advertisement


CO2 crisis.

I wonder how much the CO2 used in food and drink production contributes to the increase in atmospheric CO2 levels? Perhaps we should phase it out altogether: no more Champagne, no more beer, no more suffocated pigs. The list is endless.
 
Fair question Mike -but I suggest it's a non-starter in terms of global warming potential; C02 used in such processes,is derived for the job, almost entirely-from other extant processes- a productive use of byproduct, not a thing generated for purpose. C02 as a by product from ammonia (fertiliser and many other industrial uses) is an enormous slice of the domestic C02 supply/market; whereas -say -your example - C02 as a side-effect or waste from brewing -when you think about it, cannot be significantly-different from so much organic material left to rot instead ( -say - like natural woodland: there is carbohydrate, yeasts, time, organic rot(s)... it doesn't not all turn to coal given eons, by any means. Brewing less obvs might be better for our livers /health collectively... but it wasn't ever a prime source of C02 emissions.


But while C02 is a convenient measure, and especially so in relevance and catastrophic volume to huge industrial processes we ( as a species) must improve upon - it is far from the only elephant in the room.

The really insidious things are the gasses in widespread use with far greater GWP than C02, that take longer to break-down - if ever. Methane is a massive issue here -esp. leaks from gas wells, gas industry etc.

Industrial refrigerants, the working fluid in the heat pumps that currently appeal to save us - potentially even more so.

The road ahead also contains potholes^^^^ unappreciated / hidden buried mineshafts to trap the unwary.
It will actually take a new level of honesty & transparency between industries, people, and nations, to negotiate.
And that - imo- is that really hard bit - not the 'technology.'
 
martin clark said:
The really insidious things are the gasses in widespread use with far greater GWP than C02, that take longer to break-down - if ever. Methane is a massive issue here -esp. leaks from gas wells, gas industry etc.
Click to expand...

I know you put an "etc" in there but they're a less significant source than animal farming and ancient bogs emerging from melting permafrost.
 
stevec67 said:
There are a number of technical reasons why CO2 is used instead of nitrogen. Don't imagine that it was decided on a whim.
Click to expand...

Tell me more about the technical reasons?? Nitrogen was used extensively in the food industry so why is CO2 preferred now. Similarly animals were stunned electrically in a humane way before bleeding (and still are) so why the panic about meat shortages. The equipment still exists.

FF
 
TheDecameron said:
It’s nitrous oxide the country could use at the moment. Boris is fulfilling his promise and quite literally dismantling Britain. I think a Ted Heath-era winter of discontent is on the cards and Johnson won’t be able to lie his way out of this one.
Click to expand...
Tl;dr I can’t see Johnson surviving this
 
Nitrous oxide - yes the good old anaesthetic produced by heating ammonium nitrate; but only if you are really brave!!!!! Remember Beirut??

FF
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top