Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Sunday April 07 2019, @05:20PM   Printer-friendly

Climate Change: 'Magic Bullet' Carbon Solution Takes Big Step:

A technology that removes carbon dioxide from the air has received significant backing from major fossil fuel companies.

British Columbia-based Carbon Engineering has shown that it can extract CO2 in a cost-effective way.

It has now been boosted by $68m in new investment from Chevron, Occidental and coal giant BHP.

[...]CO2 is a powerful warming gas but there's not a lot of it in the atmosphere - for every million molecules of air, there are 410 of CO2.

While the CO2 is helping to drive temperatures up around the world, the comparatively low concentrations make it difficult to design efficient machines to remove the gas.

Carbon Engineering's process is all about sucking in air and exposing it to a chemical solution that concentrates the CO2. Further refinements mean the gas can be purified into a form that can be stored or utilised as a liquid fuel.

[...]Carbon Engineering's barn-sized installation has a large fan in the middle of the roof which draws in air from the atmosphere.

It then comes into contact with a hydroxide-based chemical solution. Certain hydroxides react with carbon dioxide, reversibly binding to the CO2 molecule. When the CO2 in the air reacts with the liquid, it forms a carbonate mixture. That is then treated with a slurry of calcium hydroxide to change it into solid form; the slurry helps form tiny pellets of calcium carbonate.

The chalky calcium carbonate pellets are then treated at a high temperature of about 900C, with the pellets decomposing into a CO2 stream and calcium oxide.

After any water lingering in the concentrated CO2 is removed, the result can be converted into a fuel:

The captured CO2 is mixed with hydrogen that's made from water and green electricity. It's then passed over a catalyst at 900C to form carbon monoxide. Adding in more hydrogen to the carbon monoxide turns it into what's called synthesis gas.

Finally a Fischer-Tropsch process turns this gas into a synthetic crude oil. Carbon Engineering says the liquid can be used in a variety of engines without modification.

The question then becomes are people going to look at this development and think there is no need to reduce their use of fossil fuels and/or delay the transition to renewable power sources?

Prev: https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=18/06/13/025232&from=rss

Related: https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=18/08/20/0148258
https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=18/10/29/1532257&from=rss
https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=19/02/28/0231247


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 08 2019, @04:03PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 08 2019, @04:03PM (#826216)

    It would be kind of annoying just standing there being back in the stoneage on the cut-off day when there is no more oil. No matter what our beliefs are, trees are the best tech we have for regulating the climate and renewable energy is our best bet on a sustainable energy source.

  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday April 08 2019, @05:57PM (2 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 08 2019, @05:57PM (#826282) Journal

    It would be kind of annoying just standing there being back in the stoneage on the cut-off day when there is no more oil.

    I'd be hopping in my electric car on that day. Contrary to popular opinion, I'm not the stupid one. Oil won't magically just disappear. When it becomes expensive enough, due either to scarcity or idiots meddling with economics beyond their ken, I'll figure out the next best thing and move to that. The real question is how well off people will be by that time. I think my path is better for humanity than eco-hysteria is.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 08 2019, @08:59PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 08 2019, @08:59PM (#826361)

      I was trying to say that this thing you call eco-hysteria (and I'm probably on of those in your eyes) and what it produce is something that we are all going to need. I don't see why any of us could be against this development. It is very important to have one thing in the clear. We are not saving Earth, we are saving ourselves. Earth don't care.

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday April 08 2019, @11:11PM

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 08 2019, @11:11PM (#826417) Journal

        and what it produce is something that we are all going to need.

        Fossil fuels produce things we need too. There's got to be a balance. Not magic thinking that there's one true path.

        As I've noted before, a big flaw in the proposals to mitigate climate change is that they haven't shown that such mitigation is better than doing nothing about climate change.