Like cement production, the industrial lime production results in carbon dioxide emission when limestone is heated up......... Quicklime production is thought to result in about 800kg of carbon dioxide per tonne, while dolomitic quicklime produces slightly more at about 900kg per tonne.
Maybe the "man made" global warming skeptics need to look at this. (if they haven't already)
The "manmade" advocates place all the "CO2" attention on fossil fuels and they claim their models demonstrate the "fossil-fuel-caused" additions account for atmospheric increases of CO2. I wonder?
According to the US geological survey, quicklime production in the US alone, for the century from 1904 to 2004:
(http://minerals.usgs.gov/ds/2005/140/lime.pdf)
amounted to 1,010,400,000 metric tons,
which at 800kg of CO2 per ton
and 1,000kg in a ton,
it amounts to a C02 contribution from US quicklime production of 808 million, 320 thousand tons (US alone).
I don't know how that compares to "fossil fuels". Maybe a new breed of "man made" GW advocates will make a case to finding an alternative to quicklime instead of an alternative to gasoline. LOL
For an example, consider hydrogen (storage) "generation" with light metal hydrides, which later suggest the resulting hydroxides be salvaged and recycled into more hydrides..Via carbothermal reduction!
Hydrogen from Methane does likewise. Coal gasification produces a CO2 stream. How much carbothermal reduction of silicon is done to make a solar cell? A mole of sugar when fermented to Ethanol produces a mole of CO2.
Hydrogen "fuels" and battery powered cars produce no CO2 at the tailpipe. They just do it upstream where no one has to think about it or see it.
The recent aluminum-as-fuel excitement conveniently ignores the reason Niagara Falls was so popular with Reynolds and Alcoa.
These Green Energy schemes have carbon footprints or other horrendous energy demands, and they cannot have it both ways. No one seems to be thinking things through the entire chain any more, and instead rush to print.