Submitted on April 23rd, 2009 by Stanford_engineer (not verified)
To characterize this debate as "a battle between venture capital and academic science" ignore the fact that Dr. Constantz is a Scientist of high acedemic prestige, particularly in the area of cements.
Personally, I believe that Dr. Constantz is motivated to sequester carbon by his strong desire to save the coral. It cannot be ignored that he is a marine biologist by training (specializing in coral). I don't see why he would persue this technology if it wasn't a promising path to sequestration.
Global premier sponsors include
Lead sponsors/partners include
All sponsors | All partners
my opinion
Submitted on April 23rd, 2009 by Stanford_engineer (not verified)To characterize this debate as "a battle between venture capital and academic science" ignore the fact that Dr. Constantz is a Scientist of high acedemic prestige, particularly in the area of cements.
Personally, I believe that Dr. Constantz is motivated to sequester carbon by his strong desire to save the coral. It cannot be ignored that he is a marine biologist by training (specializing in coral). I don't see why he would persue this technology if it wasn't a promising path to sequestration.