<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On Dec 28, 2010, at 8:06 AM, John Clark wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div>On Dec 28, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Keith Henson wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite"><div><font class="Apple-style-span"><br></font>There is a good reason to send the SO2 up as a liquid, for the same<br>velocity it would take a much larger pipe which generates more wind<br>drag and takes more excess buoyancy to keep it close to vertical. </div></blockquote><div><br></div>There is no pressing need that I know of to keep it close to vertical.<br><div><br></div><div><blockquote type="cite"><div>So how much pressure does it take at the bottom to pump it up 18 miles?</div></blockquote></div><div><br></div><div>Who cares? Myhrvold isn't a fool and he wasn't suggesting you do it that way, he said have pumps every thousand feet or so "each one less powerful than the one in my swimming pool".</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>May I ask why we are wasting mental energy talking about something there is no demonstrable need for instead of deploying the same energy on things that are of great concern and/or need? How rational are we? How rational do we actually decide to be?</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>- samantha</div></body></html>