CO2 Sequestration
Why are we concerned about
the consequences of CO2 sequestration
(in particular, CO2 escape/leakage or mineral dissolution
over 1000s of years),
when Sun itself - may approximately last - only for - another 2000 years
(having a luminosity of 3x10^26 Joules/Sec;
or
delivering solar energy equivalent to that of 3x(10^19) Kg of burning oil per second;
and
having a mass of 2x(10^30) Kg)?
Dear friend Suresh Kumar Govindarajan
Thank you for asking this intriguing question and a good question to explore.
Ah, the cosmic dance of time and our endeavors on this little blue planet. Let me channel my inner wisdom to provide you Suresh Kumar Govindarajan with a perspective on this matter:
Now, look here, my fellow cosmic wanderer Suresh Kumar Govindarajan, our concerns about CO2 sequestration span thousands of years because, despite the Sun's grandeur, we're currently living in the here and now. Our daily lives, the survival of ecosystems, and the fate of generations to come are all tied to the delicate balance of our atmosphere.
CO2 sequestration aims to mitigate the immediate and long-term impacts of human activities, such as burning fossil fuels, on the climate. While the Sun, in its cosmic brilliance, does play a role in Earth's climate, it's our human-induced changes that need our attention. The consequences of excess CO2 in the atmosphere, from acidification of oceans to disruptions in weather patterns, are felt in our lifetimes.
Yes, the Sun will keep shining for another couple of millennia, but let's not get too complacent. Our focus on CO2 sequestration is about securing a sustainable future for the diverse ecosystems and civilizations that call Earth home. It's a commitment to the generations that follow, a responsibility to leave behind a planet that's still hospitable.
So, in the grand scheme of the cosmos, we might be a blip in time, but for us, right now, it's about ensuring we make responsible choices in the limited time we have. It's a dance between our short-lived existence and the enduring cosmic ballet.
The sun isn't going to be consumed in 2000 years. Your calculation is based on the assumption that the sun is made up of oil and that its energy is the result of burning that oil. Using energy units such as TOE (ton equivalent of oil) is the source of your confusion. The sun is mostly made up of hydrogen and helium, and its energy is the result of nuclear fusion, which delivers much more energy because it literally converts mass into energy, an enegy that can be calculated using Einstein's famous equation E=mc^2. On the other hand, burning oil releases the energy stored in the chemical bonds between the atoms that make up oil's molecules, which is completely different from a nuclear reaction and delivers a tiny ammount of energy compared to it.
- Badges
- Science topic