 |
|
Cruddy
|
|
A study came out of the US a couple weeks ago showing that the cheapest way to reduce CO2 levels... is plant more trees.
Hardly rocket science, is it?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
shawnmmcc
|
|
The ooze is a subduction zone is highly stable except to green alarmists. That's why we take cores out of it going thousands of years - it forms very even nicely undisturbed layers. The depths we are talking about are typically at four-seven miles, and the movement is inches per year. It will take several thousand years to subduct into the trench, then circulate around the mantle, and then maybe get into a volcano. By the time those rocks start eroding, you are looking at realistic depletion by time.
Because it is both cold and anaerobic, I did not say a biological dead zone. A desert environment has specific implications of low biological activity, normally due to lack of water. Since the only thing living in that kind of environment is going to be anaerobic (no free oxygen) microbes, that is not going to produce the turnover of sediments that the greens prattle on about.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Richelieu
|
|
Gatineau
Dec 2001 time: 00:24
|
|
Are there any ways that have been devised to harness the power in waves?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Geronimo
|
|
st cloud USA
Jan 1970 time: 05:24
|
|
Nuclear waste is only 'waste' because we currently have no use for it. However radioactive substances and unnatural isotopes certainly might have some use in the future. Rather than trying to drop the stuff into subduction zones or otherwise make it totally inaccessable I'd rather it was just stored in dry caves in some exceptionally stable portion of the earths crust and left there until we find uses for it.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24. Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|