<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_23_1429209</id>
	<title>DoE Considers Artificial Trees To Remove CO2</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1245768540000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>eldavojohn writes <i>"CNN is running an article on <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/06/22/synthetic.tree.climate.change.ccs/index.html">a new angle of attack to reducing greenhouse gases</a>.  After meeting with the US Department of Energy on the concept, the researchers revealed the details that each 'tree' (really a small building structure in the concept design) would cost about as much as a Toyota and remove 1 ton of CO2 from the air per day.  Don't worry, they're accounting for the energy the 'tree' uses to operate: 'By the time we make liquid C02 we have spent approximately 50 kilojoules [of electricity] per mole of C02. Compare that to the average power plant in the US, which produces one mole of C02 with every 230 kilojoules of electricity. In other words, if we simply plugged our device in to the power grid to satisfy its energy needs, for every roughly 1,000 kilograms [of carbon dioxide] we collected we would re-emit 200, so 800 we can chalk up as having been successful.' Each unit would remove 20 automobiles' worth of CO2 from the air and cost about as much as a Toyota... so the plan might be a five percent surcharge on automobiles to fund these synthetic tree farms."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>eldavojohn writes " CNN is running an article on a new angle of attack to reducing greenhouse gases .
After meeting with the US Department of Energy on the concept , the researchers revealed the details that each 'tree ' ( really a small building structure in the concept design ) would cost about as much as a Toyota and remove 1 ton of CO2 from the air per day .
Do n't worry , they 're accounting for the energy the 'tree ' uses to operate : 'By the time we make liquid C02 we have spent approximately 50 kilojoules [ of electricity ] per mole of C02 .
Compare that to the average power plant in the US , which produces one mole of C02 with every 230 kilojoules of electricity .
In other words , if we simply plugged our device in to the power grid to satisfy its energy needs , for every roughly 1,000 kilograms [ of carbon dioxide ] we collected we would re-emit 200 , so 800 we can chalk up as having been successful .
' Each unit would remove 20 automobiles ' worth of CO2 from the air and cost about as much as a Toyota... so the plan might be a five percent surcharge on automobiles to fund these synthetic tree farms .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>eldavojohn writes "CNN is running an article on a new angle of attack to reducing greenhouse gases.
After meeting with the US Department of Energy on the concept, the researchers revealed the details that each 'tree' (really a small building structure in the concept design) would cost about as much as a Toyota and remove 1 ton of CO2 from the air per day.
Don't worry, they're accounting for the energy the 'tree' uses to operate: 'By the time we make liquid C02 we have spent approximately 50 kilojoules [of electricity] per mole of C02.
Compare that to the average power plant in the US, which produces one mole of C02 with every 230 kilojoules of electricity.
In other words, if we simply plugged our device in to the power grid to satisfy its energy needs, for every roughly 1,000 kilograms [of carbon dioxide] we collected we would re-emit 200, so 800 we can chalk up as having been successful.
' Each unit would remove 20 automobiles' worth of CO2 from the air and cost about as much as a Toyota... so the plan might be a five percent surcharge on automobiles to fund these synthetic tree farms.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440447</id>
	<title>use co2 to grow real trees</title>
	<author>bugi</author>
	<datestamp>1245778080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's still the question of what to do with the gathered CO2.  Use it to feed plants that you grow in an airtight environment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's still the question of what to do with the gathered CO2 .
Use it to feed plants that you grow in an airtight environment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's still the question of what to do with the gathered CO2.
Use it to feed plants that you grow in an airtight environment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28447341</id>
	<title>Re:Why so narrow minded, Slashdot?</title>
	<author>laddiebuck</author>
	<datestamp>1245761280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's a hobby around here. That said, Slashdot has a terrific diversity of views and you will see (and do in this thread) comments from just about every reasonable viewpoint, modded up too. Sure, the majority tends to some opinion on most topics, but that doesn't detract from what's great about Slashdot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a hobby around here .
That said , Slashdot has a terrific diversity of views and you will see ( and do in this thread ) comments from just about every reasonable viewpoint , modded up too .
Sure , the majority tends to some opinion on most topics , but that does n't detract from what 's great about Slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a hobby around here.
That said, Slashdot has a terrific diversity of views and you will see (and do in this thread) comments from just about every reasonable viewpoint, modded up too.
Sure, the majority tends to some opinion on most topics, but that doesn't detract from what's great about Slashdot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439953</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28442443</id>
	<title>This is silly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245784860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>CO2 is in no way, shape or form bad for the environment. It is an essential trace gas, it is only speciously linked to previous warm periods, and humans are responsible for a small portion of the CO2 that is released in the atmosphere.</p><p>This is just disgusting. What a waste of brainpower.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>CO2 is in no way , shape or form bad for the environment .
It is an essential trace gas , it is only speciously linked to previous warm periods , and humans are responsible for a small portion of the CO2 that is released in the atmosphere.This is just disgusting .
What a waste of brainpower .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CO2 is in no way, shape or form bad for the environment.
It is an essential trace gas, it is only speciously linked to previous warm periods, and humans are responsible for a small portion of the CO2 that is released in the atmosphere.This is just disgusting.
What a waste of brainpower.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28441417</id>
	<title>When the fuck did "TOYOTA" become a monetary unit?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245781560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As much as a toyota manufactured heavy mining dump truck?</p><p>As much as a toyota forklift?</p><p>A prius?  A corolla?</p><p>I smell more nonsense wrapped in a 'save the babies' cloak.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As much as a toyota manufactured heavy mining dump truck ? As much as a toyota forklift ? A prius ?
A corolla ? I smell more nonsense wrapped in a 'save the babies ' cloak .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As much as a toyota manufactured heavy mining dump truck?As much as a toyota forklift?A prius?
A corolla?I smell more nonsense wrapped in a 'save the babies' cloak.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439311</id>
	<title>Mercurial Fun</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245773640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The EPA owe me a new keyboard!!! It reminds me of using mercury at school. I recall we weren't quite as carefull as that. We used to push the stuff around with our fingers!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The EPA owe me a new keyboard ! ! !
It reminds me of using mercury at school .
I recall we were n't quite as carefull as that .
We used to push the stuff around with our fingers !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The EPA owe me a new keyboard!!!
It reminds me of using mercury at school.
I recall we weren't quite as carefull as that.
We used to push the stuff around with our fingers!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28446513</id>
	<title>1 ton of liquid CO2 per day from each "tree"</title>
	<author>Black Sabbath</author>
	<datestamp>1245756660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Remind me again, what are we supposed to do with 1 ton of liquid CO2 per day that's captured by each one of these things?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Remind me again , what are we supposed to do with 1 ton of liquid CO2 per day that 's captured by each one of these things ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remind me again, what are we supposed to do with 1 ton of liquid CO2 per day that's captured by each one of these things?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28449441</id>
	<title>Re:Borrowing from Peter to pay Paul.</title>
	<author>JRHelgeson</author>
	<datestamp>1245782940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>YES, the OCEAN IS a HUGE CO2 Sink, and whenever there is an abundance of CO2 we get an abundance of Plankton and algae, so much that the sea turns green.  Oops, but then that solves the problem without need for a manufactured crisis. Lets just ignore that bit of data to keep research funding on track. (on the brighter side, at least it saved the Wales!!)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>YES , the OCEAN IS a HUGE CO2 Sink , and whenever there is an abundance of CO2 we get an abundance of Plankton and algae , so much that the sea turns green .
Oops , but then that solves the problem without need for a manufactured crisis .
Lets just ignore that bit of data to keep research funding on track .
( on the brighter side , at least it saved the Wales ! !
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>YES, the OCEAN IS a HUGE CO2 Sink, and whenever there is an abundance of CO2 we get an abundance of Plankton and algae, so much that the sea turns green.
Oops, but then that solves the problem without need for a manufactured crisis.
Lets just ignore that bit of data to keep research funding on track.
(on the brighter side, at least it saved the Wales!!
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28441597</id>
	<title>Confusing units</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245782160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>they mix moles, kJ tons.  When you do the math, you get that this thing will use about 47 Megawatts to pull a ton of CO2 a day.  That's fine I guess... but it's hardly a little "tree" you would plant in your yard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>they mix moles , kJ tons .
When you do the math , you get that this thing will use about 47 Megawatts to pull a ton of CO2 a day .
That 's fine I guess... but it 's hardly a little " tree " you would plant in your yard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they mix moles, kJ tons.
When you do the math, you get that this thing will use about 47 Megawatts to pull a ton of CO2 a day.
That's fine I guess... but it's hardly a little "tree" you would plant in your yard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439437</id>
	<title>stop making fun of the global warming schemes</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1245774180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>just play the game</p><p>for example, i'm going to the DOE and i'm going to get $24 million in feasibility study funding for what i call "artificial carbon dioxide"</p><p>what you do is, in power plants and automobiles where carbon dioxide is typically produced, you replace the real carbon dioxide with artificial carbon dioxide. its all automatic and costs zero energy, don't worry about the specifics</p><p>then the artificial carbon dioxide takes up the space in the air normally occupied by real carbon dioxide, FORCING it to precipitate out of the atmosphere as harmless dry ice. you could even have it precipitate out into ice cream vending machines, so it even makes kids happy!</p><p>see? stop grumbling about these hare brained schemes. its more fun to play along</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>just play the gamefor example , i 'm going to the DOE and i 'm going to get $ 24 million in feasibility study funding for what i call " artificial carbon dioxide " what you do is , in power plants and automobiles where carbon dioxide is typically produced , you replace the real carbon dioxide with artificial carbon dioxide .
its all automatic and costs zero energy , do n't worry about the specificsthen the artificial carbon dioxide takes up the space in the air normally occupied by real carbon dioxide , FORCING it to precipitate out of the atmosphere as harmless dry ice .
you could even have it precipitate out into ice cream vending machines , so it even makes kids happy ! see ?
stop grumbling about these hare brained schemes .
its more fun to play along</tokentext>
<sentencetext>just play the gamefor example, i'm going to the DOE and i'm going to get $24 million in feasibility study funding for what i call "artificial carbon dioxide"what you do is, in power plants and automobiles where carbon dioxide is typically produced, you replace the real carbon dioxide with artificial carbon dioxide.
its all automatic and costs zero energy, don't worry about the specificsthen the artificial carbon dioxide takes up the space in the air normally occupied by real carbon dioxide, FORCING it to precipitate out of the atmosphere as harmless dry ice.
you could even have it precipitate out into ice cream vending machines, so it even makes kids happy!see?
stop grumbling about these hare brained schemes.
its more fun to play along</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440983</id>
	<title>Borrowing from Peter to pay Paul.</title>
	<author>NickW1234</author>
	<datestamp>1245779940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's 80\% efficient.
<p>
That means we're going to burn 20\% more fuel to deal with a problem that comes from burning too much fuel.
</p><p>
To make things worse, it doesn't even really deal with the problem, it just converts the CO2 to a liquid which has to be stored somehow, forever.  There's no easy answers there.  Dropping it to the bottom of the ocean won't work, at least not permanently.
</p><p>
The ocean is already a huge CO2 sink.  why wouldn't that CO2 solidify, covering the bottom of the ocean with dry ice, if the pressure is high enough, and the temperature low enough?
</p><p>
Simple answer.  There's not enough pressure to keep it as a solid, and at those low temperatures and high pressures, it dissolves easily into the water.  So, while you don't get bubbles coming up, the problem still hasn't gone away.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's 80 \ % efficient .
That means we 're going to burn 20 \ % more fuel to deal with a problem that comes from burning too much fuel .
To make things worse , it does n't even really deal with the problem , it just converts the CO2 to a liquid which has to be stored somehow , forever .
There 's no easy answers there .
Dropping it to the bottom of the ocean wo n't work , at least not permanently .
The ocean is already a huge CO2 sink .
why would n't that CO2 solidify , covering the bottom of the ocean with dry ice , if the pressure is high enough , and the temperature low enough ?
Simple answer .
There 's not enough pressure to keep it as a solid , and at those low temperatures and high pressures , it dissolves easily into the water .
So , while you do n't get bubbles coming up , the problem still has n't gone away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's 80\% efficient.
That means we're going to burn 20\% more fuel to deal with a problem that comes from burning too much fuel.
To make things worse, it doesn't even really deal with the problem, it just converts the CO2 to a liquid which has to be stored somehow, forever.
There's no easy answers there.
Dropping it to the bottom of the ocean won't work, at least not permanently.
The ocean is already a huge CO2 sink.
why wouldn't that CO2 solidify, covering the bottom of the ocean with dry ice, if the pressure is high enough, and the temperature low enough?
Simple answer.
There's not enough pressure to keep it as a solid, and at those low temperatures and high pressures, it dissolves easily into the water.
So, while you don't get bubbles coming up, the problem still hasn't gone away.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439363</id>
	<title>Re:More hair-brained ideas for "Global Warming"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245773880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>which then re-emit it.  using it to carbonate drinks isn't sequestering it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>which then re-emit it .
using it to carbonate drinks is n't sequestering it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>which then re-emit it.
using it to carbonate drinks isn't sequestering it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438993</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28441441</id>
	<title>Rube Goldberg and PT Barnum would be proud</title>
	<author>zogger</author>
	<datestamp>1245781680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is nutso. How about real trees instead, try to get some deserts back to being green. Or fast growing seasonal plants, when is the US going to allow industrial hemp growing? We can "capture carbon"<br>by the cubic mile that way and have something useful from it. And just getting charcoal down into the subsurface soil area in general, plowing the extra carbon into the soil in the form of charcoalized biomass. Build up the soil tilth all over and we won't have to use as much fossil fuel fertilizers. Plants are wonderful things to use to capture carbon, and they are solar fusion powered. -See, a high tech fulla buzzwords solution, using the latest biotechnology!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;) Of course, the tech to "grow plants and trees" is already out there in the public domain, can't really get a patented monopoly on it as easy or sell some zillion dollar "solution" to big governments.</p><p>I tell you when I got really suspicious of this dubious "war on carbon", and that is when they first started talking about some new trillion dollar a year carbon trading "industry", as in we don't already have enough middleman wealth skimmers and grifters out there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is nutso .
How about real trees instead , try to get some deserts back to being green .
Or fast growing seasonal plants , when is the US going to allow industrial hemp growing ?
We can " capture carbon " by the cubic mile that way and have something useful from it .
And just getting charcoal down into the subsurface soil area in general , plowing the extra carbon into the soil in the form of charcoalized biomass .
Build up the soil tilth all over and we wo n't have to use as much fossil fuel fertilizers .
Plants are wonderful things to use to capture carbon , and they are solar fusion powered .
-See , a high tech fulla buzzwords solution , using the latest biotechnology !
; ) Of course , the tech to " grow plants and trees " is already out there in the public domain , ca n't really get a patented monopoly on it as easy or sell some zillion dollar " solution " to big governments.I tell you when I got really suspicious of this dubious " war on carbon " , and that is when they first started talking about some new trillion dollar a year carbon trading " industry " , as in we do n't already have enough middleman wealth skimmers and grifters out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is nutso.
How about real trees instead, try to get some deserts back to being green.
Or fast growing seasonal plants, when is the US going to allow industrial hemp growing?
We can "capture carbon"by the cubic mile that way and have something useful from it.
And just getting charcoal down into the subsurface soil area in general, plowing the extra carbon into the soil in the form of charcoalized biomass.
Build up the soil tilth all over and we won't have to use as much fossil fuel fertilizers.
Plants are wonderful things to use to capture carbon, and they are solar fusion powered.
-See, a high tech fulla buzzwords solution, using the latest biotechnology!
;) Of course, the tech to "grow plants and trees" is already out there in the public domain, can't really get a patented monopoly on it as easy or sell some zillion dollar "solution" to big governments.I tell you when I got really suspicious of this dubious "war on carbon", and that is when they first started talking about some new trillion dollar a year carbon trading "industry", as in we don't already have enough middleman wealth skimmers and grifters out there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28450693</id>
	<title>Research photosynthesis!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245843540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This nothing but a short term solution. If you really want to solve the problem, cut down carbon emissions and plant more trees - that might take a while. So what you do is you spend those billions of dollars in researching photosynthesis and design machines that work in similar ways - absorb carbon dioxide from atmosphere and convert it into cellulose, oxygen and water.<br>If you actually read and research about photosynthesis on the internet, you'd be surprised how little we know about probably the oldest life sustaining phenomenon!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This nothing but a short term solution .
If you really want to solve the problem , cut down carbon emissions and plant more trees - that might take a while .
So what you do is you spend those billions of dollars in researching photosynthesis and design machines that work in similar ways - absorb carbon dioxide from atmosphere and convert it into cellulose , oxygen and water.If you actually read and research about photosynthesis on the internet , you 'd be surprised how little we know about probably the oldest life sustaining phenomenon !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This nothing but a short term solution.
If you really want to solve the problem, cut down carbon emissions and plant more trees - that might take a while.
So what you do is you spend those billions of dollars in researching photosynthesis and design machines that work in similar ways - absorb carbon dioxide from atmosphere and convert it into cellulose, oxygen and water.If you actually read and research about photosynthesis on the internet, you'd be surprised how little we know about probably the oldest life sustaining phenomenon!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440815</id>
	<title>Buying things in a sale</title>
	<author>Epeeist</author>
	<datestamp>1245779340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This sounds disturbingly like my wife's argument for buying things in a sale:</p><p>W; "I just saved [x] pounds!"<br>H: "How did you do that?"<br>W: "I bought [unneeded object] for [y] pounds in the sale, it was [x + y] pounds before"<br>H: "But we didn't need [unneeded object]!"</p><p>[fx]Wife smashing husband over head with sabre[/fx]</p><p>Wouldn't it be better not to generate the CO2, or at least minimise its production, in the first place?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This sounds disturbingly like my wife 's argument for buying things in a sale : W ; " I just saved [ x ] pounds !
" H : " How did you do that ?
" W : " I bought [ unneeded object ] for [ y ] pounds in the sale , it was [ x + y ] pounds before " H : " But we did n't need [ unneeded object ] !
" [ fx ] Wife smashing husband over head with sabre [ /fx ] Would n't it be better not to generate the CO2 , or at least minimise its production , in the first place ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This sounds disturbingly like my wife's argument for buying things in a sale:W; "I just saved [x] pounds!
"H: "How did you do that?
"W: "I bought [unneeded object] for [y] pounds in the sale, it was [x + y] pounds before"H: "But we didn't need [unneeded object]!
"[fx]Wife smashing husband over head with sabre[/fx]Wouldn't it be better not to generate the CO2, or at least minimise its production, in the first place?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28448081</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245767340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://ares.jsc.nasa.gov/HumanExplore/Exploration/EXLibrary/docs/ISRU/08Atmos.htm" title="nasa.gov" rel="nofollow">Leave it in gaseous form and</a> [nasa.gov]...</p><p>
&nbsp; </p><p><div class="quote"><p> Oxygen can be produced by passing CO2 through a zirconia electrolysis cell at 800 to 1000deg C. Twenty to thirty percent of the CO2 dissociates into oxygen and carbon monoxide. Separation is accomplished by electrochemical transport of oxide ion through a membrane. A prototype reactor using this chemistry has been run for over 1000 hours. Using such a scheme, we could bring a small unit to the surface of Mars which would then continuously make oxygen for life support, propellant use, or further processing. The only additional item we would need to supply is the power to run it: a 12kW unit would produce about one metric ton of oxygen per month.</p><p>This oxygen can be converted into water if we also bring a small supply of hydrogen. Since the molecular weight of hydrogen is 2 and the molecular weight of water is 18, we can leverage 2 kilograms of hydrogen into 18 kilograms of water. The mass savings would, at some manufacturing rate, pay back the mass of the oxygen production unit. After that, we would get water for only the price of getting the hydrogen to Mars.</p><p>2CO2 --&gt; 2CO + O2<br>zirconia electrolysis</p><p>O2 + 2 H2 --&gt; 2 H2O<br>combustion of hydrogen</p><p>If we choose to import hydrogen, there are other things we can do with it in addition to making water. A chemical reaction which converts CO2 into methane (CH4) was discovered in 1899. This is known as the Sabatier reaction. Along with the CO2, hydrogen is passed over a finely divided metal catalyst at an elevated temperature. Methane and water vapor are produced. By taking this water vapor and splitting it to obtain oxygen and hydrogen (which is recycled), we can completely convert the imported material into 4 times its mass of fuel. We also get the oxygen we need to burn this fuel in a rocket engine, fuel cell, or internal combustion engine. When combined with the production of additional oxygen via the zirconia process described above, only 4 kilograms of hydrogen can be converted into 72 kilograms of a rocket propellant mixture.</p><p>CO2 + 4H2 --&gt; CH4 + 2H20<br>Sabatier Reaction</p><p>2H20 --&gt; 2H2 + O2<br>Electrolysis</p><p>CO2 + 2H2 --&gt; CH4 + O2<br>Net Reaction</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Leave it in gaseous form and [ nasa.gov ] .. .   Oxygen can be produced by passing CO2 through a zirconia electrolysis cell at 800 to 1000deg C. Twenty to thirty percent of the CO2 dissociates into oxygen and carbon monoxide .
Separation is accomplished by electrochemical transport of oxide ion through a membrane .
A prototype reactor using this chemistry has been run for over 1000 hours .
Using such a scheme , we could bring a small unit to the surface of Mars which would then continuously make oxygen for life support , propellant use , or further processing .
The only additional item we would need to supply is the power to run it : a 12kW unit would produce about one metric ton of oxygen per month.This oxygen can be converted into water if we also bring a small supply of hydrogen .
Since the molecular weight of hydrogen is 2 and the molecular weight of water is 18 , we can leverage 2 kilograms of hydrogen into 18 kilograms of water .
The mass savings would , at some manufacturing rate , pay back the mass of the oxygen production unit .
After that , we would get water for only the price of getting the hydrogen to Mars.2CO2 -- &gt; 2CO + O2zirconia electrolysisO2 + 2 H2 -- &gt; 2 H2Ocombustion of hydrogenIf we choose to import hydrogen , there are other things we can do with it in addition to making water .
A chemical reaction which converts CO2 into methane ( CH4 ) was discovered in 1899 .
This is known as the Sabatier reaction .
Along with the CO2 , hydrogen is passed over a finely divided metal catalyst at an elevated temperature .
Methane and water vapor are produced .
By taking this water vapor and splitting it to obtain oxygen and hydrogen ( which is recycled ) , we can completely convert the imported material into 4 times its mass of fuel .
We also get the oxygen we need to burn this fuel in a rocket engine , fuel cell , or internal combustion engine .
When combined with the production of additional oxygen via the zirconia process described above , only 4 kilograms of hydrogen can be converted into 72 kilograms of a rocket propellant mixture.CO2 + 4H2 -- &gt; CH4 + 2H20Sabatier Reaction2H20 -- &gt; 2H2 + O2ElectrolysisCO2 + 2H2 -- &gt; CH4 + O2Net Reaction</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Leave it in gaseous form and [nasa.gov]...
   Oxygen can be produced by passing CO2 through a zirconia electrolysis cell at 800 to 1000deg C. Twenty to thirty percent of the CO2 dissociates into oxygen and carbon monoxide.
Separation is accomplished by electrochemical transport of oxide ion through a membrane.
A prototype reactor using this chemistry has been run for over 1000 hours.
Using such a scheme, we could bring a small unit to the surface of Mars which would then continuously make oxygen for life support, propellant use, or further processing.
The only additional item we would need to supply is the power to run it: a 12kW unit would produce about one metric ton of oxygen per month.This oxygen can be converted into water if we also bring a small supply of hydrogen.
Since the molecular weight of hydrogen is 2 and the molecular weight of water is 18, we can leverage 2 kilograms of hydrogen into 18 kilograms of water.
The mass savings would, at some manufacturing rate, pay back the mass of the oxygen production unit.
After that, we would get water for only the price of getting the hydrogen to Mars.2CO2 --&gt; 2CO + O2zirconia electrolysisO2 + 2 H2 --&gt; 2 H2Ocombustion of hydrogenIf we choose to import hydrogen, there are other things we can do with it in addition to making water.
A chemical reaction which converts CO2 into methane (CH4) was discovered in 1899.
This is known as the Sabatier reaction.
Along with the CO2, hydrogen is passed over a finely divided metal catalyst at an elevated temperature.
Methane and water vapor are produced.
By taking this water vapor and splitting it to obtain oxygen and hydrogen (which is recycled), we can completely convert the imported material into 4 times its mass of fuel.
We also get the oxygen we need to burn this fuel in a rocket engine, fuel cell, or internal combustion engine.
When combined with the production of additional oxygen via the zirconia process described above, only 4 kilograms of hydrogen can be converted into 72 kilograms of a rocket propellant mixture.CO2 + 4H2 --&gt; CH4 + 2H20Sabatier Reaction2H20 --&gt; 2H2 + O2ElectrolysisCO2 + 2H2 --&gt; CH4 + O2Net Reaction
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440829</id>
	<title>Atmospheric Processing.</title>
	<author>maillemaker</author>
	<datestamp>1245779400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have wondered when we would reach the point of trying atmospheric processing to correct some of our global warming issues.</p><p>I think it's great.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have wondered when we would reach the point of trying atmospheric processing to correct some of our global warming issues.I think it 's great .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have wondered when we would reach the point of trying atmospheric processing to correct some of our global warming issues.I think it's great.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28445401</id>
	<title>Why try to fix the consequences...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245751860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...instead of solving the problem?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...instead of solving the problem ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...instead of solving the problem?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28442129</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245783900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Algae farms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Algae farms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Algae farms.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439665</id>
	<title>Re:More hair-brained ideas for "Global Warming"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245774900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nobody worried about it because the large businesses were presumed to have large enough volume of tubes to make a trip to the recycle plant or a call for pickup worthwhile.  They were still required to dispose of them properly.</p><p>The difference now is that that <em>individual homeowners</em> are buying them, and the recycling options aren't anywhere near as convenient as they ought to be.</p><p>My home, for instance, burns about one CFL every six months.  There is only <em>one</em> recycling center in my home state that accepts them, and even then, they're geared for industrial uses: they only collect them on certain days, and even then by appointment (according to the website...).  I managed to catch them when dropping of my computer monitor, though, and my collection of two years of dead CFLs (a small box of about five  of 'em) was <em>laughed at</em>.  They still took them, though.</p><p>Regardless, If I don't want to keep years worth of potentially leaky mercury tubes in my basement (I don't know why they failed.  It <em>could</em> just be a faulty ballast, I hope..), I'd pretty much have to drive 25 miles every six months to drop off ONE bulb.</p><p>Ironically, if they failed more often, they'd probably be <em>easier</em> to dispose of correctly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody worried about it because the large businesses were presumed to have large enough volume of tubes to make a trip to the recycle plant or a call for pickup worthwhile .
They were still required to dispose of them properly.The difference now is that that individual homeowners are buying them , and the recycling options are n't anywhere near as convenient as they ought to be.My home , for instance , burns about one CFL every six months .
There is only one recycling center in my home state that accepts them , and even then , they 're geared for industrial uses : they only collect them on certain days , and even then by appointment ( according to the website... ) .
I managed to catch them when dropping of my computer monitor , though , and my collection of two years of dead CFLs ( a small box of about five of 'em ) was laughed at .
They still took them , though.Regardless , If I do n't want to keep years worth of potentially leaky mercury tubes in my basement ( I do n't know why they failed .
It could just be a faulty ballast , I hope.. ) , I 'd pretty much have to drive 25 miles every six months to drop off ONE bulb.Ironically , if they failed more often , they 'd probably be easier to dispose of correctly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody worried about it because the large businesses were presumed to have large enough volume of tubes to make a trip to the recycle plant or a call for pickup worthwhile.
They were still required to dispose of them properly.The difference now is that that individual homeowners are buying them, and the recycling options aren't anywhere near as convenient as they ought to be.My home, for instance, burns about one CFL every six months.
There is only one recycling center in my home state that accepts them, and even then, they're geared for industrial uses: they only collect them on certain days, and even then by appointment (according to the website...).
I managed to catch them when dropping of my computer monitor, though, and my collection of two years of dead CFLs (a small box of about five  of 'em) was laughed at.
They still took them, though.Regardless, If I don't want to keep years worth of potentially leaky mercury tubes in my basement (I don't know why they failed.
It could just be a faulty ballast, I hope..), I'd pretty much have to drive 25 miles every six months to drop off ONE bulb.Ironically, if they failed more often, they'd probably be easier to dispose of correctly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439119</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28442119</id>
	<title>Break CO2</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245783840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is it possible to break CO2 into O2 and C later? And user C as tonner in my printer<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it possible to break CO2 into O2 and C later ?
And user C as tonner in my printer : P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it possible to break CO2 into O2 and C later?
And user C as tonner in my printer :P</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439509</id>
	<title>Algae Need This</title>
	<author>phantomcircuit</author>
	<datestamp>1245774360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Algae farms which could produce fuel need large quantities of concentrated CO2 to function.  They would be a perfect match with these artificial trees.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Algae farms which could produce fuel need large quantities of concentrated CO2 to function .
They would be a perfect match with these artificial trees .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Algae farms which could produce fuel need large quantities of concentrated CO2 to function.
They would be a perfect match with these artificial trees.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28461793</id>
	<title>Re:More hair-brained ideas for "Global Warming"</title>
	<author>zippthorne</author>
	<datestamp>1245855600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not doing it wrong.  Four years is <em>nothing</em>.  I've got bulbs from 10 years and three houses ago.  MTBF is a cold hearted bitch when you've got a lot of 'em, and putting some in the bathroom sure didn't help.</p><p>Side note:</p><p>"not buying shitty bulbs" stopped being an option when GE and Philips outsourced their CFL production to the same overseas factories that were putting out the crappy bulbs in the first place.  This was, in fact, one of the many reasons (or rather, many instances of pretty much the same reason) that I no longer shop at Wal Mart unless absolutely necessary.</p><p>If you've got a list of genuinely not crappy bulbs and where you can buy them, I'll be quite interested in it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not doing it wrong .
Four years is nothing .
I 've got bulbs from 10 years and three houses ago .
MTBF is a cold hearted bitch when you 've got a lot of 'em , and putting some in the bathroom sure did n't help.Side note : " not buying shitty bulbs " stopped being an option when GE and Philips outsourced their CFL production to the same overseas factories that were putting out the crappy bulbs in the first place .
This was , in fact , one of the many reasons ( or rather , many instances of pretty much the same reason ) that I no longer shop at Wal Mart unless absolutely necessary.If you 've got a list of genuinely not crappy bulbs and where you can buy them , I 'll be quite interested in it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not doing it wrong.
Four years is nothing.
I've got bulbs from 10 years and three houses ago.
MTBF is a cold hearted bitch when you've got a lot of 'em, and putting some in the bathroom sure didn't help.Side note:"not buying shitty bulbs" stopped being an option when GE and Philips outsourced their CFL production to the same overseas factories that were putting out the crappy bulbs in the first place.
This was, in fact, one of the many reasons (or rather, many instances of pretty much the same reason) that I no longer shop at Wal Mart unless absolutely necessary.If you've got a list of genuinely not crappy bulbs and where you can buy them, I'll be quite interested in it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28443579</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440323</id>
	<title>Ridiculous idea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245777600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>'Artificial Tress'...? Strikes me as just another way for those in charge of energy production of avoiding facing the real issues at hand with the environment. Even if they do supposedly work, it's a completely ridiculous idea that humanity has reached the point where we need to start making fake trees to do the job that thousands of real trees could be doing if only we could stop cutting them all down and using their land to grow awful, unneeded food on. Seems to just be a further point of denial that our race is in over the horrendous point to which we have driven our environment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'Artificial Tress'... ?
Strikes me as just another way for those in charge of energy production of avoiding facing the real issues at hand with the environment .
Even if they do supposedly work , it 's a completely ridiculous idea that humanity has reached the point where we need to start making fake trees to do the job that thousands of real trees could be doing if only we could stop cutting them all down and using their land to grow awful , unneeded food on .
Seems to just be a further point of denial that our race is in over the horrendous point to which we have driven our environment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'Artificial Tress'...?
Strikes me as just another way for those in charge of energy production of avoiding facing the real issues at hand with the environment.
Even if they do supposedly work, it's a completely ridiculous idea that humanity has reached the point where we need to start making fake trees to do the job that thousands of real trees could be doing if only we could stop cutting them all down and using their land to grow awful, unneeded food on.
Seems to just be a further point of denial that our race is in over the horrendous point to which we have driven our environment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439811</id>
	<title>Goodish idea</title>
	<author>squoozer</author>
	<datestamp>1245775500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At the end of the day we have got to do something about the "carbon-in-the-atmosphere" problem and while this idea might not be fantastic it could be a step in the right direction. I actually think this is probably just the same carbon capture technology that they are planning on fitting to coal fired power stations (good overview in tabs - <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk\_politics/8014295.stm" title="bbc.co.uk">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk\_politics/8014295.stm</a> [bbc.co.uk]) in which case it would make more sense to capture it at source and not waste energy in transmission.</p><p>Personally I would like to see more research into using charcoal to capture the carbon. The idea goes like this: grow trees (fast growing trees), carbonize them into charcoal, plough them into the nations fields. Carbonizing them is messy but a self powering step and it can produce industrially useful chemicals. Ploughing the charcoal into the fields will improve the soil quality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At the end of the day we have got to do something about the " carbon-in-the-atmosphere " problem and while this idea might not be fantastic it could be a step in the right direction .
I actually think this is probably just the same carbon capture technology that they are planning on fitting to coal fired power stations ( good overview in tabs - http : //news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk \ _politics/8014295.stm [ bbc.co.uk ] ) in which case it would make more sense to capture it at source and not waste energy in transmission.Personally I would like to see more research into using charcoal to capture the carbon .
The idea goes like this : grow trees ( fast growing trees ) , carbonize them into charcoal , plough them into the nations fields .
Carbonizing them is messy but a self powering step and it can produce industrially useful chemicals .
Ploughing the charcoal into the fields will improve the soil quality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At the end of the day we have got to do something about the "carbon-in-the-atmosphere" problem and while this idea might not be fantastic it could be a step in the right direction.
I actually think this is probably just the same carbon capture technology that they are planning on fitting to coal fired power stations (good overview in tabs - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk\_politics/8014295.stm [bbc.co.uk]) in which case it would make more sense to capture it at source and not waste energy in transmission.Personally I would like to see more research into using charcoal to capture the carbon.
The idea goes like this: grow trees (fast growing trees), carbonize them into charcoal, plough them into the nations fields.
Carbonizing them is messy but a self powering step and it can produce industrially useful chemicals.
Ploughing the charcoal into the fields will improve the soil quality.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28447673</id>
	<title>real trees</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245763680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What the fuck is wrong with real trees? As a side benefit, they're MUCH prettier to look at.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What the fuck is wrong with real trees ?
As a side benefit , they 're MUCH prettier to look at .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the fuck is wrong with real trees?
As a side benefit, they're MUCH prettier to look at.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439385</id>
	<title>Not a bad idea at all.</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1245773940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thing is, although we know that we're jacking up the CO2, it does mean that we are the only ones that can jack up CO2.  As a rule, we're going to find that we will need to treat the atmosphere and manage it as much as we do our water and our land.</p><p>Dare I say, too, that if you plug the sequestration into a nuclear power plant, there's less CO2...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thing is , although we know that we 're jacking up the CO2 , it does mean that we are the only ones that can jack up CO2 .
As a rule , we 're going to find that we will need to treat the atmosphere and manage it as much as we do our water and our land.Dare I say , too , that if you plug the sequestration into a nuclear power plant , there 's less CO2.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thing is, although we know that we're jacking up the CO2, it does mean that we are the only ones that can jack up CO2.
As a rule, we're going to find that we will need to treat the atmosphere and manage it as much as we do our water and our land.Dare I say, too, that if you plug the sequestration into a nuclear power plant, there's less CO2...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28441885</id>
	<title>Re:A question is</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245783060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't have 999 acres of forest and one acre of artificial trees?</p><p>Seems like that'd be a good solution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't have 999 acres of forest and one acre of artificial trees ? Seems like that 'd be a good solution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't have 999 acres of forest and one acre of artificial trees?Seems like that'd be a good solution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439325</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28444067</id>
	<title>Re:When the fuck did "TOYOTA" become a monetary un</title>
	<author>Quirkz</author>
	<datestamp>1245790500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No kidding. We invented numbers so that we could use them to mean things. A "Toyota" is a wildly vague number that might mean 10k or 50k. That's just plain weird as a way to explain the cost of things.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No kidding .
We invented numbers so that we could use them to mean things .
A " Toyota " is a wildly vague number that might mean 10k or 50k .
That 's just plain weird as a way to explain the cost of things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No kidding.
We invented numbers so that we could use them to mean things.
A "Toyota" is a wildly vague number that might mean 10k or 50k.
That's just plain weird as a way to explain the cost of things.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28441417</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439435</id>
	<title>Idea chasing funding</title>
	<author>GaryOlson</author>
	<datestamp>1245774180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This guy is just looking for funding for his pet project so he can avoid real work. Read the statement closely:<blockquote><div><p>"...I don't<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... want to discuss this in a public forum...I...<i>want</i>...to tailor my proposals to the Department of Energy in a way that makes them more palatable."</p></div></blockquote><p>Just another harebrained idea chasing government money. <br> <br> And the carbon math is best appreciated by an auditor from Arthur Anderson: creating CO2 to harvest CO2 for a "net gain"?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This guy is just looking for funding for his pet project so he can avoid real work .
Read the statement closely : " ...I do n't ... want to discuss this in a public forum...I...want...to tailor my proposals to the Department of Energy in a way that makes them more palatable .
" Just another harebrained idea chasing government money .
And the carbon math is best appreciated by an auditor from Arthur Anderson : creating CO2 to harvest CO2 for a " net gain " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This guy is just looking for funding for his pet project so he can avoid real work.
Read the statement closely:"...I don't ... want to discuss this in a public forum...I...want...to tailor my proposals to the Department of Energy in a way that makes them more palatable.
"Just another harebrained idea chasing government money.
And the carbon math is best appreciated by an auditor from Arthur Anderson: creating CO2 to harvest CO2 for a "net gain"?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28442501</id>
	<title>For the low low price of $9,999 ...</title>
	<author>levicivita</author>
	<datestamp>1245785220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... I commit to deploying one unit of the latest generation iDontPollute&amp;trade (patent pending).  The proprietary technology uses a revolutionary light-dependent reaction mediated via the thylakoid membranes of custom designed chloroplasts which use light energy to synthesize adenosine triphosphate and nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate (say that 10 times really fast).  This technology, although in its early stages, is already enjoying wide adoption at a global level, see for example <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">.</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>... I commit to deploying one unit of the latest generation iDontPollute&amp;trade ( patent pending ) .
The proprietary technology uses a revolutionary light-dependent reaction mediated via the thylakoid membranes of custom designed chloroplasts which use light energy to synthesize adenosine triphosphate and nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate ( say that 10 times really fast ) .
This technology , although in its early stages , is already enjoying wide adoption at a global level , see for example .
[ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... I commit to deploying one unit of the latest generation iDontPollute&amp;trade (patent pending).
The proprietary technology uses a revolutionary light-dependent reaction mediated via the thylakoid membranes of custom designed chloroplasts which use light energy to synthesize adenosine triphosphate and nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate (say that 10 times really fast).
This technology, although in its early stages, is already enjoying wide adoption at a global level, see for example .
[wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439375</id>
	<title>in short:</title>
	<author>drolli</author>
	<datestamp>1245773940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>we lower the efficiency of burning fossile fuels? You know that sounds like a really good idea to me....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>we lower the efficiency of burning fossile fuels ?
You know that sounds like a really good idea to me... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>we lower the efficiency of burning fossile fuels?
You know that sounds like a really good idea to me....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28441261</id>
	<title>What's the price of a Toyota ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245780960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... I guess they mean the <a href="http://www.toyota.com/landcruiser/" title="toyota.com" rel="nofollow">Toyota Landcruiser</a> [toyota.com] @ $65,000? Or the <a href="http://www.toyota.com/yaris/" title="toyota.com" rel="nofollow">Yaris</a> [toyota.com] @ $12,500 ??<br>I guess the President's in for a surprise when he signs the bill @ 100.000 Toyota's and discovers it is the first<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... I guess they mean the Toyota Landcruiser [ toyota.com ] @ $ 65,000 ?
Or the Yaris [ toyota.com ] @ $ 12,500 ?
? I guess the President 's in for a surprise when he signs the bill @ 100.000 Toyota 's and discovers it is the first : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... I guess they mean the Toyota Landcruiser [toyota.com] @ $65,000?
Or the Yaris [toyota.com] @ $12,500 ?
?I guess the President's in for a surprise when he signs the bill @ 100.000 Toyota's and discovers it is the first :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440081</id>
	<title>Or we could do what works naturally...</title>
	<author>stillpixel</author>
	<datestamp>1245776640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>We could plant more trees and stop cutting down our forests.. I don't think that even takes all that much energy.  And a plus is the trees even look nicer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We could plant more trees and stop cutting down our forests.. I do n't think that even takes all that much energy .
And a plus is the trees even look nicer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We could plant more trees and stop cutting down our forests.. I don't think that even takes all that much energy.
And a plus is the trees even look nicer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28445685</id>
	<title>Disposal?</title>
	<author>Ned Fletcher</author>
	<datestamp>1245753000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Store it? Lets just put it under Yucca mountain, that works for everything else, right?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Store it ?
Lets just put it under Yucca mountain , that works for everything else , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Store it?
Lets just put it under Yucca mountain, that works for everything else, right?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439617</id>
	<title>My half-brained solution</title>
	<author>Daimanta</author>
	<datestamp>1245774780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they start conjuring up half-brained ideas I should be able to do the same.</p><p>Plant massive amounts of apple trees in apple orchards. The trees will absorb the CO2 and produce apples. Then force kids at highschools to eat apples instead of unhealthy crap and it will help to reduce the obesity problem!</p><p>Sure, this plan is flawed and won't work in practice but it stops EBIL GLOBAL WARMING and that's good enough for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they start conjuring up half-brained ideas I should be able to do the same.Plant massive amounts of apple trees in apple orchards .
The trees will absorb the CO2 and produce apples .
Then force kids at highschools to eat apples instead of unhealthy crap and it will help to reduce the obesity problem ! Sure , this plan is flawed and wo n't work in practice but it stops EBIL GLOBAL WARMING and that 's good enough for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they start conjuring up half-brained ideas I should be able to do the same.Plant massive amounts of apple trees in apple orchards.
The trees will absorb the CO2 and produce apples.
Then force kids at highschools to eat apples instead of unhealthy crap and it will help to reduce the obesity problem!Sure, this plan is flawed and won't work in practice but it stops EBIL GLOBAL WARMING and that's good enough for me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438983</id>
	<title>Re:More hair-brained ideas for "Global Warming"</title>
	<author>Icegryphon</author>
	<datestamp>1245772440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just remember if you break a CFL to follow these important Steps <a href="http://www.epa.gov/hg/spills/#fluorescent" title="epa.gov" rel="nofollow">EPA</a> [epa.gov].<br>
Glenn Beck has a wonderful joke about it on his show.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just remember if you break a CFL to follow these important Steps EPA [ epa.gov ] .
Glenn Beck has a wonderful joke about it on his show .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just remember if you break a CFL to follow these important Steps EPA [epa.gov].
Glenn Beck has a wonderful joke about it on his show.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28446867</id>
	<title>And so it begins...</title>
	<author>Vernes</author>
	<datestamp>1245758580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...the exodus of humanity out of the garden of nature.
And only after the doors close behind us, do we realize we have no way to get back.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...the exodus of humanity out of the garden of nature .
And only after the doors close behind us , do we realize we have no way to get back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...the exodus of humanity out of the garden of nature.
And only after the doors close behind us, do we realize we have no way to get back.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440079</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245776640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Now where to put all that liquid CO2?</p></div><p>The moon.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now where to put all that liquid CO2 ? The moon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now where to put all that liquid CO2?The moon.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439691</id>
	<title>Re:More hair-brained ideas for "Global Warming"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245774960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Umm, injecting CO2 into oil wells to enhance recovery has been used for some time, limited primarily by supplies of CO2. Injection into empty gas wells is doable as well, and somewhat more exotic approaches(like bubbling the stuff through algae farms) aren't too far outside the realm of the currently possible.</p></div><p>You're making it sound awfully easy. There are a number of approaches, but AFAIK the tech is not there yet for long-term storage of huge amounts of CO2. There was a huge hoopla about a law passed in Germany about carbon sequestration for coal power plants; companies are experimenting with the technology, but they aren't willing to guarantee the stuff actually stays "down" for more than a couple of decades. After that, it's the governments problem. So, yes, my first reaction to TFA was that it didn't even mention what the hell they were planning to do with all the liquid CO2 they're recovering from the atmosphere.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Umm , injecting CO2 into oil wells to enhance recovery has been used for some time , limited primarily by supplies of CO2 .
Injection into empty gas wells is doable as well , and somewhat more exotic approaches ( like bubbling the stuff through algae farms ) are n't too far outside the realm of the currently possible.You 're making it sound awfully easy .
There are a number of approaches , but AFAIK the tech is not there yet for long-term storage of huge amounts of CO2 .
There was a huge hoopla about a law passed in Germany about carbon sequestration for coal power plants ; companies are experimenting with the technology , but they are n't willing to guarantee the stuff actually stays " down " for more than a couple of decades .
After that , it 's the governments problem .
So , yes , my first reaction to TFA was that it did n't even mention what the hell they were planning to do with all the liquid CO2 they 're recovering from the atmosphere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Umm, injecting CO2 into oil wells to enhance recovery has been used for some time, limited primarily by supplies of CO2.
Injection into empty gas wells is doable as well, and somewhat more exotic approaches(like bubbling the stuff through algae farms) aren't too far outside the realm of the currently possible.You're making it sound awfully easy.
There are a number of approaches, but AFAIK the tech is not there yet for long-term storage of huge amounts of CO2.
There was a huge hoopla about a law passed in Germany about carbon sequestration for coal power plants; companies are experimenting with the technology, but they aren't willing to guarantee the stuff actually stays "down" for more than a couple of decades.
After that, it's the governments problem.
So, yes, my first reaction to TFA was that it didn't even mention what the hell they were planning to do with all the liquid CO2 they're recovering from the atmosphere.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439119</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439383</id>
	<title>Re:More hair-brained ideas for "Global Warming"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245773940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So why the outrage now?  How long have we been using fluorescent bulbs in office buildings.  What about the mercury in those?  Or are you just arguing against CFLs for the sake of arguing?</p><p>I thought so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So why the outrage now ?
How long have we been using fluorescent bulbs in office buildings .
What about the mercury in those ?
Or are you just arguing against CFLs for the sake of arguing ? I thought so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So why the outrage now?
How long have we been using fluorescent bulbs in office buildings.
What about the mercury in those?
Or are you just arguing against CFLs for the sake of arguing?I thought so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28446065</id>
	<title>People need to reconsider if...</title>
	<author>sega01</author>
	<datestamp>1245754680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Global Warming is caused by humans, and if it does harm in the first place. I'm not saying that it's not caused by humans and isn't harmful, but please think for yourself and read rather than taking the mainstream, approved view. This is a good read; just try to find the truth rather than assuming what you've been taught (or what that site says).

Either way, Toyota is a bad measure of cost. Is that my $800 1986 Toyota Celica GT-S, or a newer luxury sedan?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Global Warming is caused by humans , and if it does harm in the first place .
I 'm not saying that it 's not caused by humans and is n't harmful , but please think for yourself and read rather than taking the mainstream , approved view .
This is a good read ; just try to find the truth rather than assuming what you 've been taught ( or what that site says ) .
Either way , Toyota is a bad measure of cost .
Is that my $ 800 1986 Toyota Celica GT-S , or a newer luxury sedan ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Global Warming is caused by humans, and if it does harm in the first place.
I'm not saying that it's not caused by humans and isn't harmful, but please think for yourself and read rather than taking the mainstream, approved view.
This is a good read; just try to find the truth rather than assuming what you've been taught (or what that site says).
Either way, Toyota is a bad measure of cost.
Is that my $800 1986 Toyota Celica GT-S, or a newer luxury sedan?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440633</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245778680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Inject it into the desert (with other chemicals) in hopes of reviving it as usable land?<br>There has been some small-scale attempts to reverse desertification, this could be pretty useful.</p><p>Sell it to algae farm operators?</p><p>Fuel?<br>As Brainiac has taught us, CO2 makes fantastic fuel<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)<br>I would love to see the day when we are all in wheelchairs with fire extinguishers.  Say no to oil kids.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Inject it into the desert ( with other chemicals ) in hopes of reviving it as usable land ? There has been some small-scale attempts to reverse desertification , this could be pretty useful.Sell it to algae farm operators ? Fuel ? As Brainiac has taught us , CO2 makes fantastic fuel ; ) I would love to see the day when we are all in wheelchairs with fire extinguishers .
Say no to oil kids .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Inject it into the desert (with other chemicals) in hopes of reviving it as usable land?There has been some small-scale attempts to reverse desertification, this could be pretty useful.Sell it to algae farm operators?Fuel?As Brainiac has taught us, CO2 makes fantastic fuel ;)I would love to see the day when we are all in wheelchairs with fire extinguishers.
Say no to oil kids.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439685</id>
	<title>Hmmm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245774900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>New business plan...
<ul> <li>Build concentrated solar power plant in the middle of the desert</li><li>Build a ton of these CO2 collectors driven off the solar power</li><li>Sell as many carbon credits as possible</li><li>Sell the remaining electricity into the grid</li><li>PROFIT!</li></ul><p>
Could it work?  Now where to put all that liquid CO2?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>New business plan.. . Build concentrated solar power plant in the middle of the desertBuild a ton of these CO2 collectors driven off the solar powerSell as many carbon credits as possibleSell the remaining electricity into the gridPROFIT !
Could it work ?
Now where to put all that liquid CO2 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>New business plan...
 Build concentrated solar power plant in the middle of the desertBuild a ton of these CO2 collectors driven off the solar powerSell as many carbon credits as possibleSell the remaining electricity into the gridPROFIT!
Could it work?
Now where to put all that liquid CO2?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28441949</id>
	<title>Awesome!</title>
	<author>SlashDev</author>
	<datestamp>1245783240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can now buy my BMW M3 back!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can now buy my BMW M3 back !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can now buy my BMW M3 back!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28445367</id>
	<title>Re:More hair-brained ideas for "Global Warming"</title>
	<author>Walkingshark</author>
	<datestamp>1245751740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It occurs to me that injecting CO2 into the ground to store it could have some interesting side effects. Many caves are carved as carbonic acid eats away at cracks in the rocks. Mix CO2 with groundwater and wait a few million years and you have yourself some nice artificial cave systems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It occurs to me that injecting CO2 into the ground to store it could have some interesting side effects .
Many caves are carved as carbonic acid eats away at cracks in the rocks .
Mix CO2 with groundwater and wait a few million years and you have yourself some nice artificial cave systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It occurs to me that injecting CO2 into the ground to store it could have some interesting side effects.
Many caves are carved as carbonic acid eats away at cracks in the rocks.
Mix CO2 with groundwater and wait a few million years and you have yourself some nice artificial cave systems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28446515</id>
	<title>hmmm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245756660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>... just plant more trees?  How about that for an idea?</htmltext>
<tokenext>... just plant more trees ?
How about that for an idea ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... just plant more trees?
How about that for an idea?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28443385</id>
	<title>I vote we ship the CO2 to Mars.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245788220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, it won't do any harm on Mars.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , it wo n't do any harm on Mars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, it won't do any harm on Mars.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28443407</id>
	<title>Re:More hair-brained ideas for "Global Warming"</title>
	<author>QuantumRiff</author>
	<datestamp>1245788280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The whole point is that the CO2 would be used twice.  IE, instead of releasing 1 ton of CO2 into the air to power your house for a day (yes, I'm making numbers up) your releasing 1 ton of CO2 into the air to power your house for a day, and drive your car for a day.  The CO2 is like a fertilizer for some algae, they grow much faster in its presence.  I believe MIT had some projects with Algae based bio diesel being produced in the smokestacks of their boilers, to see if it was feasible...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The whole point is that the CO2 would be used twice .
IE , instead of releasing 1 ton of CO2 into the air to power your house for a day ( yes , I 'm making numbers up ) your releasing 1 ton of CO2 into the air to power your house for a day , and drive your car for a day .
The CO2 is like a fertilizer for some algae , they grow much faster in its presence .
I believe MIT had some projects with Algae based bio diesel being produced in the smokestacks of their boilers , to see if it was feasible.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The whole point is that the CO2 would be used twice.
IE, instead of releasing 1 ton of CO2 into the air to power your house for a day (yes, I'm making numbers up) your releasing 1 ton of CO2 into the air to power your house for a day, and drive your car for a day.
The CO2 is like a fertilizer for some algae, they grow much faster in its presence.
I believe MIT had some projects with Algae based bio diesel being produced in the smokestacks of their boilers, to see if it was feasible...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439527</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28443579</id>
	<title>Re:More hair-brained ideas for "Global Warming"</title>
	<author>Abcd1234</author>
	<datestamp>1245788940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>My home, for instance, burns about one CFL every six months.</i></p><p>You're doing something wrong.  I have CFLs that I installed in my house *four years ago* that are still working just fine.  At minimum, you should get your electrical checked.  And don't buy shitty bulbs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My home , for instance , burns about one CFL every six months.You 're doing something wrong .
I have CFLs that I installed in my house * four years ago * that are still working just fine .
At minimum , you should get your electrical checked .
And do n't buy shitty bulbs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My home, for instance, burns about one CFL every six months.You're doing something wrong.
I have CFLs that I installed in my house *four years ago* that are still working just fine.
At minimum, you should get your electrical checked.
And don't buy shitty bulbs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439665</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440137</id>
	<title>Re:More hair-brained ideas for "Global Warming"</title>
	<author>Andy Dodd</author>
	<datestamp>1245776880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"and somewhat more exotic approaches(like bubbling the stuff through algae farms) aren't too far outside the realm of the currently possible."</p><p>That's an interesting observation.  As I understand what I've read so far, one of the biggest challenges to large-scale algae farming has been keeping the medium sterile.  The most efficient species at generating biodiesel are NOT the dominant ones if other algae species or organisms enter.  As a result, most pilot projects have been using power plant exhaust directly, as it is fundamentally sterile by nature of the fact that it had recently been superheated.</p><p>One would assume that these "synthetic trees" would produce pure sterile CO2, which might allow these algae farms to be located separately from power plants.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" and somewhat more exotic approaches ( like bubbling the stuff through algae farms ) are n't too far outside the realm of the currently possible .
" That 's an interesting observation .
As I understand what I 've read so far , one of the biggest challenges to large-scale algae farming has been keeping the medium sterile .
The most efficient species at generating biodiesel are NOT the dominant ones if other algae species or organisms enter .
As a result , most pilot projects have been using power plant exhaust directly , as it is fundamentally sterile by nature of the fact that it had recently been superheated.One would assume that these " synthetic trees " would produce pure sterile CO2 , which might allow these algae farms to be located separately from power plants .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"and somewhat more exotic approaches(like bubbling the stuff through algae farms) aren't too far outside the realm of the currently possible.
"That's an interesting observation.
As I understand what I've read so far, one of the biggest challenges to large-scale algae farming has been keeping the medium sterile.
The most efficient species at generating biodiesel are NOT the dominant ones if other algae species or organisms enter.
As a result, most pilot projects have been using power plant exhaust directly, as it is fundamentally sterile by nature of the fact that it had recently been superheated.One would assume that these "synthetic trees" would produce pure sterile CO2, which might allow these algae farms to be located separately from power plants.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439119</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28452879</id>
	<title>Re:A question is</title>
	<author>mpeskett</author>
	<datestamp>1245860340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do we have a thousand acres going spare to plant and maintain a new forest on? Well, ok, maybe we do, but you try organising that.
</p><p>But why not have a thousand acres of high-tech porta-cabins? Or however many acres of high-tech porta-cabins we need to effectively reduce CO2 in the atmosphere, and cover the rest in an aesthetically pleasing forest... couple hundred acres of each should satisfy both the need for efficient CO2 removal, and the need for pleasant walking spaces.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do we have a thousand acres going spare to plant and maintain a new forest on ?
Well , ok , maybe we do , but you try organising that .
But why not have a thousand acres of high-tech porta-cabins ?
Or however many acres of high-tech porta-cabins we need to effectively reduce CO2 in the atmosphere , and cover the rest in an aesthetically pleasing forest... couple hundred acres of each should satisfy both the need for efficient CO2 removal , and the need for pleasant walking spaces .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do we have a thousand acres going spare to plant and maintain a new forest on?
Well, ok, maybe we do, but you try organising that.
But why not have a thousand acres of high-tech porta-cabins?
Or however many acres of high-tech porta-cabins we need to effectively reduce CO2 in the atmosphere, and cover the rest in an aesthetically pleasing forest... couple hundred acres of each should satisfy both the need for efficient CO2 removal, and the need for pleasant walking spaces.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439325</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28443231</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245787620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Release it near the CO2 collectors to increase efficiency and get more money to sponge off of.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Release it near the CO2 collectors to increase efficiency and get more money to sponge off of .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Release it near the CO2 collectors to increase efficiency and get more money to sponge off of.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439685</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440497</id>
	<title>I thought slashdotters would be all for this...</title>
	<author>bridgeco</author>
	<datestamp>1245778260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>After all, real trees can't run linux.</htmltext>
<tokenext>After all , real trees ca n't run linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After all, real trees can't run linux.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439747</id>
	<title>Payback</title>
	<author>Ohmaar</author>
	<datestamp>1245775140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How many REAL trees could you plant for the cost of one of these stupid artificial trees? Real trees absorb carbon dioxide using NO electricity, there's no carbon storage problem they produce oxygen and beautify the surroundings to boot!

This whole "artificial tree" solution sounds more like some business with a politician in their pocket.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many REAL trees could you plant for the cost of one of these stupid artificial trees ?
Real trees absorb carbon dioxide using NO electricity , there 's no carbon storage problem they produce oxygen and beautify the surroundings to boot !
This whole " artificial tree " solution sounds more like some business with a politician in their pocket .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many REAL trees could you plant for the cost of one of these stupid artificial trees?
Real trees absorb carbon dioxide using NO electricity, there's no carbon storage problem they produce oxygen and beautify the surroundings to boot!
This whole "artificial tree" solution sounds more like some business with a politician in their pocket.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28441359</id>
	<title>Re:More hair-brained ideas for "Global Warming"</title>
	<author>Pollux</author>
	<datestamp>1245781380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>More generally, mercury containing florescent lamps (mostly the conventional long-tube type) have been used in commercial and industrial applications for decades...somehow, nobody worried at all about that.</i></p><p>That's because businesses and offices that employed use of florescent lamps knew that they had to properly dispose of the ballasts &amp; bulbs that contained the stuff.  By-and-large, when you do business, you can't be ignorant of proper disposal procedures, less you like getting fined up the wazoo to pay the government to clean up for you.</p><p>On the other hand, once you put this stuff into the hands of Joe Consumer, they don't know jack about what the stuff is or why you can't throw it away in the dumpster.  Sadder yet, they prefer to remain ignorant.</p><p>The other day, someone in my apartment was moving out.  They threw their VCR, old computer, monitor, and air conditioner into the rear dumpster.  Guess my kids will be soaking up dioxins, lead, and refrigerant compounds for years.  Thanks Joe!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More generally , mercury containing florescent lamps ( mostly the conventional long-tube type ) have been used in commercial and industrial applications for decades...somehow , nobody worried at all about that.That 's because businesses and offices that employed use of florescent lamps knew that they had to properly dispose of the ballasts &amp; bulbs that contained the stuff .
By-and-large , when you do business , you ca n't be ignorant of proper disposal procedures , less you like getting fined up the wazoo to pay the government to clean up for you.On the other hand , once you put this stuff into the hands of Joe Consumer , they do n't know jack about what the stuff is or why you ca n't throw it away in the dumpster .
Sadder yet , they prefer to remain ignorant.The other day , someone in my apartment was moving out .
They threw their VCR , old computer , monitor , and air conditioner into the rear dumpster .
Guess my kids will be soaking up dioxins , lead , and refrigerant compounds for years .
Thanks Joe !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More generally, mercury containing florescent lamps (mostly the conventional long-tube type) have been used in commercial and industrial applications for decades...somehow, nobody worried at all about that.That's because businesses and offices that employed use of florescent lamps knew that they had to properly dispose of the ballasts &amp; bulbs that contained the stuff.
By-and-large, when you do business, you can't be ignorant of proper disposal procedures, less you like getting fined up the wazoo to pay the government to clean up for you.On the other hand, once you put this stuff into the hands of Joe Consumer, they don't know jack about what the stuff is or why you can't throw it away in the dumpster.
Sadder yet, they prefer to remain ignorant.The other day, someone in my apartment was moving out.
They threw their VCR, old computer, monitor, and air conditioner into the rear dumpster.
Guess my kids will be soaking up dioxins, lead, and refrigerant compounds for years.
Thanks Joe!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439119</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28451123</id>
	<title>Re:Buying things in a sale</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245849900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are already trying to minimize it (e.g. Carbon Credits).  Whether that is good/bad/effective is a different argument, it is happening.</p><p>While true that this is a reactive solution, it isn't a "wrong" step.  Plus, it is scalable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are already trying to minimize it ( e.g .
Carbon Credits ) .
Whether that is good/bad/effective is a different argument , it is happening.While true that this is a reactive solution , it is n't a " wrong " step .
Plus , it is scalable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are already trying to minimize it (e.g.
Carbon Credits).
Whether that is good/bad/effective is a different argument, it is happening.While true that this is a reactive solution, it isn't a "wrong" step.
Plus, it is scalable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440815</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439371</id>
	<title>What a joke</title>
	<author>OzPeter</author>
	<datestamp>1245773880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>FTFA<p> <i>"Broecker told CNN the units could stand in the middle of Australia, for example, and their presence wouldn't significantly disrupt the atmospheric distribution."</i> </p><p>Except for the minor problem of being fuck all in the middle of Australia - including massive power generation facilities require to run them</p><p>I am not sure if it is related, but sometime in the last year I saw some reality/doco TV program that was attempting to produce a proof of concept of such an artificial tree in a fixed time frame.  What struck me then was the bad engineering and science that was being put forward as the implementation of this "great idea".  It was like a mythbusters pretending to be real research.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FTFA " Broecker told CNN the units could stand in the middle of Australia , for example , and their presence would n't significantly disrupt the atmospheric distribution .
" Except for the minor problem of being fuck all in the middle of Australia - including massive power generation facilities require to run themI am not sure if it is related , but sometime in the last year I saw some reality/doco TV program that was attempting to produce a proof of concept of such an artificial tree in a fixed time frame .
What struck me then was the bad engineering and science that was being put forward as the implementation of this " great idea " .
It was like a mythbusters pretending to be real research .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTFA "Broecker told CNN the units could stand in the middle of Australia, for example, and their presence wouldn't significantly disrupt the atmospheric distribution.
" Except for the minor problem of being fuck all in the middle of Australia - including massive power generation facilities require to run themI am not sure if it is related, but sometime in the last year I saw some reality/doco TV program that was attempting to produce a proof of concept of such an artificial tree in a fixed time frame.
What struck me then was the bad engineering and science that was being put forward as the implementation of this "great idea".
It was like a mythbusters pretending to be real research.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440363</id>
	<title>Obviously stating the obvious</title>
	<author>JustJenFelice</author>
	<datestamp>1245777780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jeeze...I'm so glad that somebody used time, energy, resources and money (likely including government grant funding) to come up with a product that DOES THE SAME F-ING THING AS A NATURALLY OCCURRING, FREE TREE.</p><p>Holy hell - has the world gone mad?!?  <em>"Let's take a free, naturally sustaining object - one that provides reduced energy consumption, decreases CO2, decreases soil erosion, protects from excessive sun exposure, maintains ecosystem diversity, assists in water conservation, provides tangible resources, etc. - and use our dwindling financial and energy resources to create an imitation that doesn't do half that of the natural object...BRILLIANT!"</em> </p><p>This may have application in places where <em>real</em> trees can no longer grow, but...my god...are we really that lazy that we can't plant a freakin' tree?!?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jeeze...I 'm so glad that somebody used time , energy , resources and money ( likely including government grant funding ) to come up with a product that DOES THE SAME F-ING THING AS A NATURALLY OCCURRING , FREE TREE.Holy hell - has the world gone mad ? ! ?
" Let 's take a free , naturally sustaining object - one that provides reduced energy consumption , decreases CO2 , decreases soil erosion , protects from excessive sun exposure , maintains ecosystem diversity , assists in water conservation , provides tangible resources , etc .
- and use our dwindling financial and energy resources to create an imitation that does n't do half that of the natural object...BRILLIANT !
" This may have application in places where real trees can no longer grow , but...my god...are we really that lazy that we ca n't plant a freakin ' tree ? !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jeeze...I'm so glad that somebody used time, energy, resources and money (likely including government grant funding) to come up with a product that DOES THE SAME F-ING THING AS A NATURALLY OCCURRING, FREE TREE.Holy hell - has the world gone mad?!?
"Let's take a free, naturally sustaining object - one that provides reduced energy consumption, decreases CO2, decreases soil erosion, protects from excessive sun exposure, maintains ecosystem diversity, assists in water conservation, provides tangible resources, etc.
- and use our dwindling financial and energy resources to create an imitation that doesn't do half that of the natural object...BRILLIANT!
" This may have application in places where real trees can no longer grow, but...my god...are we really that lazy that we can't plant a freakin' tree?!
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439325</id>
	<title>A question is</title>
	<author>Chrisq</author>
	<datestamp>1245773700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A question is would you rather walk through a thousand acres of forest or an acre covered with these high-tech porta-cabins?</htmltext>
<tokenext>A question is would you rather walk through a thousand acres of forest or an acre covered with these high-tech porta-cabins ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A question is would you rather walk through a thousand acres of forest or an acre covered with these high-tech porta-cabins?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28444975</id>
	<title>Power Cars j/k</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245750360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sweet we can power cars with liquid CO2 (much like compressed air) oh wait that puts it right back into the air LOL</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sweet we can power cars with liquid CO2 ( much like compressed air ) oh wait that puts it right back into the air LOL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sweet we can power cars with liquid CO2 (much like compressed air) oh wait that puts it right back into the air LOL</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440411</id>
	<title>Re:A question is</title>
	<author>digitalsolo</author>
	<datestamp>1245777960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That depends.   Do we have paintball guns while we go on this walk?
<br>
<br>
Are ninjas involved in any way?</htmltext>
<tokenext>That depends .
Do we have paintball guns while we go on this walk ?
Are ninjas involved in any way ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That depends.
Do we have paintball guns while we go on this walk?
Are ninjas involved in any way?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439325</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439119</id>
	<title>Re:More hair-brained ideas for "Global Warming"</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1245772920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Umm, injecting CO2 into oil wells to enhance recovery has been used for some time, limited primarily by supplies of CO2. Injection into empty gas wells is doable as well, and somewhat more exotic approaches(like bubbling the stuff through algae farms) aren't too far outside the realm of the currently possible.<br> <br>

As for CFLs, <a href="http://www.epa.gov/cflrecycling/index.htm" title="epa.gov">Recyclers aren't too hard to find</a> [epa.gov]. (More generally, mercury containing florescent lamps(mostly the conventional long-tube type) have been used in commercial and industrial applications for decades; because they are cheap and last a long time. Somehow, nobody worried at all about that, until they became associated with the evil environmental movement, at which point their mercury content became a talking point. Funny how that works...)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Umm , injecting CO2 into oil wells to enhance recovery has been used for some time , limited primarily by supplies of CO2 .
Injection into empty gas wells is doable as well , and somewhat more exotic approaches ( like bubbling the stuff through algae farms ) are n't too far outside the realm of the currently possible .
As for CFLs , Recyclers are n't too hard to find [ epa.gov ] .
( More generally , mercury containing florescent lamps ( mostly the conventional long-tube type ) have been used in commercial and industrial applications for decades ; because they are cheap and last a long time .
Somehow , nobody worried at all about that , until they became associated with the evil environmental movement , at which point their mercury content became a talking point .
Funny how that works... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Umm, injecting CO2 into oil wells to enhance recovery has been used for some time, limited primarily by supplies of CO2.
Injection into empty gas wells is doable as well, and somewhat more exotic approaches(like bubbling the stuff through algae farms) aren't too far outside the realm of the currently possible.
As for CFLs, Recyclers aren't too hard to find [epa.gov].
(More generally, mercury containing florescent lamps(mostly the conventional long-tube type) have been used in commercial and industrial applications for decades; because they are cheap and last a long time.
Somehow, nobody worried at all about that, until they became associated with the evil environmental movement, at which point their mercury content became a talking point.
Funny how that works...)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28441289</id>
	<title>Yay!!</title>
	<author>Kral\_Blbec</author>
	<datestamp>1245781080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Obama is happy. Another reason for a tax, even if the CO2 tree plan never actually gets started.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Obama is happy .
Another reason for a tax , even if the CO2 tree plan never actually gets started .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obama is happy.
Another reason for a tax, even if the CO2 tree plan never actually gets started.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439479</id>
	<title>Pair with photobioreactor for free diesel</title>
	<author>petgiraffe</author>
	<datestamp>1245774300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>By itself this device only gives you liquid CO2 which you then have to deal with.  But hook this to an algae photobioreactor tower and you can have a self-contained pod that generates use able diesel fuel with only sunlight and air as inputs.
<br> <br>
Pairing them will let you eliminate the "compress to a liquid" step as well, which should further lower the energy requirement for CO2 reclamation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>By itself this device only gives you liquid CO2 which you then have to deal with .
But hook this to an algae photobioreactor tower and you can have a self-contained pod that generates use able diesel fuel with only sunlight and air as inputs .
Pairing them will let you eliminate the " compress to a liquid " step as well , which should further lower the energy requirement for CO2 reclamation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By itself this device only gives you liquid CO2 which you then have to deal with.
But hook this to an algae photobioreactor tower and you can have a self-contained pod that generates use able diesel fuel with only sunlight and air as inputs.
Pairing them will let you eliminate the "compress to a liquid" step as well, which should further lower the energy requirement for CO2 reclamation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28443517</id>
	<title>Artificial trees?</title>
	<author>PapaSmurph</author>
	<datestamp>1245788700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know. I'm kinda fond of the real ones. And last I checked, they still worked OK. We just may need a few more of them. Maybe we could plant them on the top of some of those buildings.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know .
I 'm kinda fond of the real ones .
And last I checked , they still worked OK. We just may need a few more of them .
Maybe we could plant them on the top of some of those buildings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know.
I'm kinda fond of the real ones.
And last I checked, they still worked OK. We just may need a few more of them.
Maybe we could plant them on the top of some of those buildings.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440851</id>
	<title>What the hell is C02?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245779460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't see ethane (C2 alkane) causing any problems in the near future. C<b>O</b>2 on the other hand, might be troublesome!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see ethane ( C2 alkane ) causing any problems in the near future .
CO2 on the other hand , might be troublesome !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see ethane (C2 alkane) causing any problems in the near future.
CO2 on the other hand, might be troublesome!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28450573</id>
	<title>FTA..</title>
	<author>sqldr</author>
	<datestamp>1245841620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"LONDON, England (CNN) -- Scientists in the United States are developing.."</p><p>Wait..  where?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" LONDON , England ( CNN ) -- Scientists in the United States are developing.. " Wait.. where ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"LONDON, England (CNN) -- Scientists in the United States are developing.."Wait..  where?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28443937</id>
	<title>Re:Rube Goldberg and PT Barnum would be proud</title>
	<author>jeffc128ca</author>
	<datestamp>1245790080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now I'm no biologist.  But from what I have been reading over the years on a tree's CO2 sucking ability is that this is only a positive when the tree is young.  Older trees emit more CO2 than they take in.  Even Wired brought that point up in one of its articles.  These articles also pointed out that when a tree dies and falls to the ground (I hear the puns now) it emits a lot of CO2 while not taking any in.  Forgive for being too lazy to google this stuff but I'm sure it's not that hard (biology geeks please speak up).</p><p>The other is what if this device sucks up more CO2 in the space it takes up compared to the equivalent amount of trees.  In the end we want to take more carbon out of the air to get things back in balance, wouldn't these be a handy tool to do it?  If it works more efficiently than a tree why not?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now I 'm no biologist .
But from what I have been reading over the years on a tree 's CO2 sucking ability is that this is only a positive when the tree is young .
Older trees emit more CO2 than they take in .
Even Wired brought that point up in one of its articles .
These articles also pointed out that when a tree dies and falls to the ground ( I hear the puns now ) it emits a lot of CO2 while not taking any in .
Forgive for being too lazy to google this stuff but I 'm sure it 's not that hard ( biology geeks please speak up ) .The other is what if this device sucks up more CO2 in the space it takes up compared to the equivalent amount of trees .
In the end we want to take more carbon out of the air to get things back in balance , would n't these be a handy tool to do it ?
If it works more efficiently than a tree why not ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now I'm no biologist.
But from what I have been reading over the years on a tree's CO2 sucking ability is that this is only a positive when the tree is young.
Older trees emit more CO2 than they take in.
Even Wired brought that point up in one of its articles.
These articles also pointed out that when a tree dies and falls to the ground (I hear the puns now) it emits a lot of CO2 while not taking any in.
Forgive for being too lazy to google this stuff but I'm sure it's not that hard (biology geeks please speak up).The other is what if this device sucks up more CO2 in the space it takes up compared to the equivalent amount of trees.
In the end we want to take more carbon out of the air to get things back in balance, wouldn't these be a handy tool to do it?
If it works more efficiently than a tree why not?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28441441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439393</id>
	<title>If only..</title>
	<author>kheldan</author>
	<datestamp>1245774000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If only there was something you could just plant in the ground that would grow on it's own, powered only by water and sunlight, that would do the same thing..</htmltext>
<tokenext>If only there was something you could just plant in the ground that would grow on it 's own , powered only by water and sunlight , that would do the same thing. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If only there was something you could just plant in the ground that would grow on it's own, powered only by water and sunlight, that would do the same thing..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439347</id>
	<title>Re:More hair-brained ideas for "Global Warming"</title>
	<author>ndavis</author>
	<datestamp>1245773760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>as long as the gas is pure, it can be used for carbonating drinks.</p></div><p>Sounds good so we get carbon out of the air then put it in a drink that releases it back into the air.  It seems to me like we are just picking up the cost or supplying carbon to drink manufacturers.
<br> <br>
I still think we should just plant bamboo as it grows quickly then we can harvest it like the do in China.  This seems like a better plan then building a bunch of towers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>as long as the gas is pure , it can be used for carbonating drinks.Sounds good so we get carbon out of the air then put it in a drink that releases it back into the air .
It seems to me like we are just picking up the cost or supplying carbon to drink manufacturers .
I still think we should just plant bamboo as it grows quickly then we can harvest it like the do in China .
This seems like a better plan then building a bunch of towers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>as long as the gas is pure, it can be used for carbonating drinks.Sounds good so we get carbon out of the air then put it in a drink that releases it back into the air.
It seems to me like we are just picking up the cost or supplying carbon to drink manufacturers.
I still think we should just plant bamboo as it grows quickly then we can harvest it like the do in China.
This seems like a better plan then building a bunch of towers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438993</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28444083</id>
	<title>Re:More hair-brained ideas for "Global Warming"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245790500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are natural gas companies that store natural gas underground in naturally occuring formations. If we had enough of these formations, we could store all the CO2. It is proven technology. They even re-extract the natural gas and clean it on demand.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are natural gas companies that store natural gas underground in naturally occuring formations .
If we had enough of these formations , we could store all the CO2 .
It is proven technology .
They even re-extract the natural gas and clean it on demand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are natural gas companies that store natural gas underground in naturally occuring formations.
If we had enough of these formations, we could store all the CO2.
It is proven technology.
They even re-extract the natural gas and clean it on demand.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439691</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439721</id>
	<title>Don't Forget</title>
	<author>sexconker</author>
	<datestamp>1245775020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Costs and pollution during:</p><p>Building, shipping, installation, maintenance, removal, replacement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Costs and pollution during : Building , shipping , installation , maintenance , removal , replacement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Costs and pollution during:Building, shipping, installation, maintenance, removal, replacement.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439323</id>
	<title>Disposal</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245773700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So we have 800kg or C02, what the hell are we going to do with it? All I see in the article is trapping the C02 but plants still do it better because they convert it back to O2. Are they planning on doing that or just sell the liquid C02 off and have other people readmit it into the air?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So we have 800kg or C02 , what the hell are we going to do with it ?
All I see in the article is trapping the C02 but plants still do it better because they convert it back to O2 .
Are they planning on doing that or just sell the liquid C02 off and have other people readmit it into the air ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So we have 800kg or C02, what the hell are we going to do with it?
All I see in the article is trapping the C02 but plants still do it better because they convert it back to O2.
Are they planning on doing that or just sell the liquid C02 off and have other people readmit it into the air?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439103</id>
	<title>Re:More hair-brained ideas for "Global Warming"</title>
	<author>h4rr4r</author>
	<datestamp>1245772860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Return them to HomeDepot. There your problem is solved.</p><p>We have had places that take waste like cfls and half used paint for ages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Return them to HomeDepot .
There your problem is solved.We have had places that take waste like cfls and half used paint for ages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Return them to HomeDepot.
There your problem is solved.We have had places that take waste like cfls and half used paint for ages.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28450675</id>
	<title>Re-emission at power plant</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1245843360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>In other words, if we simply plugged our device in to the power grid to satisfy its energy needs, for every roughly 1,000 kilograms [of carbon dioxide] we collected we would re-emit 200, so 800 we can chalk up as having been successful.</p></div></blockquote><p>And emit lots of other crap, depending on the power generation technology. Couldn't the thing just have a big solar panel array near it?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In other words , if we simply plugged our device in to the power grid to satisfy its energy needs , for every roughly 1,000 kilograms [ of carbon dioxide ] we collected we would re-emit 200 , so 800 we can chalk up as having been successful.And emit lots of other crap , depending on the power generation technology .
Could n't the thing just have a big solar panel array near it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In other words, if we simply plugged our device in to the power grid to satisfy its energy needs, for every roughly 1,000 kilograms [of carbon dioxide] we collected we would re-emit 200, so 800 we can chalk up as having been successful.And emit lots of other crap, depending on the power generation technology.
Couldn't the thing just have a big solar panel array near it?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440229</id>
	<title>Combine the artifical trees and windmills</title>
	<author>KDN</author>
	<datestamp>1245777240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the big problems of windmills is that the availability does not match demand.  When there is high demand, send all power to consumers.  During low demand, run the artificial trees.  It should not matter much if the CO2 is being removed at midnight or at noon.  So you have a win (Wind power to consumers) and another win (removal of excess carbon dioxide) in a single plant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the big problems of windmills is that the availability does not match demand .
When there is high demand , send all power to consumers .
During low demand , run the artificial trees .
It should not matter much if the CO2 is being removed at midnight or at noon .
So you have a win ( Wind power to consumers ) and another win ( removal of excess carbon dioxide ) in a single plant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the big problems of windmills is that the availability does not match demand.
When there is high demand, send all power to consumers.
During low demand, run the artificial trees.
It should not matter much if the CO2 is being removed at midnight or at noon.
So you have a win (Wind power to consumers) and another win (removal of excess carbon dioxide) in a single plant.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440157</id>
	<title>Negative externalities</title>
	<author>ShooterNeo</author>
	<datestamp>1245776940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>   Every fossil fuel burned in the world releases CO2 into the atmosphere.  While CO2 is obviously not a particularly toxic pollutant, in overwhelmingly vast quantities it probably will eventually cause problems.  No, plants don't remove CO2 - when a plant dies, the decay process re-releases most of the CO2 right back into the atmosphere.  If global CO2 levels ever rise to the point that the gas is causing serious problems, the only fix will be a process like this one.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Collecting all the CO2 released when it was burned the first time will cost a lot of money - that's why it makes sense to tax fossil fuels and to invest the money in clean energy technology and save some for a cleanup program.  A tax would charge uses of fossil fuels for the "negative externality" - the cost incurred by others to clean up all that CO2 and the damage resulting from it.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; In any case, climate change won't be all doom and gloom, at least for high technology societies that can react to the changes.  Some day, we'll have vast numbers of CO2 scrubbers like these 'trees', powered by nuclear or solar energy.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Every fossil fuel burned in the world releases CO2 into the atmosphere .
While CO2 is obviously not a particularly toxic pollutant , in overwhelmingly vast quantities it probably will eventually cause problems .
No , plants do n't remove CO2 - when a plant dies , the decay process re-releases most of the CO2 right back into the atmosphere .
If global CO2 levels ever rise to the point that the gas is causing serious problems , the only fix will be a process like this one .
      Collecting all the CO2 released when it was burned the first time will cost a lot of money - that 's why it makes sense to tax fossil fuels and to invest the money in clean energy technology and save some for a cleanup program .
A tax would charge uses of fossil fuels for the " negative externality " - the cost incurred by others to clean up all that CO2 and the damage resulting from it .
      In any case , climate change wo n't be all doom and gloom , at least for high technology societies that can react to the changes .
Some day , we 'll have vast numbers of CO2 scrubbers like these 'trees ' , powered by nuclear or solar energy .
   </tokentext>
<sentencetext>   Every fossil fuel burned in the world releases CO2 into the atmosphere.
While CO2 is obviously not a particularly toxic pollutant, in overwhelmingly vast quantities it probably will eventually cause problems.
No, plants don't remove CO2 - when a plant dies, the decay process re-releases most of the CO2 right back into the atmosphere.
If global CO2 levels ever rise to the point that the gas is causing serious problems, the only fix will be a process like this one.
      Collecting all the CO2 released when it was burned the first time will cost a lot of money - that's why it makes sense to tax fossil fuels and to invest the money in clean energy technology and save some for a cleanup program.
A tax would charge uses of fossil fuels for the "negative externality" - the cost incurred by others to clean up all that CO2 and the damage resulting from it.
      In any case, climate change won't be all doom and gloom, at least for high technology societies that can react to the changes.
Some day, we'll have vast numbers of CO2 scrubbers like these 'trees', powered by nuclear or solar energy.
   </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439477</id>
	<title>Which is more efficient?</title>
	<author>Weaselmancer</author>
	<datestamp>1245774300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Millions of little smog reducing machines stuck under millions of cars, which have to meet stringent weight/price/space requirements to be practical - <a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0111/p01s03-sten.html" title="csmonitor.com">or gigantic smokestack scrubbers like algae biofuel this one?</a> [csmonitor.com]

</p><p>Trying to mop up all the problems from millions of cars is the real problem here.

</p><p>Instead, let's work on moving to all electric cars.  This will centralize the pollution at the power generators and then you can take whatever steps are necessary to minimize it without having to worry about catalytic converters and artificial trees.

</p><p>I mean really, artificial tree/plants to remove CO2?  Come on.  There are easier solutions out there.  Here's another one:  <a href="http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article\_alge.html" title="unh.edu">Algae biodiesel.</a> [unh.edu]

</p><p>If you don't like electric, go diesel.  Then use algae farms to press for oil.  It's a closed-loop CO2 system.  Car burns fuel, CO2 goes into air.  Biodiesel farm collects CO2 and sunshine in photosynthesis, makes fuel.  Lather rinse repeat.  Closed loop to CO2, just like mother nature does in a forest.

</p><p>I applaud these guys for pitching a solution that works with what we have, but if we really want a solution that speaks to the future we need to ditch what we have and try for better.  Mopping up the water from the sink overflowing is a temporary solution - we should be working on turning the sink off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Millions of little smog reducing machines stuck under millions of cars , which have to meet stringent weight/price/space requirements to be practical - or gigantic smokestack scrubbers like algae biofuel this one ?
[ csmonitor.com ] Trying to mop up all the problems from millions of cars is the real problem here .
Instead , let 's work on moving to all electric cars .
This will centralize the pollution at the power generators and then you can take whatever steps are necessary to minimize it without having to worry about catalytic converters and artificial trees .
I mean really , artificial tree/plants to remove CO2 ?
Come on .
There are easier solutions out there .
Here 's another one : Algae biodiesel .
[ unh.edu ] If you do n't like electric , go diesel .
Then use algae farms to press for oil .
It 's a closed-loop CO2 system .
Car burns fuel , CO2 goes into air .
Biodiesel farm collects CO2 and sunshine in photosynthesis , makes fuel .
Lather rinse repeat .
Closed loop to CO2 , just like mother nature does in a forest .
I applaud these guys for pitching a solution that works with what we have , but if we really want a solution that speaks to the future we need to ditch what we have and try for better .
Mopping up the water from the sink overflowing is a temporary solution - we should be working on turning the sink off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Millions of little smog reducing machines stuck under millions of cars, which have to meet stringent weight/price/space requirements to be practical - or gigantic smokestack scrubbers like algae biofuel this one?
[csmonitor.com]

Trying to mop up all the problems from millions of cars is the real problem here.
Instead, let's work on moving to all electric cars.
This will centralize the pollution at the power generators and then you can take whatever steps are necessary to minimize it without having to worry about catalytic converters and artificial trees.
I mean really, artificial tree/plants to remove CO2?
Come on.
There are easier solutions out there.
Here's another one:  Algae biodiesel.
[unh.edu]

If you don't like electric, go diesel.
Then use algae farms to press for oil.
It's a closed-loop CO2 system.
Car burns fuel, CO2 goes into air.
Biodiesel farm collects CO2 and sunshine in photosynthesis, makes fuel.
Lather rinse repeat.
Closed loop to CO2, just like mother nature does in a forest.
I applaud these guys for pitching a solution that works with what we have, but if we really want a solution that speaks to the future we need to ditch what we have and try for better.
Mopping up the water from the sink overflowing is a temporary solution - we should be working on turning the sink off.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438903</id>
	<title>More hair-brained ideas for "Global Warming"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245772140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just like the fact that we legislated use of compact fluorescents with NO plan on disposal,<br>we have a half thought out plan on liquifying CO2, but nothing on storage and disposal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just like the fact that we legislated use of compact fluorescents with NO plan on disposal,we have a half thought out plan on liquifying CO2 , but nothing on storage and disposal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just like the fact that we legislated use of compact fluorescents with NO plan on disposal,we have a half thought out plan on liquifying CO2, but nothing on storage and disposal.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438993</id>
	<title>Re:More hair-brained ideas for "Global Warming"</title>
	<author>dunkelfalke</author>
	<datestamp>1245772500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>as long as the gas is pure, it can be used for carbonating drinks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>as long as the gas is pure , it can be used for carbonating drinks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>as long as the gas is pure, it can be used for carbonating drinks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28456825</id>
	<title>Wasteful, inefficient</title>
	<author>JobyOne</author>
	<datestamp>1245874200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Removing CO2 is all well and good, but if these are plugged into the grid (mostly coal powered) we're basically just reducing the efficiency of our power plants by 20\%.  Unless the energy to power these little guys comes from renewable sources we're robbing efficiency to pay pollution.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Removing CO2 is all well and good , but if these are plugged into the grid ( mostly coal powered ) we 're basically just reducing the efficiency of our power plants by 20 \ % .
Unless the energy to power these little guys comes from renewable sources we 're robbing efficiency to pay pollution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Removing CO2 is all well and good, but if these are plugged into the grid (mostly coal powered) we're basically just reducing the efficiency of our power plants by 20\%.
Unless the energy to power these little guys comes from renewable sources we're robbing efficiency to pay pollution.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28447733</id>
	<title>Machanical Tree</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245764220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mechanical tree, mechanical tree.<br>What thee be, mechanical tree.</p><p>With limbs of steel; And roots of power.<br>You form a great mechanical tower.</p><p>(thats all i got)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mechanical tree , mechanical tree.What thee be , mechanical tree.With limbs of steel ; And roots of power.You form a great mechanical tower .
( thats all i got )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mechanical tree, mechanical tree.What thee be, mechanical tree.With limbs of steel; And roots of power.You form a great mechanical tower.
(thats all i got)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439953</id>
	<title>Why so narrow minded, Slashdot?</title>
	<author>petrus4</author>
	<datestamp>1245776220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a good idea, and it's actually something I've had in my own head for years, but I've never been able to work out the finer points of how it might function.</p><p>It's exactly what we need; come up with a sufficiently non-polluting means of mass-producing these things, and then line the streets with them.  Clean air for breathing, astronomy, and as a major part of lowering global temperatures and cleaning up the environment.</p><p>I am seeing more and more, an influx of WoW forum refugees to Slashdot, as I've mentioned earlier, and they're just as anti-intellectual, brazenly sociopathic, and juvenile now as they were within the WoW forums.</p><p>Please go back there, former WoW players.  Slashdot used to be a place for intelligent, often enjoyable discussion of ideas; and you're ruining it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a good idea , and it 's actually something I 've had in my own head for years , but I 've never been able to work out the finer points of how it might function.It 's exactly what we need ; come up with a sufficiently non-polluting means of mass-producing these things , and then line the streets with them .
Clean air for breathing , astronomy , and as a major part of lowering global temperatures and cleaning up the environment.I am seeing more and more , an influx of WoW forum refugees to Slashdot , as I 've mentioned earlier , and they 're just as anti-intellectual , brazenly sociopathic , and juvenile now as they were within the WoW forums.Please go back there , former WoW players .
Slashdot used to be a place for intelligent , often enjoyable discussion of ideas ; and you 're ruining it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a good idea, and it's actually something I've had in my own head for years, but I've never been able to work out the finer points of how it might function.It's exactly what we need; come up with a sufficiently non-polluting means of mass-producing these things, and then line the streets with them.
Clean air for breathing, astronomy, and as a major part of lowering global temperatures and cleaning up the environment.I am seeing more and more, an influx of WoW forum refugees to Slashdot, as I've mentioned earlier, and they're just as anti-intellectual, brazenly sociopathic, and juvenile now as they were within the WoW forums.Please go back there, former WoW players.
Slashdot used to be a place for intelligent, often enjoyable discussion of ideas; and you're ruining it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28442037</id>
	<title>Just so we're clear...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245783540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It costs as much as a Toyota?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It costs as much as a Toyota ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It costs as much as a Toyota?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28443331</id>
	<title>My Xmas tree</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245787980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where you gonna put a tree that big?</p><p>Bend over and I'll show you.</p><p>You've got a lot of nerve talking to me like that, Griswold!</p><p>I wasn't talking to you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where you gon na put a tree that big ? Bend over and I 'll show you.You 've got a lot of nerve talking to me like that , Griswold ! I was n't talking to you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where you gonna put a tree that big?Bend over and I'll show you.You've got a lot of nerve talking to me like that, Griswold!I wasn't talking to you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28443935</id>
	<title>Trees, boats, and coke</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245790080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If God had meant us to have fibreglass boats, he would have given us fibreglass trees... Though I suspect their C02 uptake would not be quite as good as the ones with the green leafy bits. Just imagine when Artificial Grass 98 is replaced with Artificial Grass XP and is no longer compatible with Artificial Tree v 3.1. Everyone will be forced into a wholesale hardware upgrade.</p><p>The real solution is to drink more Coke and persuade Coca Cola to stockpile more Coke to meet the increasing demand, thereby developing a nice capitalist solution to the problem of carbon sequestration.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If God had meant us to have fibreglass boats , he would have given us fibreglass trees... Though I suspect their C02 uptake would not be quite as good as the ones with the green leafy bits .
Just imagine when Artificial Grass 98 is replaced with Artificial Grass XP and is no longer compatible with Artificial Tree v 3.1 .
Everyone will be forced into a wholesale hardware upgrade.The real solution is to drink more Coke and persuade Coca Cola to stockpile more Coke to meet the increasing demand , thereby developing a nice capitalist solution to the problem of carbon sequestration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If God had meant us to have fibreglass boats, he would have given us fibreglass trees... Though I suspect their C02 uptake would not be quite as good as the ones with the green leafy bits.
Just imagine when Artificial Grass 98 is replaced with Artificial Grass XP and is no longer compatible with Artificial Tree v 3.1.
Everyone will be forced into a wholesale hardware upgrade.The real solution is to drink more Coke and persuade Coca Cola to stockpile more Coke to meet the increasing demand, thereby developing a nice capitalist solution to the problem of carbon sequestration.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439527</id>
	<title>Re:More hair-brained ideas for "Global Warming"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245774420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Two objections:</p><p>1. The CO2 would be released into the air again<br>2. I really doubt that if this plan is implemented on a massive scale(which is the only way it would be remotely useful) there would be enough demand from the carb-soda industry for the product</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Two objections : 1 .
The CO2 would be released into the air again2 .
I really doubt that if this plan is implemented on a massive scale ( which is the only way it would be remotely useful ) there would be enough demand from the carb-soda industry for the product</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Two objections:1.
The CO2 would be released into the air again2.
I really doubt that if this plan is implemented on a massive scale(which is the only way it would be remotely useful) there would be enough demand from the carb-soda industry for the product</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438993</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439405</id>
	<title>Tree Huggers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245774060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are at war against the trees.  People are stupid. C02 is what trees "breath" to survive.  Eliminating C02 will kill off the trees and make the planet uninhabitable.  But people will never understand the truth, instead they choose to believe in a totally insane politician who believes in his cause so much that he flies his private jet all around the world spewing C02 everywhere he can.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are at war against the trees .
People are stupid .
C02 is what trees " breath " to survive .
Eliminating C02 will kill off the trees and make the planet uninhabitable .
But people will never understand the truth , instead they choose to believe in a totally insane politician who believes in his cause so much that he flies his private jet all around the world spewing C02 everywhere he can .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are at war against the trees.
People are stupid.
C02 is what trees "breath" to survive.
Eliminating C02 will kill off the trees and make the planet uninhabitable.
But people will never understand the truth, instead they choose to believe in a totally insane politician who believes in his cause so much that he flies his private jet all around the world spewing C02 everywhere he can.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438993
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28448081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28445367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439691
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439119
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28447341
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439953
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28443407
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439527
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438993
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28441885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439325
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440411
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439325
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438983
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28452879
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439325
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440633
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439119
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28451123
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440815
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28449441
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440983
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28461793
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28443579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439665
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439119
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28442129
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439347
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438993
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439383
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438983
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28444067
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28441417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28441359
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439119
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28443231
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28443937
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28441441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28444083
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439691
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439119
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439103
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_23_1429209_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439325
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28441885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440411
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28452879
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440363
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440983
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28449441
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439437
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439435
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439477
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28446065
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28441417
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28444067
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28441597
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440323
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440815
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28451123
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439953
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28447341
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438903
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438993
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439527
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28443407
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439363
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439347
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439103
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439119
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439665
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28443579
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28461793
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440137
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28441359
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439691
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28445367
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28444083
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28438983
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439383
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439311
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439371
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439509
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439393
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28441441
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28443937
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439811
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439685
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28442129
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440633
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28443231
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28448081
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28440079
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_23_1429209.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_23_1429209.28439323
</commentlist>
</conversation>
