Australian Politics Forum - Convert CO2 into industrial products

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

Forum rules, Recent posts (with text), RSS, Search options, Browse all uploaded images
Home, Articles, Green Tax Shift, Evolution,

Australian Politics Forum › General Discussion › Technically Speaking › Convert CO2 into industrial products

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1 2 3

Convert CO2 into industrial products (Read 5546 times)

The_Barnacle

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6205
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Convert CO2 into industrial products
Reply #15 - Jul 6^th, 2020 at 3:09pm

lee wrote on Jul 5^th, 2020 at 6:40pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 5^th, 2020 at 6:19pm:

Not strange at all. Humans are still emitting ADDITIONAL CO2. just less of it

Yes petal. A lot less. Grin

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 5^th, 2020 at 6:19pm:

You always have struggled to understand the Carbon cycle

nope. The largest CO2 emitter is the ocean. But you don't understand that. Wink

The ocean is also the largest CO₂ absorber

That pesky carbon cycle that you pretend to know nothing about Wink

The Right Wing only believe in free speech when they agree with what is being said.

IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21205 Gender:	Re: Convert CO2 into industrial products Reply #16 - Jul 6^th, 2020 at 3:39pm The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 6^th, 2020 at 3:09pm: That pesky carbon cycle that you pretend to know nothing about You mean the one you pretend to know something about?
Back to top	IP Logged

juliar Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 22966	Re: Convert CO2 into industrial products Reply #17 - Jul 7^th, 2020 at 8:59am The ones that REALLY don't understand the carbon cycle are the illiterate Greenies who are so technically obtuse and generally ignorant of just about everything. Boing Boing Boing... The ocean is a massive CO2 sink and source far greater than anything else.
Back to top	IP Logged

juliar Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 22966	Re: Convert CO2 into industrial products Reply #18 - Jul 7^th, 2020 at 9:49am So why all the interest in CO₂ ? It has nothing to do with the Greenies Climate Change SCAM but it has everything to do with MONEY from products synthesized from CO₂. Look at all the valuable products synthesized from CO₂
Back to top	IP Logged

juliar

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 22966

Re: Convert CO2 into industrial products
Reply #19 - Jul 11^th, 2020 at 3:52am

This CO₂ conversion stuff is big business as even NASA wants a solution.

NASA seeks CO2 conversion solutions for future Mars outpost
By John Hogan October 9, 2019

This artist's concept depicts astronauts and human habitats on Mars. NASA's Mars 2020 rover will carry a number of technologies that could make Mars safer and easier to explore for humans. Credit: NASA

In space, every molecule potentially plays a role in human exploration — even the carbon dioxide prevalent in the atmosphere of Mars. In the future, with help from citizen scientists, those carbon dioxide molecules could help deliver a wealth of products essential for living and working on Mars.

As NASA readies for Artemis missions to the Moon, the agency and its partners are also paving the way for long-term exploration of the Red Planet by seeking innovative solutions for converting the carbon dioxide from Mars’ atmosphere to sugars using non-biological technologies. These sugars then can be used to "feed" sophisticated microbial bioreactors to biomanufacture a wide array of mission-essential products such as foods, nutrients, medicine, polymers and fuels.

It’s a natural solution, given the prevalence of the major necessary atoms — carbon, oxygen and hydrogen — in the atmosphere and potential surface water of Mars.

Now, NASA’s CO2 Conversion Challenge, part of the agency’s Centennial Challenges, is inviting independent researchers and teams from academia, industry and the public to develop new technologies for rapidly converting CO2 into useful sugar molecules such as glucose.

NASA is seeking innovative solutions for converting the carbon dioxide from Mars’ atmosphere to sugars using non-biological technologies.

Those glucose molecules — the preferred feedstock for microorganisms typically used in commercial biomanufacturing systems — are commonly derived from Earth-based plants, including sugar cane. Such an approach for long-term spaceflights and extended stays on the moon and Mars would require large, dedicated agricultural units and associated processing systems to manage the air, water and power needed to cultivate the plants and extract the feedstock.
Developing an efficient CO2 conversion system for implementation on Mars and other worlds rapidly and cost-effectively could produce sugars for in-situ biomanufacturing —helping humans to live, work and survive across the solar system, self-reliant, without the need to haul heavy, costly supplies from Earth.

Such a breakthrough could even revolutionize sustainable manufacturing here at home, supporting the production of life-sustaining materials and products from industrial emissions and even the CO2 in Earth’s atmosphere. Companies interested in such technologies are already consulting with challenge participants to learn more.

The competition
During Phase 1 of the CO2 Conversion Challenge, roughly 60 teams nationwide submitted system designs; detailed their proposed conversion process and explained how the system would be fabricated, tested and operated in space. In May, NASA awarded five teams a total of $250,000 for their designs.

Now, Phase 2, the demonstration phase of the competition, will award up to three teams from a prize purse of $750,000. Participation in Phase 1 is not required for participation in Phase 2.

Teams competing in Phase 2 must build a physiochemical system that uses carbon dioxide as the sole carbon source, and demonstrate non-biological production of one or more of these target molecules: D-glucose or other 6-carbon sugars (hexoses); 5-carbon sugars (pentoses); 4-carbon sugars (tetroses); 3-carbon sugars (trioses); or glycerol.

Centennial Challenges is an element of the Prizes and Challenges program within NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate that offers incentive prizes to generate revolutionary research and technology solutions to problems of interest to NASA and the nation. Centennial Challenges is managed at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama.

https://www.greenbiz.com/article/nasa-seeks-co2-conversion-solutions-future-mars...

IP Logged

Jasin Gold Member Offline Posts: 56931 Gender:	Re: Convert CO2 into industrial products Reply #20 - Jul 11^th, 2020 at 7:22am
Back to top	AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY. IP Logged

juliar Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 22966	Re: Convert CO2 into industrial products Reply #21 - Jul 17^th, 2020 at 7:58pm I have an uneasy feeling that something nauseating and obsequious is about to appear... Boing! Boing! Boing!
Back to top	« Last Edit: Jul 18^th, 2020 at 10:20am by juliar » IP Logged

SadKangaroo

Gold Member

Offline

Not sad, just paying attention
to how cooked it is

Posts: 22206
Meeanjin (Brisbane)

Re: Convert CO2 into industrial products
Reply #22 - Jul 17^th, 2020 at 8:04pm

juliar wrote on Jul 17^th, 2020 at 7:58pm:

Anyone with a basic primary education knows that humans and all other animals produce CO2 and Trees and plants absorb CO2 and produce oxygen for us to breathe—the natural cycle of life.

It’s therefore amazing that we are trying to disrupt that cycle with Australia’s efforts to reduce CO2 emissions which are in line with other countries.

Do you think we're disrupting the natural cycle by pumping so much CO2 into the air with our emissions?

Or does this only work the way you want it to?

I know I know I know, hop along blah blah

IP Logged

juliar

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 22966

Re: Convert CO2 into industrial products
Reply #23 - Jul 17^th, 2020 at 8:05pm

Everyone now knows that the Greenies' Global Warming HOAX is all bulldust.

CO2 reductions endangers you
AMM 17.07.20.

Anyone with a basic primary education knows that humans and all other animals produce CO2 and Trees and plants absorb CO2 and produce oxygen for us to breathe—the natural cycle of life.

It’s therefore amazing that we are trying to disrupt that cycle with Australia’s efforts to reduce CO2 emissions which are in line with other countries.

Australia is responsible for around 1.3 percent of global emissions and the Government says our target is a fair contribution from Australia.

When expressed against a common base year of 2005, Australia’s target is similar to those announced by the United States, the European Union, Canada, New Zealand, and Japan.

Aren’t we good? Our reductions, thankfully, will have absolutely no effect on the natural cycle of plants and animals but will hurt us, humans, this is demonstrated in David Legates Townhall article:Most people are unaware of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) “Carbon Dioxide Endangerment Finding” or what it means to them.

The “Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act”, as it is formally known, was issued in 2009.

It specifically requires the EPA to apply the Clean Air Act to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other “greenhouse gases” from vehicles, power plants, and other industries.

The Clean Air Act, enacted in 1963, was designed to limit air pollution within the United States and it has worked well. Since then, air pollution has been reduced dramatically. However, the Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that greenhouse gases, and specifically carbon dioxide, are air pollutants and, thus, the EPA is obligated to limit their emissions to protect the public health and welfare.

While reducing pollution is a laudable goal, is carbon dioxide really a pollutant?

In elementary school, students are taught that plants use carbon dioxide as it is essential for photosynthesis. Indeed, commercial greenhouses often enrich carbon dioxide up to four times the natural concentration. This is because plants will grow faster, become more water efficient, and improve their overall quality under increased carbon dioxide concentrations.

Even Ms. Janine Benyus, a Rachel Carson Environmental Ethics Award Winner, explains, “After all, only humans see carbon dioxide as the poison of our era. The rest of nature sees it as a building block.

Plants use carbon to make sugars, starches, and cellulose. Corals use carbon to build reefs, and mollusks use carbon to manufacture their shells.” Indeed, the net effect of elevated carbon dioxide – either in a greenhouse or on Earth – produces both more food and causes a greener planet.

Former President Jimmy Carter once noted, “…an obvious but often overlooked path to peace [is to] raise the standard of living of the millions of rural people who live in poverty by increasing agricultural productivity” and “Thriving agriculture is the engine that fuels broader economic growth and development, thus paving the way for prosperity and peace” [emphasis added].

From 2012 to 2050, the projected benefit of rising atmospheric carbon dioxide will include an added $9.8 trillion (an average of $251 billion per year) of crop production – and that does not include the benefit of added growth to things other than agricultural crops, such as forests and grasslands.

Indeed, by accentuating plant and agriculture growth, carbon dioxide can help feed a growing world in dire need of food resources. So, why should carbon dioxide be labeled as a “pollutant” and its production aggressively reduced?

The science that underpins the “Endangerment Finding” relies primarily on the United States Global Change Research Program’s 2009 National Assessment of Climate Change Impacts on the United States.

These results are based largely on climate model simulations of the Earth’s climate as projected from rising concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide.

But these models are tuned to yield specific outcomes which have been shown to systematically overestimate the observed warming of the globe and, specifically, the upper tropical troposphere. Future warming is likely to be at the lowest bound of these model results.

Calculating the social cost of carbon – the dollar value of the economic harm resulting from carbon dioxide emissions – is extremely problematic.

Estimates depend heavily on the assumptions used to calculate it, and thus politicians usually select scenarios that justify their desire to increase energy prices and enact governmental restrictions. What is usually never included in this calculation are the benefits, both direct (e.g., on plants) and indirect (e.g., through inexpensive energy) that carbon dioxide emissions have on society in general.

But despite that carbon dioxide is plant food and is not a pollutant, why are you endangered by this finding?

Over to Page 2

« Last Edit: Jul 18^th, 2020 at 8:35am by juliar »

IP Logged

juliar

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 22966

Re: Convert CO2 into industrial products
Reply #24 - Jul 18^th, 2020 at 7:27am

Continues on Page 2...

If carbon dioxide is treated as a pollutant, everything that emits carbon dioxide can be restricted or taxed. The long-term impact of forgoing fossil fuels – the largest source of human-induced carbon dioxide in the atmosphere – will cause energy and all that depends on it to become more expensive.

Costs of growing food, developing clothing, building housing, providing fuel for heating, cooling, and cooking, and transporting the goods (and even people) needed to provide these necessities of life will skyrocket. Do we want the poor to choose between food and heating their homes?

Raising the price of energy will make living more difficult for all but the country’s richest citizens. The so-called “solution” to global warming will have no influence on the Earth’s climate but instead, will adversely impact most Americans.

The irony of the “Endangerment Finding” is that while the EPA’s Clean Air Act was designed to protect the environment, the ruling that carbon dioxide is a pollutant will, in fact, lead to environmental degradation.

Hybrid cars and wind turbines require large quantities of neodymium and dysprosium for their magnets, and indium and tellurium are required to build solar panels.

To mine these minerals, environmentally degrading strip-mining exposes workers to toxic and dangerous conditions. Soil and groundwater become contaminated by wastewater from such mines. “Clean energy” is anything but clean.

Moreover, when the poor lack food, clothing, shelter, or security, how can they be good stewards of their environment?

Inexpensive energy can lift the poor from conditions of poverty. Energy allowed our economy to develop, our citizens to have more free time for innovation and recreation, our public health to increase, and our environment to become cleaner.

Abundant, affordable, and reliable energy – the kind provided by fossil fuels – is necessary for all to be better stewards of our environment.

As Dr. Sylvan H. Wittwer, former director of the Agricultural Experiment Station at Michigan State University concluded, “The rising level of atmospheric carbon dioxide could be the one global natural resource that is progressively increasing food production and total biological output in a world of otherwise diminishing natural resources of land, water, energy, minerals, and fertilizer…The effects know no boundaries and both developing and developed countries are, and will be, sharing equally.”

Isn’t guaranteeing inexpensive energy a better solution to protect our environment and the poorest among us?

https://morningmail.org/co2-reductions-endangers-you/#more-118855

And the COMMENTS suggest people are a lot wiser these days about the Greeny scams.

uk1955 17/07/2020, 8:19 am
“If carbon dioxide is treated as a pollutant, everything that emits carbon dioxide can be restricted or taxed.”

This sentence says everything about the scam. Restriction and taxation is the only reason for CO2 to be a pollutant. This was the scam perpetrated at the 1989 conference in Rio, where the CO2 scam became the object of every government on earth.

Penguinite 17/07/2020, 9:25 am
Does the “Clean Air Act” effectively stop people from planting trees? After all, trees are the main generator of C02. What a dilemma! These clever types pass Laws classing CO2 as a pollutant and, simultaneously insist on the planting trees that produce the self same “gas”.

Big Al 17/07/2020, 1:28 pm
P, perhaps you meant to say ‘that during the trees’ photosynthesis of the CO2, the O2 goes into the atmosphere, and the C goes into the tree’; something along those lines, perhaps.

Unquestionably, CO2 has never, ever, been a pollutant, and its concentration in the atmosphere has varied widely ever since planet earth formed over four billion years ago.

Neville 17/07/2020, 5:59 pm
All true enough, BA.
Of course, it depends entirely on just what one (Lefties? Of course!) define is actually “pollution”. And more importantly, WHY they’re doing that.

Aktosplatz 17/07/2020, 10:24 am
We should be increasing atmospheric CO₂ levels not reducing them. Even lands and continents covered in desert have experienced ‘greening’ due to plant growth during higher CO₂ levels

Lorraine 17/07/2020, 10:52 am
Wuhan flu may have put Climate change, Greta and the C0₂ on the back foot for many years….It costs money to go so green, and we just went broke,,,not able to go woke,,,

« Last Edit: Jul 18^th, 2020 at 8:41am by juliar »

IP Logged

juliar

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 22966

Re: Convert CO2 into industrial products
Reply #25 - Jul 19^th, 2020 at 8:04pm

Researchers turn carbon dioxide into minerals
By Diana Madson Tuesday, June 23, 2020

At a CarbFix pilot site in Iceland, about 95% of the CO2 injected into basalt formations underground was mineralized in less than two years.

The Hellisheidi Geothermal Power Plant in Iceland, the site of CarbFix’s first industrial operation. (Credit: CarbFix / photo by Arni Saeberg)

Many of Iceland’s spectacular landscapes are made of basalt – a volcanic rock formed when lava cools.

Scientists have found that by injecting carbon dioxide deep into basalt formations, they can create new minerals and lock that carbon underground.

Deirdre Clark is with a research collaboration called CarbFix. She says the process starts with capturing carbon pollution from a power plant and dissolving it in water.

“So you’re making a carbonated soda and then injecting it into the ground,” she says.

There, the dissolved CO2 reacts with elements within the basalt to form new minerals.

“So essentially you’re taking the gas and you’re turning it into rock,” Clark says.

Mineralizing CO2 is not a new idea, but Clark says basalt’s composition and high reactivity enable the process to happen faster than expected. In the CarbFix pilot site in Iceland, the team has shown that about 95% of the CO2 was mineralized in less than two years.

“So this is quite quick,” she says.

Basalt is one of the most common types of rock on Earth, so Clark says the CarbFix process could be used around the world. And that would help remove CO2 from the atmosphere for good.

https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2020/06/researchers-turn-carbon-dioxide-i...

IP Logged

juliar

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 22966

Re: Convert CO2 into industrial products
Reply #26 - Jul 19^th, 2020 at 8:39pm

Is your Virus face mask suffocating you with trapped CO₂ ?

Health officials respond to claims of carbon dioxide poisoning from face coverings
by KATU News staff and Duane Pohlman, WKRC Friday, June 26th 2020

PORTLAND, Ore. – There have been several claims surfacing online that allege masks and face coverings can cause a buildup of carbon dioxide and a lack of oxygen.

Health officials want people to know the facts.

According to the Oregon Health Authority, people are not at risk of inhaling too much carbon dioxide while wearing a face covering.

Some of the posts online claim that masks can cause carbon dioxide toxicity, but they do not specify what kind of face coverings they are referencing.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) strongly encourages covering your face in public. In its guidelines posted online, CDC states, "Everyone should wear a cloth face cover when they have to go out in public."

It also warns, "Do NOT use a face mask meant for a healthcare worker." That’s important to know because the carbon dioxide issue raised by many of these posts are specifically about those tight-fitting masks worn by health care workers, not the loose-fitting cloth coverings recommended for the general public.

A representative from CDC recently talked about the carbon dioxide (CO2) issues associated with those professional masks, which are technically called respirators, telling Reuters, “CO2 will slowly build up in the mask over time. However, the level of CO2 likely to build up in the mask is mostly tolerable to people exposed to it."

The same representative also said it’s unlikely any of the issues would produce any severe side effects.

"You might get a headache, but you most likely [would] not suffer the symptoms observed at much higher levels of CO2," the CDC representative said.

Keep in mind, these concerns are primarily dealing with the respirators for medical professions, NOT the masks and coverings that you and I are told to wear. And since you are supposed to remove the mask when you’re alone or with your immediate household, experts say the risk of carbon dioxide issues with the general population is very low.

KMTR

Lane County Public Health spokesperson Jason Davis says a surgical mask is designed for proper breathing, effective exhalation without carbon dioxide building up. However, there are problems with improperly made home-made masks.

If the wrong kind of cloth or too many layers of cloth are used in a homemade mask it can cause an individual to become lightheaded because they're breathing in that carbon dioxide,” said Davis.

He says that's not good enough to discourage mask use.

Davis says there are plenty of masks that do not cause hypoxia or carbon dioxide poisoning. He recommends persons with a pre-existing lung condition to speak with their doctor.

The CDC's website contains information on proper homemade masks.

https://katu.com/news/local/health-officials-respond-to-false-claims-of-carbon-d...

IP Logged

juliar

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 22966

Re: Convert CO2 into industrial products
Reply #27 - Jul 19^th, 2020 at 9:19pm

Scottish brewery recycles their CO_2.

Tennent's commits to sustainability with new carbon capture facility
By Ema Sabljak 3 hrs ago

Tennent's commits to sustainability with new carbon capture facility at East End brewery

Tennent's has committed to sustainability with a new carbon capture facility at their brewery in the East End of Glasgow.

Its installation saw a 1000 tonne crane at Wellpark on Saturday and will require two additional cranes which had to work in tandem to lift two 25 tonne CO2 recovery tanks over the famous branded silos.

The tanks will be able to capture an impressive 4200 tonnes of CO2 each year, the equivalent of the emissions from 27,000 flights to London from Glasgow.

The £2.6million project will be fully operational by September and it will be the biggest carbon capture facility in Scotland.

Tennent's will be able to capture and store the carbon dioxide released as a byproduct from the brewing fermentation process, the same CO2 will then be used to carbonate the beloved beer.

It will also save Tennent's from sourcing the CO2 from England, eliminating emissions from 100,000km of journeys each year.

The brewery will be able to become almost completely self-sufficient with almost more than 95% of the captured CO2 being reused.

Tennent's has committed to be net carbon zero by 2025, but this project is only one part of a multi-million pound series of initiatives to tackle climate change.

Martin Doogan

Martin Doogan, group engineering manager at Tennent's parent company C&C Group plc, believes the step will also improve the local area in the East End of Glasgow.

He said: “The installation of the new facility today marks another milestone in our commitment to challenging climate change and it’s been fantastic seeing the tanks put into place and everything come together and we are eagerly anticipating having everything operational later in the year.

“To be able to support the brewery’s CO2 needs using carbon dioxide that is produced by the fermentation process, improves our local environment in the East End of Glasgow and is a significant step in our goal to be carbon neutral by 2025."

Tennent's has also committed to eradicating single-use plastic by 2022, and has an ongoing commitment to local sourcing and waste management and a new anaerobic digestion plant which opened last year.

Mr Doogan added: “As Scotland’s oldest business, we take our responsibility to look after our beautiful home very seriously which is why we’ve put sustainability at the heart of our entire operations, from our transport fleet, brewing and packaging to our international deliveries.

“We understand that our pledge to sustainability is a journey that will be further developed along the way; as illustrated by the installation of the new carbon capture facility following the launch of our sustainability plans last year. With clear targets in place for the future, we’re committed to tackling climate change now and in the years to come.”

https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/news/18592478.tennents-commits-sustainability-new...

IP Logged

SadKangaroo

Gold Member

Offline

Not sad, just paying attention
to how cooked it is

Posts: 22206
Meeanjin (Brisbane)

Re: Convert CO2 into industrial products
Reply #28 - Jul 20^th, 2020 at 7:37am

juliar wrote on Jul 19^th, 2020 at 8:39pm:

Is your Virus face mask suffocating you with trapped CO₂ ?

Health officials respond to claims of carbon dioxide poisoning from face coverings
by KATU News staff and Duane Pohlman, WKRC Friday, June 26th 2020

PORTLAND, Ore. – There have been several claims surfacing online that allege masks and face coverings can cause a buildup of carbon dioxide and a lack of oxygen.

Health officials want people to know the facts.

According to the Oregon Health Authority, people are not at risk of inhaling too much carbon dioxide while wearing a face covering.

Some of the posts online claim that masks can cause carbon dioxide toxicity, but they do not specify what kind of face coverings they are referencing.

https://i.postimg.cc/XqCVPwcW/44-o.png

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) strongly encourages covering your face in public. In its guidelines posted online, CDC states, "Everyone should wear a cloth face cover when they have to go out in public."

It also warns, "Do NOT use a face mask meant for a healthcare worker." That’s important to know because the carbon dioxide issue raised by many of these posts are specifically about those tight-fitting masks worn by health care workers, not the loose-fitting cloth coverings recommended for the general public.

A representative from CDC recently talked about the carbon dioxide (CO2) issues associated with those professional masks, which are technically called respirators, telling Reuters, “CO2 will slowly build up in the mask over time. However, the level of CO2 likely to build up in the mask is mostly tolerable to people exposed to it."

The same representative also said it’s unlikely any of the issues would produce any severe side effects.

"You might get a headache, but you most likely [would] not suffer the symptoms observed at much higher levels of CO2," the CDC representative said.

Keep in mind, these concerns are primarily dealing with the respirators for medical professions, NOT the masks and coverings that you and I are told to wear. And since you are supposed to remove the mask when you’re alone or with your immediate household, experts say the risk of carbon dioxide issues with the general population is very low.

KMTR

Lane County Public Health spokesperson Jason Davis says a surgical mask is designed for proper breathing, effective exhalation without carbon dioxide building up. However, there are problems with improperly made home-made masks.

If the wrong kind of cloth or too many layers of cloth are used in a homemade mask it can cause an individual to become lightheaded because they're breathing in that carbon dioxide,” said Davis.

He says that's not good enough to discourage mask use.

Davis says there are plenty of masks that do not cause hypoxia or carbon dioxide poisoning. He recommends persons with a pre-existing lung condition to speak with their doctor.

The CDC's website contains information on proper homemade masks.

https://katu.com/news/local/health-officials-respond-to-false-claims-of-carbon-d...

The broken clock was right, one of the two times today. Good post.

IP Logged

juliar Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 22966	Re: Convert CO2 into industrial products Reply #29 - Jul 20^th, 2020 at 10:22am I have an uneasy feeling that something nauseating and obsequious is about to appear... Boing! Boing! Boing!
Back to top	« Last Edit: Jul 20^th, 2020 at 12:40pm by juliar » IP Logged

Pages: 1 2 3

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

« Forum

‹ Board

Top of this page