In Britain provincial universities often do not get the credit they deserve for research. The hallowed quadrangles of Oxford and Cambridge are traditionally thought of as the centres of excellence, mainly because the great and the good, often “studying” Politics, Philosophy and Economics move there from school and thence to the sheltered halls of the Inns of Court, Parliament nor the civil service, often stopping on the way to pick up some remuneration (that dreadful but essential stuff) from various quangos also set up by the great and the good.
For those of us that are neither great nor good we have to make do with less exalted surroundings but the contribution of those from less exalted places is far greater, when it comes to providing service to humanity. The person whose ability probably saved more lives than most is Joseph Bazalgette, who never went to university at all; he built London’s sewers, drawing on his learning as an engineer, to which profession he was articled.
Alexander Fleming studied at the Royal Polytechnic as well as his school in Kilmarnock. He discovered penicillin, with the help of his team. Ernest Rutherford, the father of nuclear physics, was awarded the Nobel Prize while he was at the University of Manchester. The most significant step in the discovery of DNA was at King’s College, London where Maurice Wilkins and Rosalind Franklin were able to produce good quality diffraction patterns and thus get meaningful information about the structure of DNA.
Of course Oxbridge produces some fine minds – Tim Berners-Lee, for example, but it is far from the repository of the nation’s best minds.
It is therefore with some hope that I learn that the University of Nottingham’s Professor Martin Schröder and Dr Sihai Yang working with Peking University, and others have found a material, named for the time being NOTT-300 which can be manufactured from simple materials which absorbs carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide. CO2 and SO2 bind to NOTT-300, effectively sequestrating (or capturing) these gases. It is a porous material which has the possibility, I stress “possibility”, of being a cheap low energy way to sequestrate carbon from carbon dioxide and sulphur from sulphur dioxide.
It is early days in the research but there are great hopes that the material might well help atmosphere or at least slow down the rate of atmospheric carbon dioxide which at the last count at Mauna Loa (one of the world’s most isolated and unpolluted places) was in the week of 23rd September 2012, 390.84 ppm, compared with a year ago 388.59 ppm and 370.39 ppm 10 years ago.
Filed under: carbon emissions, climate change, global warming Tagged: | Dr Sihai Yang, Joseph Bazalgette, NOTT-300, Nottingham University, Oxford and Cambridge, present atmospheric carbon dioxide content, Professor Martin Schröder, sequestrating carbon dioxide, sulphur dioxide
Lets keep it simple. The lovely Lovelock advises we do what the Incas did, simply bury charcoal. I can tell you it works perfectly, by the size of my vedge, pardon the pun, lol, speak for themselves, without any fertilisers, only the trimmings of the plants themselves, as compost.
What is charcoal, carbon perhaps, reabsorbing the nutrients it realeased earlier, facts not fiction, called AGW.
BRUNCH.
A few more thoughts:
(1) For those interested in english/chemistry:
(a) Sequestering means isolating and making incapable of chemical reaction. Sequestrating means confiscating.
(b) contrary to the blog title and text: NOTT-300 does not sequester or sequastrate carbon from carbon dioxide nor sulphur from sulphur dioxide. Self evidently.
Nor does NOTT-300 absorb carbon dioxide/sulphur dioxide, rather it
a d s o r b s these gases.
(2) For those interested in maths/statistics and the amount of carbon dioxide measured at Mauna loa in parts per million (ppm):
391ppm – 371ppm = 20ppm
Put this into real life perspective: the increase is 20 molecules in 1,000,000 molecules
Put another way the amount of carbon dioxide has increased by .002% in 10 years. Is that significant enough to cripple this country’s industry and double energy bills?
Furthermore, is the figure even accurate? Mauna Loa is sitting on top of a vast source of carbon dioxide in the form of an active volcano. Apparently the measurements are adjusted to eliminate the effect of the volcano below! So, apparently, the scientists can deduct the effect of an overwhelming source of carbon dioxide on their doorstep to tell us that the atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased by .002% thousands of miles away can they????
(3) For those interested in the environment.
carbon dioxide is not a pollutant but an essential plant food. We breathe in oxygen and breathe out plant food. What could be better?
“…..being a cheap low energy way to sequestrate carbon and emissions from oxygen and nitrogen.”
That makes no sense. There is no carbon in oxygen or nitrogen.
A quick check reveals that it captures predominantly carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide.
Adrian Vance all over, check him out.