Carbon Trapping or Is It Carbon Wasting?

The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) announced that they have concluded a first draft of a carbon trapping rules. These rules would require smokestack owners to filter the emissions from their smokestacks and create liquified CO2 that could be stored underground. Granted, preventing pollution is a must, but in these troubled economic times in America, isn’t there another option besides costing business more money? When the price of doing business goes up, we all know the worker is the first disposable asset to be hurt.

Carbon Trapping or Carbon Sequestration as it is sometimes called, seems to be too expensive and includes no economic incentive. Last time we checked, plants were pretty great at converting CO2 into oxygen and trapping carbon in the structure of the plant. Why not turn the geseous CO2 pollution into CO2 tanks that can be used by professional plant growers? People who grow plants use CO2 tanks to promote accelerated growth and are accustomed to paying for their CO2 tanks.

What about requiring businesses that are producing CO2 pollution to also grow plants in greenhouses, using the C02 created by the smokestack to feed the plants? This way energy producers and smokestack factories would still be spending money on preventing air pollution but they could also consider that expense as an investment into an agricultural product. Even if the greenhouses grew non edible plants that could be used to create biofuels, wouldn’t this solution create an economic incentive as part of the regulation of smokestack industries? The biofuel created could also be sold for additional profits. An additional benefit in this manufacturing structure would also be the fact that you can use the excess waste heat created by the smokestack to control the temperature in the greenhouses, allowing for the production of plants that normally do not grow in colder climates. Selling tropical fruits in a place in the world where those plants need to be imported from far away is a great way to make money on a cash crop.

One other idea which might merit further exploration would be nanocarbon. Recently, inventors have used a super resilient material called nanocarbon in vehicles and other manufactured products. Is it possible to use the trapped carbon to create nanocarbon materials?

Sticking something in your closet is one way to get it out of your face, but it is still taking up space in your storage space and doing nothing positive. You will have to expend more energy moving it out of your closet at some point anyways, so why not figure out something productive to do with it in the first place?