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

Skip to comments.

British Engineers Produce Amazing 'Petrol From Air' Technology
Telegraph(UK) ^ | October 18, 2012 | Andrew Hough

Posted on 10/18/2012 8:36:34 PM PDT by Steelfish

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 next last

1 posted on 10/18/2012 8:36:40 PM PDT by Steelfish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Sounds like using corn for fuel, it will probably take more energy input than what you get out of it.


2 posted on 10/18/2012 8:40:00 PM PDT by bigtoona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

“........Company officials say they had produced five litres of petrol in less than three months from a small refinery......”
*********************************************************************

Five liters in less than three months? I’m sure this will really be cost effective and completely eliminate the need to actually drill for oil. I expect Obama & crew to announce an award of 1/2 billion dollars to these folks any day now.


3 posted on 10/18/2012 8:43:43 PM PDT by House Atreides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Oh my god! This is funnier than something from the onion! My wife and I couldn’t stop cracking up.


4 posted on 10/18/2012 8:43:54 PM PDT by bolobaby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Sounds like the Solyndra execs have setup shop in the UK.


5 posted on 10/18/2012 8:44:09 PM PDT by randog (Tap into America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigtoona

Thats what I want to know. All these stupid “breakthroughs” and “holy grails” are bunk every time we find out you have to feed more energy in than you get out.


6 posted on 10/18/2012 8:44:24 PM PDT by Crazieman (Are you naive enough to think VOTING will fix this entrenched system?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Somehow, just somehow, even if they can truly do this, I will bet one hundred and eleventy billion dollars that it requires much more energy (just from the electrolysis part alone), than you actually get from the petrol. But with the word “climate change” inserted eleventy billion times, they are sure to get lots of free government money to develop it, and will retire in the bahamas just before the government realizes it isn’t worth the investment.


7 posted on 10/18/2012 8:44:24 PM PDT by dsrtsage (One half of all people have below average IQ. In the US the number is 54%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Nothing like using a couple of megawatts to produce a few kilowatts of energy, but hey we are saving the planet.


8 posted on 10/18/2012 8:44:55 PM PDT by RockyMtnMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigtoona

Correct, there is no way around the First Law of Thermodynamics. Depending on the effeciency of the process, though, it could be useful as a storage medium for nuclear or hydroelectric power *IF* it is cheaper than pumping oil from the ground.


9 posted on 10/18/2012 8:45:05 PM PDT by Squawk 8888 (True North- Strong Leader, Strong Dollar, Strong and Free!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Since plants need carbon dioxide to live, if this technology really works well won’t we potentially be reducing plant growth by reducing CO2 levels?


10 posted on 10/18/2012 8:45:32 PM PDT by gunnut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

I have discovered a way to make bridges from sparrow farts. It takes a little while depending on the length of the fart and the bridge. Contact me with your bank data right away and we’ll work something out.


11 posted on 10/18/2012 8:46:02 PM PDT by Rembrandt (Part of the 51% who pay Federal taxes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Such a deal! Especially when you live in a place, like the UK, where they have unlimited, free electricity to such all this ‘petrol’ out of the air for free......


12 posted on 10/18/2012 8:46:51 PM PDT by RedElement
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gunnut

Nothing like a desert planet. Maybe they can grow Arabs next.

They get them from Dragon’s teeth, i think.


13 posted on 10/18/2012 8:49:24 PM PDT by Hardraade (http://junipersec.wordpress.com (I will fear no muslim))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: bigtoona

And what is the cost per liter to produce it?


14 posted on 10/18/2012 8:54:37 PM PDT by Lmo56 (If ya wanna run with the big dawgs - ya gotta learn to piss in the tall grass ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

British Engineers Produce Something Completely Impractical In The Real World.


15 posted on 10/18/2012 8:55:29 PM PDT by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

This is the kind of innovation that will attract the wrath of oil producers, but the petroleum industry would embrace because they can produce and sell it without being dependent on questionable governments. I am skeptical, but the process could work especially as a method of storing interrupted power sources such as wind and solar. I like the effects without consideration of the environment, and we need to push all possible methods.


16 posted on 10/18/2012 8:57:55 PM PDT by ghannonf18
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

This is the kind of innovation that will attract the wrath of oil producers, but the petroleum industry would embrace because they can produce and sell it without being dependent on questionable governments. I am skeptical, but the process could work especially as a method of storing interrupted power sources such as wind and solar. I like the effects without consideration of the environment, and we need to push all possible methods.


17 posted on 10/18/2012 8:57:59 PM PDT by ghannonf18
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish
No thanks. I'll just keep my car that runs on sea water.
18 posted on 10/18/2012 8:58:11 PM PDT by smokingfrog ( sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: House Atreides

5 liters = 1.32 gallons. I could fill my pickup in no time.


19 posted on 10/18/2012 8:58:39 PM PDT by Lurkina.n.Learnin (Ignorance is bliss- I'm stoked)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Spktyr
"British Engineers Produce Something Completely Impractical In The Real World."

20 posted on 10/18/2012 9:00:44 PM PDT by Tony in Hawaii (Evacuate? In our moment of triumph?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Yikes...Be really afraid, they’re going to go after huge sums of taxpayer money in subsidies.

Hopefully Obama will be long gone.


21 posted on 10/18/2012 9:01:02 PM PDT by jazusamo ("Intellect is not wisdom" -- Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Squawk 8888

You beat me to it. IF the process could be made efficient enough then it could be used as a means of storing excess energy generated from a nuclear power plant. It can never be used to generate power, however, since it will always take far more energy to create fuel than can be recovered from the fuel.

By the way, I learned how to create clean burning pure hydrogen out of water back in my high school chemistry class 40 years ago. This is not new technology.


22 posted on 10/18/2012 9:02:48 PM PDT by Bubba_Leroy (The Obamanation Continues)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

It’s a lot easier to create “Petrol” from Coal
The Germans worked it out in WWII

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_gasification
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fischer-Tropsch_process
http://seekingalpha.com/article/850891-a-new-vision-the-potential-for-coal-gasification-and-coal-chemical-industry-development-in-mongolia


23 posted on 10/18/2012 9:04:37 PM PDT by HangnJudge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gunnut

It would appear that the process is ‘carbon neutral’. Any CO2 taken out of the atmosphere to produce the fuel would then be returned to the atmosphere when the fuel is burned. Of course this does not take into account any CO2 produced creating the energy inputs necessary to create the fuel in the first place.

Conservation of Energy rules the day.


24 posted on 10/18/2012 9:07:47 PM PDT by rottndog (WOOF!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

I am really excited about carbon-neutral gasoline /sarc


25 posted on 10/18/2012 9:09:00 PM PDT by steve86 (Acerbic by nature not nurture TM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish
The technology, presented to a London engineering conference this week, removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. The “petrol from air” technology involves taking sodium hydroxide and mixing it with carbon dioxide before "electrolysing" the sodium carbonate that it produces to form pure carbon dioxide. Hydrogen is then produced by electrolysing water vapour captured with a dehumidifier.

The company, Air Fuel Syndication, then uses the carbon dioxide and hydrogen to produce methanol which in turn is passed through a gasoline fuel reactor, creating petrol.


The above process is seriously energy-intensive. From the first Law of Thermodynamics they're obviously not going to get the same energy out of the 'petrol' that they put into making it (duh), but reading the above I'm wondering just how bad the gap between energy-in and energy-out is for this. Might not even be the same order of magnitude.

I love how they put "electrolysing" in quotes like it's a made up term.
26 posted on 10/18/2012 9:09:42 PM PDT by verum ago (Some people must truly be in love, for only love can be so blind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Squawk 8888
Correct, there is no way around the First Law of Thermodynamics.

Sure there is... but you kinda have to be God for that route to work.

27 posted on 10/18/2012 9:12:45 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

hmmm, if the Brits decide to go through with this, I should buy stock in their electric companies!


28 posted on 10/18/2012 9:13:06 PM PDT by verum ago (Some people must truly be in love, for only love can be so blind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish
How much energy in for how much energy out?

Envirofascists never want to answer that question.

29 posted on 10/18/2012 9:13:06 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Government is the religion of the psychopath.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

That’s all fine but I have the true revolutionary fuel. There are these small round things made from nickel and copper. And you can make energy with NOTHING but electricity. You put electricity in them and they store it. Then you hook these things up to am electric motor and BAM you can propel your car with electricity!

I think I am going to apply to nObama for a billion dollar financing. I think I am going to call these things.... Batteries.... Yeah that sounds right...


30 posted on 10/18/2012 9:15:56 PM PDT by Syntyr (Happiness is two at low eight!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

And I have developed a process for turning dog turds into gold bars.


31 posted on 10/18/2012 9:19:18 PM PDT by faucetman ( Just the facts, ma'am, Just the facts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ghannonf18
This is the kind of innovation that will attract the wrath of oil producers, but the petroleum industry would embrace because they can produce and sell it without being dependent on questionable governments. I am skeptical, but the process could work especially as a method of storing interrupted power sources such as wind and solar. I like the effects without consideration of the environment, and we need to push all possible methods.

Well, it might work if you were partnering w/ a brewery and capturing/processing the carbon-dioxide waste from fermenting*... that's kind of how we got gasoline in the first place: it was a waste product.

It might not be enough to dent the global supply, but if crude-prices are high it might be enough to turn a bit of profit.

32 posted on 10/18/2012 9:22:13 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

I vote that this is a scam.


33 posted on 10/18/2012 9:27:08 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: verum ago
The above process is seriously energy-intensive. From the first Law of Thermodynamics they're obviously not going to get the same energy out of the 'petrol' that they put into making it (duh), but reading the above I'm wondering just how bad the gap between energy-in and energy-out is for this. Might not even be the same order of magnitude.
I love how they put "electrolysing" in quotes like it's a made up term.

True; but it only takes a little over one volt to do electrolysis w/ water (that could easily be produced by solar) -- I don't know what the energy cost for sodium hydroxide electrolysis is though.

Even so, it would make more sense to partner with a brewery, as fermentation produces carbon-dioxide as a waste-product (and IIRC it's fairly high purity).

34 posted on 10/18/2012 9:27:43 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62
I vote that this is a scam.

It likely is, as it seems to be trying to take carbon dioxide straight from the air... rather than capping a brewery or somesuch.
In all likelyhood, the best 'alternative energy' source is biodiesel, considering that there is no modification to the engine (or current designs) needed to use it and that the algae-production method looked very promising last I heard about it.

But then again, maybe it's because it could work that I haven't heard about it in a few years.

35 posted on 10/18/2012 9:32:34 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Tony in Hawaii

No, that was practical and useful. After all, if it stopped running, you could park it in your living room as sculpture. :P


36 posted on 10/18/2012 9:40:55 PM PDT by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

From the information given, there’s no way to know whether this can go into mass production. But if electricity can be converted into gasoline with reasonable efficiency, then nuclear energy will fill up our gas tanks. If cold fusion can be made practical, even better.


37 posted on 10/18/2012 9:42:56 PM PDT by AZLiberty (No tag today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish
"using only air and electricity"

That should be all anyone needs to know in order to make a reasonable conclusion regarding this process. It will most likely take 100 bucks worth of electricity to produce an ounce of fuel.

I hope I'm wrong, but so far, history has shown us a 100% accuracy rate of pessimistic observations regarding any such magical energy production methods.

38 posted on 10/18/2012 9:43:56 PM PDT by FunkyZero (... I've got a Grand Piano to prop up my mortal remains)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish
five litres of petrol in less than three months from a small refinery in Stockton-on-Tees, Teesside

The £1.1m project, in development for the past two years

Five liters in three months, at a cost of 1.1 MILLION British Pounds.... what a bargain. So you use enough energy to power how many cities to produce this fuel in limited quantities... Don't let Obama hear- he will sink US Taxpayer $$$ into it...

39 posted on 10/18/2012 9:46:47 PM PDT by TheBattman (Isn't the lesser evil... still evil?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Pretty clear to me that the vast majority of posters here are missing the point. Ah never mind....


40 posted on 10/18/2012 9:47:21 PM PDT by Paradox (I want Obama defeated. Period.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Well, He passed that law so I suppose He can amend it.


41 posted on 10/18/2012 10:05:48 PM PDT by Squawk 8888 (True North- Strong Leader, Strong Dollar, Strong and Free!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Bubba_Leroy
I learned how to create clean burning pure hydrogen out of water back in my high school chemistry class 40 years ago.

Yep, me too. Too bad it's nearly impossible to store.

42 posted on 10/18/2012 10:08:45 PM PDT by Squawk 8888 (True North- Strong Leader, Strong Dollar, Strong and Free!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Syntyr

I know you’re being facetious, but *IF* this process is reasonably efficient then it is a far more effective means of storing energy. Consider the fact that the bulky, heavy, state-of-the-art battery in the Chevy Volt only holds the energy equivalent of one gallon of gasoline. Ultimately all fossil fuels are the storage medium for solar & geothermal energy from prehistoric times.


43 posted on 10/18/2012 10:14:10 PM PDT by Squawk 8888 (True North- Strong Leader, Strong Dollar, Strong and Free!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: bigtoona

“It will probably take more energy input than what you get out of it.”

Ya think? :)


44 posted on 10/18/2012 10:18:17 PM PDT by ImaGraftedBranch (...By reading this, you've collapsed my wave function. Thanks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

“While the technology has the backing of Britain’s Institution of Mechanical Engineers, it has yet to capture the interest of major oil companies”.

Possibly because they need more than a few tons of petrol.


45 posted on 10/18/2012 10:32:36 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish
British Engineers Produce Amazing 'Petrol From Air'

Yeh -- as long as the air is over a dairy farm or a Mexican burrito wagon at lunchtime.

46 posted on 10/18/2012 10:41:17 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Produced 6 liters of petrol in 3 months? And I apparently missed the part where they mentioned how many thousand pounds it cost per liter to produce! Right up there with Solyndra, et al!


47 posted on 10/18/2012 11:09:47 PM PDT by Tucker39
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dsrtsage

not to mention that removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere would be harmful to plants and crops ... doh!


48 posted on 10/19/2012 12:26:16 AM PDT by willyd (Don't shoot, we're Republicans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62
I vote that this is a scam.

Sure it’s a scam

It’s a scam to get tax dollars to develop a completely useless process.

49 posted on 10/19/2012 12:44:25 AM PDT by Pontiac (The welfare state must fail because it is contrary to human nature and diminishes the human spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: gunnut; willyd
won’t we potentially be reducing plant growth by reducing CO2 levels?

No, since burning the fuel will release the CO2 back into the air.

50 posted on 10/19/2012 2:43:55 AM PDT by Right Wing Assault (Dick Obama is more inexperienced now than he was before he was elected.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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