Greenpeace : Amazing new technology cuts CO2 emissions 99.5%

[Rob187ok]

This technology could ruin the carbon tax plans.

[henrykay01]

I invented a breakthrough source of energy which violates the law of conservation of energy. I have a PROOF that there are electrodynamic phenomena which violate the law of energy conservation. Making a 6 kW generator will cost $1200 in mass production, value of energy produced yearly $5400.

I am looking for $300 000 for a prototype and $3M for patents.

H. Tomasz Grzybowski

tel. +48-512-933-540

[bignycom]

Cool

[Kyleacameron]

Why haven't we heard of this in America? I rarely see any green options in the daily media. Guess I should have thrown my tv out a long time ago...

btw Tetekofa what kind of oxygen emissions are you worried about? From what I've heard, our oxygen output is radically dropping.

[ybnvs2]

oops... CO2 isn't a pollutant... if it was then we've been killing ourselves with seltzer water.

[mmtot]

Do people not see the irony in Greenpeace wanting to cut down on atmospheric co2, the gas that plants breath to grow and survive? What a total fraud !

[katzenjammerkid]

There is no irony.

don't be ignorant...

of course, plants use co2!

The issue is that there is TOO MUCH of it right now, the system is out of balance.

If you make these improvements and reduce co2 in the enviroment, it's not like all the plants in the world will die.

Do your research and check your logic.

[jamesrobertdobbs]

Kazakhstan greatest country in world!

[tetekofa]

- '"what about the oxygen emissions?

[mrmartin123]

thank you GreenpeaceUk for clarifying that up, but i would also like to add to my statement that gases heaver than air do not rise, therefore can not, and do not magically go floating up into the atmo

[AuroraOmega]

Really??!! So there must be no dust, sand, heavy metals in the air you say. Ever heard of storms , winds and such stuff. Volcanoes erupt??? Have you ever been to school: primary, secondary...? You have thousands of documentaries to watch to catch up with the rest of the world. Friendly suggestion: start right away.

[mrmartin123]

hate to say this, but co2, even when its blown up in a storm, comes back down, look it up

[GreenpeaceUK]

Just want to make clear that this video is nothing to do with Greenpeace. We have not reviewed and are not aware of this technology, and so cannot endorse it. To avoid any confusion we have contacted the company to request that Greenpeace's name is removed from any publicity claims relating to this product...

[mrmartin123]

my god people,are you guys nutz, carbon emisitions are good for the earth, what do you think plants live on CO2, cut that down, and plants die, then , no plants, no air, no air, no mankind, my god, i cant believe you people are buying into this co2 B.S. co2 is part of nature, and if you believe mankind is responsible for its down fall your fooling yourself.

[Nochacktul]

Youre an idiot...

[mrmartin123]

kid, two words, "GROW" "UP",

[AuroraOmega]

Yeah, kid needs some manners but you lack education :(

[AuroraOmega]

Don¨'t insult but rather put an argument to the discussion, otherwise this utterly uninformed 41 year old told you off with every right. Your lack in manners lost you this discussion. Shame to lose to less knowledgeable opponent.

[AuroraOmega]

Are you for real??? We are about to cook whole Earth. Hope you like it hot! If you are really 41 you should get informed as you obviously stopped reading and learning long time ago :O

[JonThm]

Plants take in CO2 to support all life on Earth. Since 2005, temperatures have gone down globally, as CO2 emisisons, and life on Earth, have gone up.

[IWantToPlayAGame314]

which covers around four fifths of the Earths surface. Many scientists agree that global warming/climate change etc. cannot be stopped as human activity makes up such a small fraction of pollutants in the atmosphere.

[IWantToPlayAGame314]

I believe that the emissions that are generated from factories and warehouses etc. make up a small fraction of the carbon dioxide (CO2) and environmentally-harmful gases that is in the atmosphere today (within 2-3%). The majority of the amount of harmful gases is from nature itself. The two main constituents are decaying vegetation, which creates carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4). The same gases are made by the vast oceans, through their expansion in heat and other scientific phenomena,

[mrmultidextrous]

You can believe whatever you want, but burning 8 billion metric tons of carbon a year is increasing CO2 in the air by about 3 ppm a year, and will increase as the ocean's ability to buffer CO2 decreases with increasing ocean temperature and increasing ocean acidity.

[checkersq]

thats true,but it is also true that carbon emmissions have increased dramatically over the last century, which is also not good in respect to he greenhouse effect

[freudnow]

why do you use greenpeace name?

[ambrosaek]

i want to say that if such invention is found we should spread it quickly in order t SAVE THE PLANET !!! i belive in humanity ps could please sb explain in plain words how far exactly from destruction?

[humanrightstruth]

To learn more about WORLDBANK plans = google search YouTube video :

"PROTEST-Indigenous Peoples "2nd MAY REVOLT" at the UN"

[eskimokiss90]

Now put The Technology Into Cars And We Found Our Answer... IF The Technology Exist, Works And True....

That Country Economy Will Blow Up Cause oF That.

[fox20012]

Holy F**k ...... I mean really HOLY HOLY f**K, thats is an Amazing invention

[XanatharEye]

lolol borat is so funny

[andypants05]

Lets say Tommy the Terrorist decides to pay Numnuts Nuclear a visit. What then?

I say no thx nuclear, our atmosphere is polluted enough without the risk of ANOTHER Chernobyl. Either by accident or purposeful attack. We can hardly call any technology reliable. And these are deadly chemicals we are talking about, ones that dont break down for MILLIONS of years. I get enough risk of cancer from watching TV thanks. Let's think sustainable and safe i say. Who cares about how many green notes it takes

[GhostInTheShell29]

@andypants05 So what if it doesn't break down for millions of years? we built yucca mountain for that. You get no risk of cancer from watching TV, you do get risk from your cell phone and chemicals you digest, as well as from coal power plants that release PCB's into the air. Where as nuclear plants do not release any radiation or chemicals into the atmosphere. Not caring about costs would cause people to go into poverty, lowering standards of living, and life expectancy raising birth rates

[NinthGateKnight]

this could have some application in the future but not now Bush is a dipshit ok.Fusion or fision are good but u radiation and it's after waste with it. unless you got a foot ball feild of dense lead laying around you go get your asses killed. heavy water has deuterium oxide in it A RADIOACTIVE substance and is only made when a very large amount of water is boiled sea water i think???not sure.... do the math before you go eradiating the friggid planet there are always prices to pay

[NinthGateKnight]

though his experiment does sound very nice i doupt the highr powers that like to play god will go for it because there is no big money in it if you think about it. you make ten of them and the world is pure again what profite did they make off of it. ou can make more money from making the world worse off and thats how it goes unfortunatly

[JonThm]

Nuclear fusion cuts CO2 by 100%, and your kettle does it as it boils!

[4thkind]

its a lie that Atom energy dont produce co2

u must know that Plutonium is a material what is like oil out of the earth, we must take it out transport it, this produce co2.

and dont forgett that the atomenergy is a problem for millions of years after use.

[JonThm]

Nuclear power do a lot of building! Ur is transported and processed a lot! Coal can be mined next to the power plant. Molecular nuclear fusion gets power from water, whic hrusn in pipes, and does mnotprodcue toxic death! Oh, adn it is free!

[rashin]

You moronic person. Do you have any idea the radiation caused by Fusion? Not to mention it's complete unbalanced reaction. It's powerful enough to wipe out a country.

Even solar power gives of Sulfur emitions. There's always a price to pay. Fusion's price is just a little higher.

[JonThm]

I have an M.Eng. on this stuff. Fro a moron, look in a mirror! A waterfall doe smolecular nuclear fusion. Safge, clean and cheap. Wtih no CO2, or the toxic death of present nuclear power. Go get educated, or wash your mind out with quick setting concrete!

[JonThm]

Global warming is academic fiction and nuclear power public relations. You are stooges. Nuclear fusion gets power fropm water, with NO CO2 at all!

[1BrknHrtdRomeo]

you know...china keeps talking about coal burning plants and i think they should definitely consider this.

[andypants05]

Okay to explain.

CO2

1 part carbon

2 part oxygen

Together a deadly mix. Called CO2.

This technology very cheaply separates these 2 parts into.

1 Part Carbon, which can be burnt at very high temperatures creating enough energy to run the technology + some.

2 parts oxygen, which can be safely released into the atmosphere.

As for mercury and other heavy particles.

It has a purification rate of 95.5% approx.

[JonThm]

All life on Earth is supported by plants taking in CO2 - that is where the oxygen comes from. There is 0.00037% max CO2 in the air, 25% O2. And CO2 tracks the climate

[Mechness]

What you are describing is a perpetual motion engine. If it were real it would break the laws of thermodynamics. You can't get more energy out than you put in. Splitting CO2 into carbon and oxygen will consume no less energy than you can get by recombining them. Ie: burn the carbon and you're back where you started in terms of CO2.

Filtering the flue gases is a good thing, but you can't make energy out of it.

[lemmejustseethevids]

BORAT

[alienevolved]

do you think theyle consider co2 emissions when they invade iran and iran set light to the oilfields,nah cant be helped!

[Libertarianist]

I smell bullshit.

[syongo]

in spite of their limited resource, third world countries are most serious in addressing environmental degradation caused by those powerful nations in the west

[sillium6]

so you burn coal to generate the power to run the machine to clean the air from burning of the coal to power the machine to clean the air from the burning of the coal to generate the power to run the machine

[CFrostyTheSnowman]

Professor of "el camino" college? rofl hahahaha

[straats]

Co2 becomes toxic at a low PPM level. We are approaching that level. Many species including humans are starting to show the effects of excess and high levels of C02 globally. Research it and find out.

Do not buy the propoganda put out by corporations that it is a harmless gas and can be produced in infinite amounts without harm.

[Zaetix]

they're just making up for borat

[andypants05]

The CO2 gets converted into its chemical compounds. The chemicals such as carbon become a powder substance which can then be reburnt at extremely high temperatures and the oxygen is released clean and clear back into the environment.

Using this method we are effectively burning the CO2 emissions for more energy.

[raduking]

why do I have a strange feeling about this movie ?

Alexander Borisenko ?!? he's a mathematician as far as I know...

[tripillthreat]

I know what you're saying. It seems waaaaaaay too miraculous for me to just now hear about it through a youtube video.

And they have a professor from prestigious "El Camino College." Huh? It seems legit, though, because he's standing next to a "businessman."

Hmm.

[deathblade979]

dude u live in usa do u think the nes would even say anything about is .... and the anwser is No.

[tripillthreat]

Why in the world would the U.S. oppose this? Bush is no friend of the environment, but the coal industry would be clamoring for this device if there were anything to it, because it would mean that they could keep strip mining coal for another zillion years. And, believe me, the coal industry definitely has the president's ear.

[DofS1]

this video should be feature and promoted.

[rootless11]

lies about co2 emissions,gloryfies nuclear power;no co2 emissions.

[rootless11]

co2 emissions means very little,we are in the suns climate,sunspots determinates weather its warm or cold, this is a scientific fact.

[soylentgreenb]

"co2 emissions means very little,we are in the suns climate,sunspots determinates weather its warm or cold, this is a scientific fact."

No, this is a party political talking point. Neither solar output nor output of ionizing radiation that could seed cloud cover has changed remotely as much as it would need to explain the recent warming trend through known mechanisms.

[tripillthreat]

It is a scientific fact that your claim is pure bullshit.

[mattizzle81]

I think this is a scam of some sort. I don't buy it.

[qbfx]

because you're a dumbass

[col1n1234]

I remember when I was at Greengate and we were burning coal, it was important

that we did not have smoke coming out of the factory chimney.

We could achieve that but the Carbon chemicals and sulpher dioxide was still

coming out. These have to go somewhere.

A common way was to wash them and dilute them in water, now they talk about

burying them back underground, but for how long.

Originally they were locked into the coal, but we burned the coal and they are

now free.

[nslepak]

kaz speaks completely in russian? not even like.. modified?

[meroydiniz]

I hope it could set an example for the hole world

[ilomse]

borat: verrrry niiiiceee, thumbs up...

(if it is real, kazakhstan will indeed by glorified!!)

[clintoff]

If goverments use emission free teckno,

Then they must look for new ways to raise taxes

dohooo

[col1n1234]

I agree, also every can of cola opened releases CO2 but not a word to be Said

[qbfx]

Yeah, but imagine how many thousands of cans of cola you need to open to release the co2 a factory chimney releases in a second or how many percent of the co2 that polutes the air every minute comes from opening a can of cola .. It would be logical to have these things installed in all factories and even adapt the technology to be used on cars ..

[col1n1234]

your right. but to make co2, is still not the answer. Why not use a gas that dose not harm the planet, And i think you will be suprised about the amount of co2 produced for soft drinks.This vidio does not say where the co2 goes to? it just does not disapear?

[CrossoverManiac]

Greenpiss says "Trust your future to Borat-tech"

[woo2fly18]

KAZAKHSTANNNN

[Abbaleo2]

Great Achievement!

[dapple33]

This looks like a promising technology. I would personaly like to know how efficeint it is at removing murcury from coal plant exaust. Right now in Colorado three major northern lakes are market as unsafe drinking sources and the fish are said to carry dangeriuos amounts of murcury that comes form coal fire power plants in northern Colorado.

[videowatcher06]

why doesn't anyone in the USA know about this?

[whatare0o0o]

how come this isnt known in the us

[andypants05]

This is a solution to climate change, watch it, rate it, comment it, support it. Otherwise be prepared for a nuclear future.