Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Researchers have combined gold nanoparticles (in light red) with copper nanoparticles (in light green) to form hybrid nanoparticles (dark red), which they turned into powder (foreground) to catalyze carbon dioxide reduction.

1 posted on 04/11/2012 8:26:16 AM PDT by Red Badger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Red Badger; Ellendra

Cue McGyver - “The thing about hydrocarbons is...”
http://macgyver.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_problems_solved_by_MacGyver


2 posted on 04/11/2012 8:28:35 AM PDT by knittnmom (Save the earth! It's the only planet with chocolate!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger
Copper -- the stuff of pennies...

Actually, that would be Zinc.

3 posted on 04/11/2012 8:29:57 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Over half of U.S. murders are of black people, and 90% of them are committed by other black people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger
When fashioned into an electrode and stimulated with voltage...

How much voltage, for how long? IOW, will it cost more to supply the necessary voltage than the net value of the fuel produced?

Will it end up as inefficient as the other "green" technologies?

5 posted on 04/11/2012 8:33:01 AM PDT by JimRed (Excising a cancer before it kills us waters the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS, NOW AND FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SunkenCiv

science ping


6 posted on 04/11/2012 8:33:48 AM PDT by skinkinthegrass (Kill all the terrorists; protect all the borders, ridicule all the (surviving) Liberals :^)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger
recycling carbon dioxide emissions in powerplants: Instead of being released into the atmosphere, carbon dioxide would be circulated through a copper catalyst and turned into methane — which could then power the rest of the plant.

I guess I'm missing the point. Thermodynamics requires MORE energy to convert CO2 into methane than can be produced by converting (combustion of) methane back into CO2 and H2O. The total mass of carbon remains constant. So how does this help?

7 posted on 04/11/2012 8:37:51 AM PDT by LucianOfSamasota (Tanstaafl - its not just for breakfast anymore...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger

Wait a minute - they burn methane which produces carbon dioxide which they convert back into methane which they burn which produces carbon dioxide which they convert back into methane.....


8 posted on 04/11/2012 8:37:51 AM PDT by AdSimp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger
turned into methane — which could then power the rest of the plant.

When methane is burned the carbon turns back into CO2 so there is no net gain. Are they suggesting they've discovered a perpetual motion machine? Is there any point in doing this?

9 posted on 04/11/2012 8:43:21 AM PDT by Reeses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger

Sounds like another great money-wasting scheme to me. But it’s great for Professorette Chu, whose research is probably funded by Steven Chu (no relation?).

Meantime, they’re blocking the nuclear plants and shutting down the coal plants that would produce the needed electricity to do this.

Lights out! Time to freeze in the dark, while starving the plants.


14 posted on 04/11/2012 8:49:33 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger

Let’s see CO2 has one carbon atom and two oxygen atoms. Methane is CH4, that is one carbon atom and 4 hydrogen atoms. I never see in the article where the hydrogen atoms are going to come from. Besides as cheap as methane is today I don’t see the point.


23 posted on 04/11/2012 9:10:55 AM PDT by Okieshooter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger

I think you guys are missing something. It sounds to me like the whole article is talking about a breakthrough in combining CO2 and hydrogen, into methane. Thus its not a perpetual motion machine. The hydrogen will be supplied outside of this process. That is the only thing that make sense to me.


24 posted on 04/11/2012 9:12:14 AM PDT by BJ1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger

Very interesting!

I wonder whether this science would work with other non-oxidizing metals like platinum or paladium and copper, as our catalytic converters already use these metals to reduce noxious gasses.

Perhaps the resulting methene could be recycled into the combustion process thru introducing it back into a turbocharger


25 posted on 04/11/2012 9:17:59 AM PDT by Noob1999 (Loose Lips, Sink Ships)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger

Now if we can figure how to reverse the process we can turn coal into copper and gold.


26 posted on 04/11/2012 9:18:56 AM PDT by oldbrowser (They are Marxists, don't call them democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger

Thermodynamics should be required education for every citizen. Especially the morons in congress.


35 posted on 04/11/2012 9:36:02 AM PDT by far sider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Red Badger

Hmmm. I believe I’ve used copper to make ethanol too! :)


48 posted on 04/11/2012 10:18:01 AM PDT by IamConservative (Shall I try and perhaps fail or shall I do nothing without fail?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson