"I'll have a big global warming, please."

[Professor Tanhauser]

I just wondered about something that I was thinking of based on the 'clean coal" debate, and I was hoping that someone here could point me in the right direction.

Basically, one of the bugaboos about "clean coal" (Is it for real, BTW?) is that it's going to boost CO2 emissions. CO2 is bad because it contributes to global warming, supposedly.

Well, has anyone ever looked into this issue: How much CO2 do carbonated drinks release into the atmosphere annually? I mean, it's pretty safe to say that there are a hell of a lot of carbonated drinks made and consumed on earth every year. I mean, the number has got to be in the hundreds of millions, just in america, and it's not just canned soda, but how about fountain drinks? How much CO2 is in a typical can of cola, and how much in a big gulp?

So I was wondering if anyone's every looked into how much Co2 carbonated drinks release into the air every year and if that amount is significant.

I did a quick websearch for "Carbonated drinks and global warming" and got nothing but some snarky neocon blogs attacking al gore. Anyone here have something a bit more useful on the issue?

BTW, I'm not for banning CO2 as we need it for some things. I mean, we could switch from carbonated to non carbonated drinks, sure, most carbonated drinks are bad for you anyway, if they're bad for the planet that's even more reason to switch. But we can't get rid of all CO2, I mean, we need CO2 fire extinguishers. really, we need them, I mean, if the arctic thaws due to global warming it might release the Blob, and then we'd need Co2 fire extinguishers to defend ourselves against it. Likewise we need Co2 guns for kids because having your own air gun is part of being a kid, but maybe we don't need so much carbonated drinks.

[Ronald Brak]

Ecogeek has apparently already tackled this question:

http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/691/85/

(As for clean coal being "for real," it is definitely possible to capture CO2 from burning coal and shove it underground. However, there are currently doubts about its cost effectiveness compared to using other sources of low emission energy and the amount of time it would take to put into practice. It is also very difficult to capture all the carbon released, although obviously catching even 1% would be an improvement.)

[HenrikOlsen]

Basically the answer is that the source of commercially used CO2 is combustion that already happens, so the bubble part is neutral.
Less so the production of the containers:)

[Ronald Brak]

Interestingly drink companies measure the amount of CO2 in their products by passing an infrared light through it and seeing if the CO2 absorbs it, so if someone tries to tell me that carbon dioxide is not a greenhouse gas I can tell them that the coca cola company disagrees.

[nauthiz]

Ecogeek has apparently already tackled this question:

http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/691/85/


Just a side amusement -


HOLY CRAP! Fifty Six Gallons Per Year! I've got a lot of catching up to do...
Anyhow... now for the math:
56 / 365 = ~0.15 gallons per day = ~19.2 ounces per day.

That's roughly 1.6 cans of soda per day on average. That doesn't seem very high at all to me. And I generally avoid soda.

[Gillianren]

I think I'm drinking your share.

[mugaliens]

How much CO2 do carbonated drinks release into the atmosphere annually?

About the same amount that would have been released, anyway.

Even if we kept making soft drinks, but never drank another one, the cumulative effect on global warming over ten years time would be the rough equivalent of the heat you feel from a lit candle on the other side of a large room.

I think there may be bigger fish to fry...

[HenrikOlsen]

Apart, of course, for the CO2 released to make the energy to make the bottles and drive the machines that fill it, etc.
Big net loss for sequestering.

[Demigrog]

Funny question, as there is at least one coal plant producing CO2 for food use (http://www.co2captureandstorage.info/project_specific.php?project_id=28). :) IIRC, the capture percentage was pretty low.

[danscope]

I just wondered about something that I was thinking of based on the 'clean coal" debate, and I was hoping that someone here could point me in the right direction.

Basically, one of the bugaboos about "clean coal" (Is it for real, BTW?) is that it's going to boost CO2 emissions. CO2 is bad because it contributes to global warming, supposedly.

Well, has anyone ever looked into this issue: How much CO2 do carbonated drinks release into the atmosphere annually? I mean, it's pretty safe to say that there are a hell of a lot of carbonated drinks made and consumed on earth every year. I mean, the number has got to be in the hundreds of millions, just in america, and it's not just canned soda, but how about fountain drinks? How much CO2 is in a typical can of cola, and how much in a big gulp?

So I was wondering if anyone's every looked into how much Co2 carbonated drinks release into the air every year and if that amount is significant.

I did a quick websearch for "Carbonated drinks and global warming" and got nothing but some snarky neocon blogs attacking al gore. Anyone here have something a bit more useful on the issue?

BTW, I'm not for banning CO2 as we need it for some things. I mean, we could switch from carbonated to non carbonated drinks, sure, most carbonated drinks are bad for you anyway, if they're bad for the planet that's even more reason to switch. But we can't get rid of all CO2, I mean, we need CO2 fire extinguishers. really, we need them, I mean, if the arctic thaws due to global warming it might release the Blob, and then we'd need Co2 fire extinguishers to defend ourselves against it. Likewise we need Co2 guns for kids because having your own air gun is part of being a kid, but maybe we don't need so much carbonated drinks.

*********************
Sir: Co2 in carbonated beverages amounts to taking co2 from one place and redistributing it to another. The net co2 remains the same. The problem with coal and other fossil fuels is that it has been sequestered,quarantined so to speak for millions of years within that coal, untill we liberate it by burning it. THAT is a different problem , adding immense ammounts of additional co2 to an environment which tries to balance co2 emmision with
the effort of plants to sequester co2 and give oxygen.
Dan

[HenrikOlsen]

And plants just plain can't do that, you may get more plants, but that's a one-off until they die and rot and then that's released again.

[mugaliens]

Funny question, as there is at least one coal plant producing CO2 for food use (http://www.co2captureandstorage.info/project_specific.php?project_id=28). :) IIRC, the capture percentage was pretty low.

You raise an interesting point - if we seriously cut back on CO2 production, how will that affect food production? Will the extra effort we expend cause us to lose a significant percentage of the ground we gained in making a smaller CO2 footprint?

So many ramifications to consider! So many things left unconsidered...

[Atraveller]

Not meaning to hi-jack the thread - but as was noted a carbonated drink simply moves pre existing C02 from one place to another.

Now beer on the other hand is made from making new C02 from complex sugars formerly trapped in organics (malted barley.) So perhaps the real question is how much c02 is produced per bottle of beer?

And then again - do we really care if it effects global warming?:lol:

[mike alexander]

Before everyone starts to laugh, I note that Venus has huge amounts of CO2 in its atmosphere. Obviously, being closer to the sun and therefore hotter, its inhabitants must have indulged in much greater quantities of soda, leading to a runaway seltzer effect.

[HenrikOlsen]

Not meaning to hi-jack the thread - but as was noted a carbonated drink simply moves pre existing C02 from one place to another.

Now beer on the other hand is made from making new C02 from complex sugars formerly trapped in organics (malted barley.) So perhaps the real question is how much c02 is produced per bottle of beer?

And then again - do we really care if it effects global warming?:lol:
Carbon in the sugars in the plants used for beer comes from CO2 absorbed by the plants from the atmosphere while growing, it's CO2 neutral.

[Atraveller]

Carbon in the sugars in the plants used for beer comes from CO2 absorbed by the plants from the atmosphere while growing, it's CO2 neutral.

So in drinking beer we are only moving C02 from one place to another? That's a relief - can drink beer guiltlessly again...:lol:

[mugaliens]

So in drinking beer we are only moving C02 from one place to another? That's a relief - can drink beer guiltlessly again...:lol:

Just don't burp...

[crosscountry]

Interestingly drink companies measure the amount of CO2 in their products by passing an infrared light through it and seeing if the CO2 absorbs it, so if someone tries to tell me that carbon dioxide is not a greenhouse gas I can tell them that the coca cola company disagrees.


that's a neat tid bit. where can I find more about that?

[Ronald Brak]

Here's a page:

http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5473161/description.html

[crosscountry]

thanks.

[mike alexander]

If I read he patent correctly they actually are doing infrared head space analysis of gaseous CO2 in equilibrium with the carbonated liquid, not the direct concentration in the liquid itself.

And if I am reading the patent correctly, the ability to patent such a process says lots about the US patent system. Not good, either.