Skip navigation
20comments
Share conversation: Share via:

Johnnie Buttram

Mar 6, 2015
03:35

Member


1 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Dear Climate Co Lab, I have just moved my proposal titled, "Pursuing the Economical Enhancement of Supercritical Fluids!"from the proposal creation venue to the Energy Supply Contest. In the move everything including my graphics in the "What Actions do you propose?" section was erased. Please .. fix this situation. Thank you, Johnnie Buttram

Jeff Harti

Mar 8, 2015
05:34

Fellow


2 |
Share via:
Hi Johnnie, Thank you for submitting your proposal and sorry about the apparent technical glitch. I will connect with the MIT folks and see what they can do to correct the problem. Regards, Jeff

John Smith

Mar 9, 2015
11:40

Member


3 |
Share via:
Hello, It is very hard to follow this. I read through the opening part about the volcano and I could not see the connection between that, supercritical fluids and energy production. For example: "...This proposal is designed to economically produce supercritical fluids to help serious science and engineering innovators prepare global strategies to address the economics of food, water, drought, energy, and climate change issues..." Or this section from further down: "Supercritical fluids have the potential to save lives!" What are you talking about? What do you mean? This does not follow a logical structure. ------

Johnnie Buttram

Mar 9, 2015
02:07

Member


4 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Dear John Smith, Thank you for your comment. When we were notified by Co Lab the 2015 contests were now in operation - I moved two proposals from the Proposal Workplace to the Adaptation and Energy Contest sites. Somehow - somewhere - in the transmission the important protein of the proposals were not transferred to the "What Actions do You Propose? site. I have notified Co Lab and hopefully they will rectify this situation before everyone backs off taking my research seriously! Once again, I want to thank you for your time - and I am truly sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused. Johnnie Buttram

John Smith

Mar 10, 2015
01:11

Member


5 |
Share via:
Johnnie, So as I understand it, the meaning was lost when you migrated the proposal. Let me know when you have the technical glitches worked out and I can re-read it. Cheers.

Laur Hesse Fisher

Mar 10, 2015
10:51

Staff


6 |
Share via:
Dear Johnnie-Buttram, Because contests ask different questions, we give members the ability to copy text from their previous proposal to answer the new contest's questions. To do this, when members move their proposals, they can select the "Copy from base proposal" button under each new question. If a member does not do this, the content will not transfer to the new contest. Our site developers will look into your proposal's history to recover the Actions section. ~~ Laur Climate CoLab Project Manager

Johnnie Buttram

Mar 10, 2015
11:20

Member


7 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Dear Laur Fisher, Thank you for your reply. I did not know the above information about the "Copy from the base proposal" button under each new question - as I do my proposals and graphics in the Proposal Workplace section and had believed they would transfer over to the contest site I wanted to enter. I think I understand the situation better now. Thank you again, Johnnie Buttram

Michael Hayes

Mar 10, 2015
02:49

Member


8 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Dear Johnnie, You've brought an interesting and important concept to the table by pointing out the benefits of super-critical fluids. In the past, I've studied many of the technical areas/application of SCF and can see how SCF can bring advanced levels of efficiency to a number of climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts. I'm working on a marine based BECCS protocol and there are multiple applications for SCF within a vast scale biomass production/processing (i.e. BECCS) effort. I will point to your proposal(s) if and when SCF related production details need to be explained.

Johnnie Buttram

Mar 10, 2015
05:24

Member


9 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Dear Michae123, Thank you for your comment. I totally agree that a properly designed Supercritical water process has the potential to unleash the benefits of our vast, raw-material resources provided by our oceans. Climate Co Lab is in the retrieval process of my lost text and graphics which will help everyone get a better overview of the proposed process. Thanks again, Johnnie Buttram

Thomas Knauer

Mar 12, 2015
12:16

Member


10 |
Share via:
Dear Johnnie-Buttram, we restored a previous version of your "WHAT" section. Could you please check whether that is correct? ~~ Thomas Climate CoLab Software Engineer

Johnnie Buttram

Mar 12, 2015
01:38

Member


11 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Dear Thomas, I sincerely want to thank you and the entire Climate Co Lab Staff for your help in restoring my graphics and text. I will be more careful in the future when I transfer a proposal from the Proposal Workplace to a new contest. Thank you for your time and skills! Johnnie Buttram

Michael Hayes

Mar 13, 2015
04:28

Member


12 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Hi Johnnie, Here are a few links which may be relative to mid-oceanic proposals. http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/search.html?q=OTEC http://www.otecnews.org/ http://planetearthandhumanity.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-otec-professors-of-japan-and-usa.html http://www.navysbir.com/n11_1/N111-071.htm http://mhk.pnnl.gov/wiki/index.php/Tethys_Home http://www.interridge.org/ http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/eoi/index.html http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/pubs/outstand/bake2544/discussion.shtml http://www.marshallhydrothermal.com/ The Navy/SBIR is most germane. We seem to be working along the same lines with the primary divergence being my focus upon the actual biomass production for portable energy/biohar/food/fuel/water etc. which used mid-oceanic ridge resources coupled with nutricline resources. Whereas your work seems to be focused upon the basic energy conversion/harvesting within the mid-oceanic ridges with only brief mention of the full spectrum of commodity production potential. And, I truly understand how difficult it is to fit a complex concept into the space we have. The primary points I would like to bring to your attention is that the surface support vessels can, themselves, be used for a wide range of biomass production needs. And, they need to be engineered for a 100 wave (approx. 35 meters in hight). The below references may help illustrate what others are proposing in this arena. A Marine Covective Tower and Biomass Production Complex https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4dTSYGhZ8XnOENXQmU2UndIczA/view?usp=sharing Tropos and Shimizu oceanic complex concepts http://www.troposplatform.eu/ and http://www.shimz.co.jp/english/theme/dream/pdf/greenfloat_e.pdf Artificial Upwelling of Deep Seawater Using the Perpetual Salt Fountain for Cultivation of Ocean Desert http://www.greenseaupwelling.com/Reference.html Chemosynthetic production of biomass - An idea from a recent oceanographic discovery http://www.divediscover.whoi.edu/ventcd/pdf/JannaschOCv22.pdf Reduction of Carbon Dioxide Coupled with the Oxyhydrogen Reaction in Algae (Water Production with Primary Production Aquaculture) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19873340 In brief, we need portable biofuels if we are to compete against the global FF industry as biofuels will keep the current energy distribution networks functioning...which is an important global financial stability need...for now. I would like to find some way in-which we can collaborate as we are, in essence, trying to bring attention to the same suite of technological solutions. Best regards, Michael P.S. Your graphics are appearing oversized for the format. There is a way to adjust the size of the graphics through right clicking them and opening up the 'attribute' tab. M

Michael Hayes

Mar 13, 2015
04:40

Member


13 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Sorry, but I meant to write '100...Year...Wave Hieght' M

Johnnie Buttram

Mar 14, 2015
10:00

Member


14 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Dear Michael, thanks for your comments and especially the Navy/SBIR article. Although the environmental entities like the green float islands are more sophisticated and appealing . . to be honest . . at this stage of the game I am more focused on trying to find the most simple denominator, where our world has the option to use free energy provided by thermal vents to transform the beneficial options provided by our oceans into life sustaining products at a fair price to the masses. Michael, again I thank you for your comments and help on this sophisticated project. I also want to commend you, and the ocean foresters and others for all the hard work and effort you do to promote the benefits of our oceans.(BECCS). Johnnie

Michael Hayes

Apr 7, 2015
03:29

Member


15 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Hello Johnnie, I apologize for not responding earlier, lately I've been focused upon the Buckminister Fuller Institute Challenge. During that effort, I ran across a hydrothermal vent project which you may wish to view. The design features of the collection and piping designs are...exactly....what I had in mind as being needed to utilize the vents. The link is: http://www.marshallhydrothermal.com/ Michael

Johnnie Buttram

Apr 7, 2015
07:13

Member


16 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Dear Michael, No apology needed - especially when you're pursuing the possibilities of greater understanding. Also, thanks for providing the link to the Marshall Hydrothermal Group of visionaries. This is a good example, where focus and commitment to do the right things could help Planet Earth have a more sustainable future. Michael, thanks again, Johnnie

Manohar Lal Baharani

Apr 20, 2015
09:01

Catalyst


17 |
Share via:
Activation Barge - could be ready in 90 days....I would like to read more on implement ability, site selection processes, investments and returns on investment.... many new energy proposals are having "limitation of returns on investment barriers" for market entry. Bests, Manohar

Johnnie Buttram

Apr 22, 2015
07:00

Member


18 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Dear laxmimanohar, Thank you for your comment. After reading the information - http://www.marshallhydrothermal.com/ (please see above)provided to me from collaborator Michael Hays on this project - I better understand why a 90 day time line as a start-up mode might be considered as being overly optimistic on my part. I have now changed the time line. Thank you - for your focus' Johnnie Buttram

Dustin Carey

Jun 1, 2015
09:38

Fellow


19 |
Share via:
Hi Johnnnie, Thanks for your submission of an interesting proposal. Your inclusion of schematics was useful in conveying your proposed means of harvesting supercritical fluids. Unfortunately, I must confess some confusion as to the full purpose of your proposal. Would I be more-or-less correct in simplifying your proposal to harvest supercritical fluids from deep-sea hydrothermal vents, isolate the minerals contained within the SCF for the growing of algae to be used as a near-carbon-neutral, and use the heat from these SCF to produce electricity via thermal-to-electric conversion? Thanks, Dustin Carey Catalyst

Johnnie Buttram

Jun 1, 2015
10:21

Member


20 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Dear Dustin Carey, Thank you for your insightful comment. Yes - your simplification of the SCF proposal is correct. However - if this became a reality - this could be a positive addition to be the economic stimulus we need to help offset the climate change dilemma now facing Planet Earth. Thank you for your time. Johnnie Buttram