CO2 Emissions

Damages done to our land and atmosphere so far are a large result of the carbon dioxide given off from coal and petroleum fueled plants. Coal-fired power plants for instance give off 8 billion tons of CO2. We know where this problem is, we know what it takes to solve it—trap the carbon dioxide being emitted into our ozone. However, finding an adequate way to trap or alter these CO2 emissions takes time and money. Two proposed ideas of doing this are to either create some sort of sponge-like substance to soak up these emissions or to build coal-plants differently so that less CO2 is emitted into the air. I greatly encourage the idea of this plan.
Finding our high concentrated CO2 areas is not the problem; finding where to put our problem once it is collected is a difficult task. The first area of dumping discussed, and that I find more tolerable, is injecting the gathered carbon dioxide into saline aquifers surrounded by basalt. The basalt reacts with the CO2 infused salt-water and hardened it into various minerals including calcium carbonate. Research shows that this reaction would occur before the CO2 had time to escape the ground. The second area of dumping, which I completely disagree with, is putting a carbon dioxide-blended mixture into the ocean. Since injecting the ocean floor with CO2 can cause high levels of acidity in the surrounding waters, blending the carbon dioxide with a salt water and limestone creates a more ocean-friendly effect when dropped into the seas. Since the CO2 would mostly break down the limestone as opposed to creating high levels of acidity, the effect would not be as drastic. Also, the substance formed from the mixture would be small amounts instead of one lump. The effect from dropping each CO2 globule would be adequate to dropping a tiny Tum into the ocean. This sounds fine when you consider dropping one “Tum” into the water, however how many of these these tiny Tum-bombs would have to be placed out to sea to take care of our CO2 issue at home?