• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Washington Post: Oman’s mountains may hold clues for reversing climate change

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thought this was interesting

Deep in the jagged red mountains of Oman, geologists are searching for an efficient and cheap way to remove carbon dioxide from the air and oceans — and perhaps begin to reverse climate change.

They are coring samples from one of the world’s only exposed sections of the Earth’s mantle to uncover how a spontaneous natural process millions of years ago transformed carbon dioxide into limestone and marble.

As the world mobilizes to confront climate change, the main focus has been on reducing emissions through fuel efficient cars and cleaner power plants. But some researchers are also testing ways to remove or recycle carbon already in the seas and sky.

Peter Kelemen, a 61-year-old geochemist at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, has been exploring Oman’s hills for nearly three decades. “You can walk down these beautiful canyons and basically descend 20 kilometers (12 miles) into the earth’s interior,” he said.

The sultanate boasts the largest exposed sections of the Earth’s mantle, thrust up by plate tectonics millions of years ago. The mantle contains peridotite, a rock that reacts with the carbon in air and water to form marble and limestone.

“Every single magnesium atom in these rocks has made friends with the carbon dioxide to form solid limestone, magnesium carbonate, plus quartz,” he said as he patted a rust-colored boulder in the Wadi Mansah valley.

“There’s about a billion tons of CO2 in this mountain,” he said, pointing off to the east.

He and a team of 40 scientists have formed the Oman Drilling Project in order to better understand how that process works and whether it could be used to scrub the earth’s carbon-laden atmosphere. The $3.5 million project has support from across the globe, including NASA.

Now to see how many people only see the words "Climate Change" in the title and immediately rush to post the usual defeatism without actually reading anything here.
 

Beartruck

Member
Im not quite as defeatist as most. Science caused this mess, but science can also fix or least mitigate it. Lord knows most people won't change their lifestyles so carbon capture seems like our best hope. Only problem is implementing it on a planetary scale, which is damn close to practically terraforming tech.
 

captive

Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
Fight on multiple fronts.

Im likibg the things ive seen where science is tesring the efficacy of literally putting a filter over power plants to capture the polution at the source.

Would be really cool if on a small scale you could put "air filters" out in your yard that capture carbon emmissions. Like solar panels for residential homes, but on a bigger scale, spread it out every where.
 

jett

D-Member
That's interesting, but I'm not sure how climate change begins to be reversed, eventually. What's the hypothetical end goal? Build factories around the world that expel some magical compound derived from these mountains that recycles the CO2 in the atmosphere?
 

Stumpokapow

listen to the mad man
That's interesting, but I'm not sure how climate change begins to be reversed, eventually. What's the hypothetical end goal? Build factories around the world that expel some magical compound derived from these mountains that recycles the CO2 in the atmosphere?

The pitch is to build giant machines to pull CO2 out of the air and get solid matter that we can then bury or use.
 
That sounds even more complicated.

I mean I don't doubt the human capacity to do it. I think the nuclear story is a good example of how quickly something extremely complicated can be produced if we are set on it

Either way I don't think lowering emissions will work anymore
 
I mean I don't doubt the human capacity to do it. I think the nuclear story is a good example of how quickly something extremely complicated can be produced if we are set on it

Either way I don't think lowering emissions will work anymore

Yeah we can definitely do this. Still gotta lower emissions though, and we can if we tried.
 

Aikidoka

Member
The pitch is to build giant machines to pull CO2 out of the air and get solid matter that we can then bury or use.

Yeah, but from the article the current goal is to figure out how the 90 million year process even works, then try and figure out if it's possible to speed it up to a rate that would make a meaningful difference for us. And then start thinking about building things.

It's great that the OP is not a "defeatist" and whatnot, but this research here is probably not the one to prop-up as anything substantial.
 

jett

D-Member
I mean I don't doubt the human capacity to do it. I think the nuclear story is a good example of how quickly something extremely complicated can be produced if we are set on it

Either way I don't think lowering emissions will work anymore

I don't think it was ever going to work. People can call me cynical if they want, but our entire way of life revolves around fossil fuels.

Maybe scientists will some day create the miracle tech needed to reverse climate change. Because that's really the only hope.
 

JJDubz

Member
If I'm remembering correctly, Iceland has had some really great success locking up CO2. Pretty sure it far exceeded their guesses with a super high success rate.
 

AstroLad

Hail to the KING baby
I don't think it was ever going to work. People can call me cynical if they want, but our entire way of life revolves around fossil fuels.

Maybe scientists will some day create the miracle tech needed to reverse climate change. Because that's really the only hope.

just figure out a way for fat rich white guys to make a ton of money off it and we'll be on a rocketship to the moon with this stuff. there'll be machines on every street corner
 

DrSlek

Member
Fight on multiple fronts.

Im likibg the things ive seen where science is tesring the efficacy of literally putting a filter over power plants to capture the polution at the source.

Would be really cool if on a small scale you could put "air filters" out in your yard that capture carbon emmissions. Like solar panels for residential homes, but on a bigger scale, spread it out every where.

There's even ways to get cattle ranches involved, while also increasing their productivity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pI
 

Khaz

Member
Im not quite as defeatist as most. Science caused this mess, but science can also fix or least mitigate it. Lord knows most people won't change their lifestyles so carbon capture seems like our best hope. Only problem is implementing it on a planetary scale, which is damn close to practically terraforming tech.

I'm sorry, what?
 

Fuchsdh

Member
I mean I don't doubt the human capacity to do it. I think the nuclear story is a good example of how quickly something extremely complicated can be produced if we are set on it

Either way I don't think lowering emissions will work anymore

Lowering emissions has always been a stalling tactic, basically, especially since even if we cut emissions now there's enough CO2 out there to cause positive feedback loops that would be damaging.

This stuff is ultimately the only way we're going to reverse climate change. I had never heard of this exposed portion of the mantle, though. Fascinating geology, leaving aside potential implications for climate change mitigation.
 

Ac30

Member
If I'm remembering correctly, Iceland has had some really great success locking up CO2. Pretty sure it far exceeded their guesses with a super high success rate.

From what I remember it uses up an arseload of water and energy, though, which is the main problem - I'm assuming the scientist here are looking for a natural catalyst to increase the speed or lower the energy requirements of the process.
 
How about we just stop doing what is causing it instead of trying to pretend we aren't. Seems good if it helps but no one learns or has accountability.
 

Choabac

Member
The $3.5 million project has support from across the globe, including NASA

That's not much money at all. Maybe WaPo meant $35 million? I don't see how else they could fund a research project with 40 scientists.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom