to recovery and energy research as priorities.The amounts seem small but well targeted compared to the previous rounds that were more about financial stimulous IE just get money into the economy.
Science has always been an investrment in the future and is critical to the US economy in particular and at this time in its history more so.

Sadly there are many tea party advocates of dumb and dumber in education health and human values (rights)
That can claim ~ 50% of voter interests.
thats democracy in action.

Nothing happens in a vacuum, that is why I believe it is important to contribute to the debate and encourage the politicians to loosen some purse strings in a targetted way.

Unfortunately there are many well funded interests with powerful lobbying ability that would rather see wars on 'every other thing that can't be won' and that often make things worse.

Its good to see much serious investigation and thought on this site that reaches into many matters of importance.

TX,
If you accept that your full post in context is imediately before, then it is far to say in this instance I cannot be misquoting or being selective.
How can you say:
"That said arguing AGW is arguing beliefs which means it’s arguing religion as I am a fully qualified licensed Geoscientist,"

And follow with:
"The consent of the government is a natural right given by God no man can take that away and to attempt to do so only invites war and bloodshed"

Not that I disagree with strong western democracies, just that you seem to be flipping around a bit.

That you seem to be claiming a belief in "god given rights" I can only think to ask if you believe in literal translations from the bible too or which authority do you refer to?
IE any particular god viz the many religions and versions of each?

As a scientist with a sense of planetary evolution, I assume you are not one that takes many historical religious written work as a singular truth?
The next bit is also badly written and confusing.
"The consent of the government is a natural right given by God no man can take that away and to attempt to do so only invites war and bloodshed as men have the right to choose our form of government always."

There are rulers out there to this day insisting that god gave the right to them to do as they "say" some even hold regular democratic elections.

As I did not bring the God or religion issue up, and you seem content to allow it to be a part of your reasoning, can I ask how you reconcile your "beliefs with scientific discipline.

I much prefer the simpler matter of CCS which was the original context of our discussion.

TX and Arnold: good dialogue. Illuminating.

Dakota Gasification makes methane (natural gas) out of air, coal and water. They also make ammonia out of air, coal and water. The sulphur in the coal is mostly captured and combined with the ammonia to make ammonium sulphate fertilizer. Sulphur is a necessary element for plant growth as is nitrogen, so nitrogen oxides and sulphur oxides are needed in the soil, but not in the air. What is most interesting is that the Carbon-Dioxide that is also made from the coal in these processes is put into a pipeline and shipped over a hundred miles into Canada to maintain the production of an oilfield. Any CO2 that comes up with the oil could be recycled, but not much does. Sulphur compounds are also piped with the CO2 to increase the demonstrated efficiency of the process. It is possible that liquid or dissolved CO2 can also be transported along with oil products in some pipelines or it might even make crude oil cheaper to transport.

Whilst not very energy efficient, C302 could be produced from coal and air and CO2 and put into depleted oil fields as a liquid or polymerised solid.

The present oilfield in Canada does not require all of the carbon-dioxide produced by Dakota, but the pipeline could possibly be extended. There are many underground minerals that can combine with CO2 permanently so the gas could not be recovered unless at great expense. If the underground temperatures are low, liquid or even supercritical CO2 can dissolve heavy hydrocarbons to liquify them. In the ultimate case, pure oxygen and CO2 can be used to make gas out of many remaining hydrocarbons at high temperatures and there is reason to believe that microorganisms can do this conversion at low temperatures, but more CO2 is produced.

In a very few days or even hours, Dakota Gasification could demonstrate a system that generated electricity from coal without releasing any CO2 into the air. They could even start producing more hydrogen and convert their neighboring power plant to burning pure hydrogen, but they would have to find a market for their CO2 and perhaps build new and bigger CO2 pipelines as well as building the new hydrogen production reactors.

The Alberta tar sands project could absorb much CO2 if the extraction process for the surface deposits used liquid CO2 inside pressure vessels instead of water and a solution of bitumen and CO2 might be easier to pump to the refinery. The CO2 could be returned in a parallel pipeline or released for oil fields in the area. There is a CO2 pipeline that feeds CO2 to greenhouses in Europe. The ability to make combination steel and plastic pipelines for high pressures exists. Alupex is similar for low presure gas tight plastic pipes.

Many comments about the acidification of the Ocean are false on their very idea as the ocean is very alkaline with its contained magnesium and calcium. The great volume of the ocean has much magnesium and calcium and these are necessary to build the shells and reefs but so is CO2. The surface waters of the ocean, even, have never become acid but they have become less alkaline.

Instead of requiring ships to use low sulphur fuels, they should be required to have a system that deposits the sulphur oxides in the water and this is easily done because the ocean has an alkaline reaction. This sulphur is necessary for ocean photosynthesis. The same can be said about nitrogen oxides. Perhaps the ships can be required to carry iron and deposit it in the ocean as iron sulphate or sulphite which will greatly increase the photo synthetic production of the ocean. ..HG..

It is near the end of the time when alternating current is the major way to put electrical energy into buildings to run lights and motors. Most lights being installed now can run on direct current with no or slight modifications and the old carbon and tungsten lights can do it as well. Motors now use electronic drives to match the speed with the mechanical energy actually needed for fans and pumps. LG has even eliminated the motor from some of its refrigerators and uses electromagnetically propelled free pistons at much higher efficiency.

All of this means that electronically switched reluctance motors and generators can replace induction motors and permanent magnet motors with higher efficiency and lower cost, they and lighting can use direct current along with many other loads such as computers. An IBM data center at a university now has direct current distribution.

The silicon electronic switches can be produced at low prices in large quantities. There may be some limited places where switched reluctance motors are not suitable, but especially the free piston compressor from LG can be switched reluctance. Switched reluctance motors have been used for their reliability in aircraft for many years.

DC systems in buildings waste less power in the conduits and a large flywheel connected to a switched reluctance motor can be used to provide power until diesel generators can be brought on line. Even the wiring system stores power in a DC system. Batteries can also be used. Even cheap old DC motors with flywheels can keep power flowing for a few seconds for computers while the grid recovers.

Electronics allow the use of inverters of all types and sizes to be used to power older devices from the DC system with higher reliability than the grid does, even desktop and laptop computers. Many, or even most, electronic inverters now made have a high voltage direct current intermediate section that can be fed high voltage directly. Many computer power supplies can do this too. Many CFLs can do this as well. ..HG..

Something stinky fishy about a person claiming to have done a thesis on palo anything as the word does not exist.
TX is not what he claims to be.- "I am a fully qualified licensed Geoscientist," (no such thing)
There are similar charlatans like him on this site so people, BE AWARE.

"While I don't agree with AGW and yes this is most certainly in my scientific field you get that I am a Geoscientist right? My masters thesis was in marine palo-biology as oil is almost always found in sedimentary formations of palo-marine algae so I have done quite a bit of paloclimate research as only certain climatic conditions are...." Blather Blather.