$210 Billion In PV Would Reverse Osmosis All the Rise In Sea Level

[Bret Cahill]

If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the
reverse osmosis pumps or about $210 billion in PV at $0.60/watt.

The water can be injected into the aquifers to buy some time.

There are other costs, i.e., canals, etc. but this is faster and
cheaper than sea walling every port city on the planet.


Bret Cahill

 

[Unum]

If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the
reverse osmosis pumps or about $210 billion in PV at $0.60/watt.

The water can be injected into the aquifers to buy some time.

There are other costs, i.e., canals, etc. but this is faster and
cheaper than sea walling every port city on the planet.

Cool idea, but then you have to figure out what to do with
all of the brine.

 

[Bret Cahill]

If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the

Cool idea, but then you have to figure out what to do with
all of the brine.

That will resalinate the ocean from all the fresh water from the ice
melt runoff.

Basically the transfer is fresh water from ice to the ground.


Bret Cahill

 

[Unum]

Preserve usenet trolls in it?

Pickled trolls. Mmmmm

 

[$27 TRILLION to pay for Kyoto]

If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the
reverse osmosis pumps or about $210 billion in PV at $0.60/watt.

The water can be injected into the aquifers to buy some time.

There are other costs, i.e., canals, etc. but this is faster and
cheaper than sea walling every port city on the planet.


Bret Cahill

Spend, spend, spend, spend, spend, spend.

 

[Bret Cahill]

If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the

Spend, spend, spend, spend, spend, spend.

Every enthusiastic supporter of free marketry knows free marketry
ain't possible without _someone_ spending.

With seaquestration, however, we spend a whole lot less.


Bret Cahill

 

[Tom P]

That will resalinate the ocean from all the fresh water from the ice
melt runoff.

Basically the transfer is fresh water from ice to the ground.


Bret Cahill

It's an interesting idea, but I'd like to check the figures. Here's some
info on the economics-
http://www.oas.org/dsd/publications/Unit/oea59e/ch20.htm

Desalinated water is much too valuable just for agriculture, there are
over 1 billion people in the world without access to safe drinking
water. Combine the two and you have a geoengineering project that makes
sense for a change.

 

[Sleepalot]

If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the
reverse osmosis pumps or about $210 billion in PV at $0.60/watt.

The water can be injected into the aquifers to buy some time.

If it was me, I'd irrigate Spain, N.Africa, etc, with some of that water.

There are other costs, i.e., canals, etc. but this is faster and
cheaper than sea walling every port city on the planet.


Bret Cahill

For a couple of million you could flood the Qattara Depression - it's only
about 50km from the Mediterranean coast - using windmills and ditches.

That would;
Lower sea-levels a little.
Create flamingo habitat.
Create a Dead Sea type tourism facility.
Create a salt industry.
Reduce regional temperature.
Increase rainfall somewhere a little.

....

Ha! I've been saying this for years, and today I find people have actually been
looking into it.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression_Project>

Of course wikipeadia goes full-stupid, talking about nuclear explosions. Tsk.

 

[Sleepalot]

Cool idea, but then you have to figure out what to do with
all of the brine.

Put it back in the sea. The sea can only get so salty, after which point the
salt precipitates out and falls to the sea-floor.

 

[Sleepalot]

It's an interesting idea, but I'd like to check the figures. Here's some
info on the economics-
http://www.oas.org/dsd/publications/Unit/oea59e/ch20.htm

Desalinated water is much too valuable just for agriculture, there are
over 1 billion people in the world without access to safe drinking
water. Combine the two and you have a geoengineering project that makes
sense for a change.

So send the water to a city in return for sewerage: treat the sewerage, and
you've got soil-conditioner and irrigation water.

 

[Tom P]

If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the
reverse osmosis pumps or about $210 billion in PV at $0.60/watt.

The water can be injected into the aquifers to buy some time.

There are other costs, i.e., canals, etc. but this is faster and
cheaper than sea walling every port city on the planet.


Bret Cahill

It's a great idea, but using these figures -
http://www.oas.org/dsd/publications/Unit/oea59e/ch20.htm
and a melt rate of around 100 km3 per year, you'd need at least $210
billion just to build the desalination plants, let alone the PV plants.
I'd still have to estimate how much PV capacity is required.

The other problem is that it does nothing to actually stop global
warming. That means that on the BAU model you can expect the melt rate
to continue up to the icecap tipping point, after which it starts to
shoot up exponentially. That means that however you cut it, in the long
run you're going to have 70 meters of water level rise, regardless
whether it's salt water or drinkable.

 

[Tom P]

Spend, spend, spend, spend, spend, spend.

To put that sum of $210 billion into context, Munich Re has just
announced that in 2012, natural catastrophes caused over $160 billion
worth of damage worldwide. Hurricane Sandy caused an estimated $25 billion.
http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/international/2013/01/03/275865.htm

 

[1treePetrifiedForestLane]

PVs are unpremeditated expanses of urban heat-islanding, although
there are some that also heat water. anyway,
Morner's datum shows that there is no sealevel rise,
beyond "eustatic rebound from last glacial maximum," and
he ought t'know.

"global" warming, it is to snicker.

 

[Unum]

To put that sum of $210 billion into context, Munich Re has just announced
that in 2012, natural catastrophes caused over $160 billion worth of damage
worldwide. Hurricane Sandy caused an estimated $25 billion.
http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/international/2013/01/03/275865.htm

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2013/01/03/boehner-caves-agrees-to-hurricane-sandy-aid-vote-on-friday/

Aid package to be voted on totaling $60 billion. If Toronto had
been hit harder that Richard Anderson dirtbag would have been
screaming for relief money.

 

[Bret Cahill]

If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the

If it was me, I'd irrigate Spain, N.Africa, etc, with some of that water.

Most of it needs to be injected where it won't evaporate and will help
prevent sink holes.

 

[Bret Cahill]

If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the

It's a great idea, but using these figures -http://www.oas.org/dsd/publications/Unit/oea59e/ch20.htm
and a melt rate of around 100 km3 per year, you'd need at least $210
billion just to build the desalination plants, let alone the PV plants.

All of the water doesn't have to be desalinated. In California it's
illegal to inject anything into the aquifer, however, in some places
the geo thermal brine is so toxic it might not be hard to get the
state to provide a varuience.

Consider that a acre foot of R.O. costs a few hundred dollars in
electricity at today's rates and an acre of berries and many other
crops can fetch $40,000.

Some farmer from Salinas was telling me farm land in Salinas _rents_
for $60,000 / acre - year. Maybe he meant a quarter square.

I'd still have to estimate how much PV capacity is required.

That calculates from the 8 MPa pressure needed for R. O.

The other problem is that it does nothing to actually stop global
warming. That means that on the BAU model you can expect the melt rate
to continue up to the icecap tipping point, after which it starts to
shoot up exponentially. That means that however you cut it, in the long
run you're going to have 70 meters of water level rise, regardless
whether it's salt water or drinkable.

Before we discuss point C the IPCC _better_ come up with a plan to get
to point B.


Bret Cahill

 

[Bret Cahill]

If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2013/01/03/boehner-caves-agrees-to-hurric...

Aid package to be voted on totaling $60 billion. If Toronto had
been hit harder that Richard Anderson dirtbag would have been
screaming for relief money.

Also consider conventionally [read: expensive] powered R. O. costs
several hundreds dollars/acre foot while many crops bring in at least
an order of magnitude more money / acre.


Bret Cahill

 

[Bret Cahill]

If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the

Wouldn't it make better economic sense to use wind and solar to make
Hydrogen from the water already in the aquifer and then make peak load
electricity with a hydrogen burning turbine electric generator?

Too many unnecessary conversions and losses.

If they can get the price down on batteries just go straight from
solar to the battery.


Bret Cahill

 

[Bret Cahill]

  if you pump sea water into the aquifer

what  do you do about a  the  NaCl  (salt for the  science impaired)

Leave it down there.

A lot of ground water is toxic, Cd and other heavy metals.


Bret Cahill

 

[Bret Cahill]

If the volume of sea level rise is 0.2 km^3/hr or 350 GW to power the

Other costs like the amount of CO2 and other pollutants building the
panels

What is the CO2 produced/watt of PV?

And while you are at it, tell everyone the elevation of Al Gore's
mansion above mean high tide.


Bret Cahill