Startup turns carbon dioxide into fuels

phys.org ^ | June 15, 2012 | By Catherine Zandonella

[Red Badger]

Liquid Light licensed its technology from Princeton. Cole leads a team of chemists who tackle the practical issue of how to scale up a laboratory invention to an industrial scale, while Bocarsly chairs the company's scientific advisory board. Credit: Denise Applewhite

This photoelectrochemical cell contains a solution of carbon dioxide and pyridinium as a catalyst dissolved in water. A low-power blue light-emitting diode (LED) provides light, which activates the semiconductor, causing the conversion of the CO2 and water to methanol and oxygen with the help of the pyridine catalyst. This cell is highly efficient, with greater than 95 percent of the electrons generated by the illumination going into the formation of methanol. Credit: Andrew Bocarsly

[Red Badger]

Ping!..........

[Red Badger]

Ping!.............

[Red Badger]

Ping!........

[smokingfrog]

Pretty cool.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Doing technically at great effort and expense what God’s green trees and plants do now? (Well, almost.)

[JoeFromSidney]

Converting CO2 into methane, methanol, or some similar compound is nothing really new. "Producer gas" used to be made that way, until it was displaced by cheaper natural gas. All such schemes founder on the fact that you can't get more energy out of the resulting "fuel" than was used to make the fuel. Unless the energy comes from some source that doesn't itself release CO2 (nuclear, hydropower, etc.), you're right back where you started.

[Blueflag]

Exactly! NET negative calories.

WHY is this a good idea??????

[Jeff Chandler]

Great idea. His weak point is that we already have an almost limitless supply of fuel, and it’s just sitting there in the ground waiting to be harvested.

[Toddsterpatriot]

[DrDavid]

Given that C-C bonds are possible, it shouldn't be too hard to do the following:

2 CO₂ + 3 H₂O -> H₅C₂OH (Ethanol) + O₂

AKA Vodka Martini + Oxygen!

[KarlInOhio]

Unless the energy comes from some source that doesn't itself release CO2 (nuclear, hydropower, etc.), you're right back where you started.

If you create easily used hydrocarbons during the low power usage times at power plants for use in auxillary generators or portable engines like cars, you can come out ahead of where you are today. Coal plants are difficult to turn on and off, so if you run them at constant output and run the excess into one of these for later use you can make the whole process more efficient. Is it a net energy loss? Yes, but less that the alternative of just making steam without turning a turbine to keep the plant running.

[Triple]

Yep -

And when back when in organic chemistry III, all of our tests involved manufacturing a desired complex organic molecule from methanol or methane, and catalysts. Point being, the chemistry to go from methanol to most any other organic molecule is well defined.

[Wurlitzer]

Very interesting.

I would love to know the longevity of the electrodes and catalyst along with their cost.

Even at somewhat low efficiencies, the ability to create a combustible gas from an intermittent source such as wind or solar and a plentiful byproduct would allow for that energy to be consumed and made productive when needed.

This is no silver bullet but we do not need a silver bullet just many bullets of all types for a variety of needs.

[taxcontrol]

Step that up to butanol and you will have a decent replacement for gasoline.

[DaxtonBrown]

What we need is more coal fired electrical power to drive the blue LEDs that convert CO2 to hydrocarbons!!

[mvpel]

They’re proposing to drive the reaction with sunlight, not blue LEDs.

[sand88]

All such schemes founder on the fact that you can't get more energy out of the resulting "fuel" than was used to make the fuel.

Yep, just like ethanol.

Unless the energy comes from some source that doesn't itself release CO2 (nuclear, hydropower, etc.), you're right back where you started.

In one way, this product (method) is just like ethanol -- without raping the taxpayer, neither would ever come to market.

We have thousands of years of cheap, abundant energy sources. Let the market decide, not leftist or RINO politicians.

[Repeal The 17th]

I am mentally imagining
a strange rube goldberg type device
installed at a factory
with windmill blades mounted over the smokestack
that spin from the heat rising from the stack
that send electrical power to the electrodes
that convert the CO2 in the stack emissions
into fuel that runs the factory

[dirtymac]

but, what do we do when we run out of CO2? We will be right back where we started from and the we will be required to use fossil fuels so as to supply the green energy jobs at the CO2 convering industry.

Let’s see, based on projected increases, we have in excess of 500 years of known reserves for natural gas;m more than 500 years of coal; more known reserves of oil than anyone else on the planet and finding more all of the time, and virtually untapped nuclear power (except in the Navy).