<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: CCS, the cost, the risk, and the law of unintended consequences</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2009/10/11/ccs-the-cost-the-risk-and-the-law-of-unintended-consequences/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2009/10/11/ccs-the-cost-the-risk-and-the-law-of-unintended-consequences/</link>
	<description>Trends, happenings and innovations in the clean technology market</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:28:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jo</title>
		<link>http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2009/10/11/ccs-the-cost-the-risk-and-the-law-of-unintended-consequences/comment-page-1/#comment-7462</link>
		<dc:creator>Jo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:04:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cleanbreak.ca/?p=1837#comment-7462</guid>
		<description>I have some concerns about CCS as well, but underground (drinking) water tables becoming carbonated isn&#039;t one of them. Perhaps those fears can be appeased by some soda bottlers association somewhere? The risk here haven&#039;t been properly described and could benefit from more debate.

In the meantime:
CO2 has been getting pumped underground into improve flow in oilfields for quite awhile now, so there is field data to work with on this. Natural gas is also being stored underground if you need data on a truly volatile gas.

What I;m (primarily) concerned about is the cost...
Here&#039;s a pretty cool little Canadian company that&#039;s using enzymes to reduce the cost of carbon capture dramatically!  It&#039;s the same basic process that our lungs use ! ! !

   http://envirogy.wordpress.com/2009/09/11/capturing-climate-change/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have some concerns about CCS as well, but underground (drinking) water tables becoming carbonated isn&#8217;t one of them. Perhaps those fears can be appeased by some soda bottlers association somewhere? The risk here haven&#8217;t been properly described and could benefit from more debate.</p>
<p>In the meantime:<br />
CO2 has been getting pumped underground into improve flow in oilfields for quite awhile now, so there is field data to work with on this. Natural gas is also being stored underground if you need data on a truly volatile gas.</p>
<p>What I;m (primarily) concerned about is the cost&#8230;<br />
Here&#8217;s a pretty cool little Canadian company that&#8217;s using enzymes to reduce the cost of carbon capture dramatically!  It&#8217;s the same basic process that our lungs use ! ! !</p>
<p>   <a href="http://envirogy.wordpress.com/2009/09/11/capturing-climate-change/" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview('/outbound/comment/envirogy.wordpress.com');" rel="nofollow">http://envirogy.wordpress.com/2009/09/11/capturing-climate-change/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Milan</title>
		<link>http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2009/10/11/ccs-the-cost-the-risk-and-the-law-of-unintended-consequences/comment-page-1/#comment-7398</link>
		<dc:creator>Milan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 21:32:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cleanbreak.ca/?p=1837#comment-7398</guid>
		<description>This is objectionable for two major reasons:

1) We are putting too many of our eggs in the CCS basket. We need alternatives, if it proves to be unsafe, ineffective, or unaffordable.

2) The costs associated with mitigation should be borne by polluters, not by society at large.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is objectionable for two major reasons:</p>
<p>1) We are putting too many of our eggs in the CCS basket. We need alternatives, if it proves to be unsafe, ineffective, or unaffordable.</p>
<p>2) The costs associated with mitigation should be borne by polluters, not by society at large.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

