Comments:University of Calgary scientist Keith cracks carbon capture conundrum

Should North American governments invest in bringing this technology to market?

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

• Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
• Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
• You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading

Click here to add a new comment · Add onto existing comments

Technology

Certainly this technology should be explored by US markets. With worldwide concerns about global warming increasing by the day, investing in this technology would not only be an investment in the environment, but also an economic goldmine. Although the technology may not be ready for widespread implementation, it is clearly ready to set off a technological revolution. This technology looks much more promising than many of the other assets that the US is currently investing in.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.61.77.11 (talk) 16:32, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

This and others. The University of Minnesota built a prototype energy cell that used thin-film technology to provide pure hydrogen from liquid fuels like alcohol or gasoline. Meaning that we could all switch to hydrogen cell driven vehicles *today*, without any other changes to the fuel infrastructure, pumping from the same fueling stations.

But they did that almost 10 years ago. And the US government has done nothing to implement it, or convince automakers to use it. Instead we have "hybrid" cars which barely get any better fuel economy than economical cars, but cost the environment and the consumer twice as much. - Amgine | ^t 16:39, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Eh, I think you are both oversimplifying and exaggerating the findings of Lanny Schmidt (assuming you are talking about this). As of September, Schmidt's research hasn't yielded any workable results, as most require extreme heat, which—as you can imagine—requires a lot of energy in itself. --SVTCobra 22:42, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

sounds promising, especially if it could be made with a small form factor and inexpensively. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.27.237.161 (talk) 15:13, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Carbon sequestration

As world leaders in pollution (per capita), it is our obligation to spearhead efforts to combat global warming. Carbon dioxide levels are currently higher than they have been in the past six hundred thousand years. Our planet is akin to glass of ice water, staying at the same temperature until all of the ice melts and then heating up. We need to remove significant amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere in order to ensure that we remain in a hospitable environment.

68.111.244.83 18:03, 5 October 2008 (UTC)