61 comments on Q & A With Paul Hanrahan, CEO of AES
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
61 comments on Q & A With Paul Hanrahan, CEO of AES
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
User login
Personnel
Classic posts
Archives
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
The Oil Drum: New York City archives
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
I will give you one that essentially requires no energy. Shell fish farms. Assume 1000 tons of oysters a year and the weight of meat is 20 percent. It works out to about 350 tons of CO2 a year. Yes, trivial I know.
I don't think this would be really trivial if it could be used to offset some of the fishing quotas. We know that we are greatly overfishing almost every single species we use from the oceans. If a greatly expanded shell fish industry could remove some of that stress on our oceans and at the same time act as a carbon sink, it would be a win-win. 1000 tons of oysters are nothing. If we want to feed the world, we will probably need a hundred million tons of shell fish (current fishing quotas are 90 million tons of fish, I believe). That amounts to 35 million tons of CO2. Still small compared to the 7Gtons of carbon we put in the atmosphere but not trivial by any measure. I don't know where the other environmental limits of this industry are, but maybe it can make an impact, after all.