Proven one-step process converts CO2 and water directly into liquid hydrocarbon fuel

A team of University of Texas at Arlington chemists and engineers have proven that concentrated light, heat and high pressures can drive the one-step conversion of carbon dioxide and water directly into useable liquid hydrocarbon fuels.

Source

Links: 1, 2

This sounds too good to be true! We don't want laws and we don't want drastic changes to a problem we never created. I can't stand when humans are accused of contributing to climate change, even though part of that statement is true.

Simply put, I will not share the blame with those living in excess that inadvertently cause me to negatively impact my planet. Don't you understand? The people living in gross excess are those who define generations by using reactionary cause and effect economics and suppressing any conflicts of interest.

Who's going to pay for this? Who do you think. Start investing in the right technologies, give up all the suppressed ideas and inventions and just MAYBE I’ll believe that my government actually cares about the planet. Its obvious who they're going after and they sure are excluding themselves from the equation.

Governments contribute to global warming, NOT people.


This team of chemists and engineers seem to have their heads on straight. Not only does their machine remove carbon from the atmosphere to make fuel, the process also creates oxygen as a byproduct. The best part though? We would not have to overhaul much infrastructure in order for the hydrocarbons to burn effectively and efficiently.

"Our process also has an important advantage over battery or gaseous-hydrogen powered vehicle technologies as many of the hydrocarbon products from our reaction are exactly what we use in cars, trucks and planes, so there would be no need to change the current fuel distribution system," said Frederick MacDonnell, UTA interim chair of chemistry and biochemistry and co-principal investigator of the project.

The process is called photothermochemical alkane reverse combustion, which converts carbon dioxide and water into hydrocarbons and oxygen using a photothermochemical flow reactor operating between 180 to 200 Celsius, under up to 6 atmosperes of pressure. While the device itself sounds fancy, it uses little more than light, heat and pressure to synthesize liquid hydrocarbons in a single step.

"Discovering a one-step process to generate renewable hydrocarbon fuels from carbon dioxide and water is a huge achievement," Dimos said. "This work strengthens UTA's reputation as a leading research institution in the area of Global Environmental Impact, as laid out in our Strategic Plan 2020."

Currently, they are using a titanium dioxide photo-catylyst, which cannot absorb the entire visible light spectrum used in the heating process. Better catalyst, better sustainability.

The authors envision using parabolic mirrors to concentrate sunlight on the catalyst bed, providing both heat and photo-excitation for the reaction. Excess heat could even be used to drive related operations for a solar fuels facility, including product separations and water purification.

The team has receive more than 2.6 million in grants and corporate funding (a drop in the bucket compared to what oil companies spend on advertising, lol), and are also working on converting natural gas into high-grade diesel and jet fuel. A team of modern day alchemists if you ask me!

MacDonnell and Dennis' investigations also are focused on converting natural gas for use as high-grade diesel and jet fuel. The researchers developed the gas-to-liquid technology in collaboration with an industrial partner in UTA's Center for Renewable Energy and Science Technology, or CREST, lab, and are now working to commercialize the process.

MacDonnell also has worked on developing new photocatalysts for hydrogen generation, with the goal of creating an artificial photosynthetic system which uses solar energy to split water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen. The hydrogen could then be used as a clean fuel.

Put this team in charge of removing the excess carbon in our atmosphere and you just might see it happen. Multiple technologies exist Mr. Government, now cough up the grants and put them to work! To further illustrate my point, I have included more reasons to point the finger in the second post.

These are the real polluters of our planet. Throw some regulation and oversight on these bastards before you come knocking on MY door. How do my emissions even compare?

These numbers from July 2012 and are sure to make your blood boil. And for all that money earned, all that carbon burned. These corporate scumbags and their insatiable greed, do not hesitate to put profit over preventative safety measures. The demand justifies the means, right?

How the Big Five Oil Companies Spend their $375 Million Daily Profits

• The five biggest oil companies earned a combined profit of $375 million per day, or a record $137 billion profit for the year, in 2011, despite reducing their oil production.

• In 60 seconds, these five companies earned $261,000 — more than 96 percent of American households make in one year.

• These five oil companies received $6.6 million in federal tax breaks every day.

• In 2011, the three largest domestic public oil companies spent $100 million of their profits each day, or over 50 percent, buying back their own stock to enrich their board, senior managers, and largest share holders.

• The entire oil and gas industry spent on average $400,000 each day lobbying senators and representatives to weaken public health safeguards and keep big oil tax breaks, totalling nearly $150 million.

• Each CEO of the Big Five companies received an average of $60,110 in compensation per day last year. On average, their pay jumped 55 percent in 2011. Exxon CEO Rex Tillerson’s compensation came close to $100,000 per day last year.

Big polluters: one massive container ship equals 50 million cars

April 23, 2009 The Guardian has reported on new research showing that in one year, a single large container ship can emit cancer and asthma-causing pollutants equivalent to that of 50 million cars. The low grade bunker fuel used by the worlds 90,000 cargo ships contains up to 2,000 times the amount of sulfur compared to diesel fuel used in automobiles. The recent boom in the global trade of manufactured goods has also resulted in a new breed of super sized container ship which consume fuel not by the gallons, but by tons per hour, and shipping now accounts for 90% of global trade by volume.

In international waters ship emissions remains one of the least regulated parts of our global transportation system. The fuel used in ships is waste oil, basically what is left over after the crude oil refining process. It is the same as asphalt and is so thick that when cold it can be walked upon . It's the cheapest and most polluting fuel available and the world's 90,000 ships chew through an astonishing 7.29 million barrels of it each day, or more than 84% of all exported oil production from Saudi Arabia, the worlds largest oil exporter.

The global economy was not our idea (but a human's), the shipping and transportation system was not the brainchild of you and I, and most importantly, the oil industries and their shareholders have purposefully designed our infrastructure to foster profits and sustainability, allowing them to write off the shame as our own excessive consumption.

Almost everything in existence generates waste and after a slave has fully assimilated the only thing that remains useless is their waste. Well, powerful lawmakers and shareholders have found a way to turn that waste into dollars, without actually reducing any of their own excessive expenditures of energy. They don't want to reduce carbon in our atmosphere, they want to reduce “slave emissions”.

Do many of the 99% still live in excess? They sure do, I can't deny that. For the majority, the establishment has successfully transformed the underlying thought process that self control and moderation depend on. We are brainwashed and we are not contributing to global warming,

They are.

(Disclaimer: My opinions are subject to change with education. The hypocrisy of my guilt is the only thing being sustained at the moment as I do not believe "humans" are to blame, only a small handful of scum suckers that dictate policy and regulation)

a reply to: eisegesis


SnF for awareness on energy solutions. This IS the future.

I absolutely love the idea of decentralized...x.y.z.

Decentralized energy would be amazing. I can just imagine having my own one of these generators to power my house for....ever?

Of course, decentralized anything these days seems to be a radical-ish idea, but it would seem to me to be a great idea in many applications with energy solutions being the main one.

But where does the energy come from?

To take H2O and CO2 and have 'fuel' and o2 left over, you're going to wind up with something like bicarbonate anion or formaldehyde...

But to create these out of those, you'd need to input energy- more than you'll get from combustion of that fuel, because no process is 100% efficient.

That's why oil is so popular- it's already got millions of years of energy stored up in every drop- we just dig it out of the ground and release that energy into our environment by burning it.


I'd like to think they could take readily available water, rub it against some contaminated air, and make something that will run my car or heat my home- but they can't do it without using more energy to make the fuel than the fuel already has.
Amusingly enough, that's essentially what we're doing with batteries- using 100% of the power to get 60% of it back later, but in a more convenient format.

I'd love to see more on the chemical process they're using, though. Neat stuff.

Don't hold your breath waiting for this to be used, and don't blame the men in black, its simply not practical.

What they do is hydrogen from water and carbon monoxide from co2 to perform a Fischer–Tropsch process (nazi tech at finest) the resultant hydrocarbon production is abysmal and a bunch of useless aromatic alcohols, last time i check cars runs in octane so that whole premise of using same old cars is a dream.

water and photocatalysis don't mix well, water absorbs UV and after 5 microns there is no radiation left, you cannot use photocatalysis in bulk reactors, is a waste, so the best way is using continue reactors that have very small diameter, industry people don't like continue reactors too much, they are hard to control, and when you produce a drop per minute it better be worth it, gas is not worth it.

And that about using mirrors and what not... you need to control very well your reactions if you don't you end up with 90% useless side products on the best case and a few miles leveled by the explosion in the worst, what they say sound more like the imagination of a student that the design of an engineer.

Its a nice concept for a paper, nothing more.

a reply to: lordcomac

But where does the energy come from?

The authors envision using parabolic mirrors to concentrate sunlight on the catalyst bed, providing both heat and photo-excitation for the reaction. Excess heat could even be used to drive related operations for a solar fuels facility, including product separations and water purification.

Contained in the OP.

Who wants to bet these scientists will start dying in mysterious ways?

This could end the oil industry overnight.

On the bright side, this is like the best news ever. I wonder if the heat needed could be obtained from the sun i.e. use desert land for solar ovens to reduce the needed energy input.

a reply to: Indigent

True. But what about other tech, so thermoelectric?

This company made a camp stove that can charge your usb devices with nothing but fire from burning whatever you can....

www.bioliteenergy.com...

Pretty damn awesome, and if this thermoelectic device is availble for public purchase, i wonder what other thermoelectric tech exists...?

a reply to: lordcomac

Yes requires 400 degrees and something to create a lot of pressure. Meaning it will use far more energy than it provides.be easier to use methane since that's basically what they are making any way just the hard way. Since just putting bio matter in the sun is a lot more efficient . This is more a scientific discovery than practical it shows us how easy simple hydrocarbons are to create on other planets with the right condituons .

a reply to: OneGoal

any plant that burn fuel/coal/whatever to make electricity is a thermoelectric plant

nuclear power plants are thermo electric too, anything that boils water to move a turbine is

originally posted by: lordcomac
But where does the energy come from?

To take H2O and CO2 and have 'fuel' and o2 left over, you're going to wind up with something like bicarbonate anion or formaldehyde...


I'd love to see more on the chemical process they're using, though. Neat stuff.

Variation on an old theme.

Photolysis/electrolysis of water to produce hydrogen, reverse water gas shift to make CO with some of the hydrogen, and then either Fischer-Tropsch or Mobil MTG process with the rest of the hydrogen.

Indigent
a reply to: OneGoal

Right, i was referring to technology that doesnt require a spinning generator or turbine but has some type of panel/material that can take heat and convert it into electricity. I guess that example wasnt the best as it doesnt specify exactly how it achieves the 2 watt charge from heat. It does say it has a fan to move the heated air, but doesnt specify the method to charge.

A better example would be like wrapping the headers and hottest exhaust pipes on a standard i.c. engine and somehow derive electricity from the heat alone.


Thinking on this subject, do you think there could be a chemical compound, solid material, or otherwise that could yield an electrical charge by neutrino bombardment?

a reply to: Indigent

What they do is hydrogen from water and carbon monoxide from co2 to perform a Fischer–Tropsch process (nazi tech at finest) the resultant hydrocarbon production is abysmal and a bunch of useless aromatic alcohols, last time i check cars runs in octane so that whole premise of using same old cars is a dream.

This is more or less proof of concept and refinement.

"We are the first to use both light and heat to synthesize liquid hydrocarbons in a single stage reactor from carbon dioxide and water," said Brian Dennis, UTA professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering and co-principal investigator of the project.

Nothing has been remotely practical on a large scale until the conception of this single stage reactor. It just needs a substantial power source.

New solar reactor technology to produce liquid hydrocarbon fuels

Once these two technologies synchronize, we'll be in business... meaning somebody else we'll be in business. Remind me to buy stock in carbon sequestration technologies.

With the first ever production of synthesized "solar" jet fuel, the SOLAR-JET project has successfully demonstrated the entire production chain for renewable kerosene obtained directly from sunlight, water and carbon dioxide (CO2), therein potentially revolutionizing the future of aviation. This process has also the potential to produce any other type of fuel for transport applications, such as diesel, gasoline or pure hydrogen in a more sustainable way.

Link

Give it time and hope that someone funds these guys! The simplicity in this design is in my opinion a glimpse into the future. Thanks for your input.

originally posted by: OneGoal
a reply to: eisegesis

Decentralized energy would be amazing. I can just imagine having my own one of these generators to power my house for....ever?

You have to put in a lot more energy into the conversion than you get back by burning the fuel.

If you were reading this as "It's a miraculous new energy source!!" that's not what it is. It is a way to make high energy density fuel out of atmospheric CO2, at the expense of a lot of input energy. More energy by far than you'll get back by burning the fuel.

What it might be good for is to convert crappy energy sources to something useful. Say, wind power or solar thermal power. Instead of making electricity out of it and it only being available episodically, you could just design the plant to make a useful chemical fuel while the sun shines or the wind blows. It would solve a lot of the problem with energy storage to make these sources useful.

originally posted by: OneGoal
a reply to: Indigent
Pretty damn awesome, and if this thermoelectic device is availble for public purchase, i wonder what other thermoelectric tech exists...?

You can buy all you want of it off the shelf. It's horribly inefficient.

a reply to: eisegesis

There is a scientist in IRan who has a $50 device that converts CO2 into a gooey type substance. The technology works on the same principle as a tree leaf.

look up Kshe but be warned many people say he is a crook of course.

a reply to: eisegesis

ok - a 2 part question :

what is the total calorific value of the ` liquid hydrocarbon produced `

what is the total energy requirement of the plant [ to sustain the temp and pressure required ] ?

i will assume a ` hot start ` - ie the apparatus is already at the operating temp // pressure

and all losses are due to product extraction and other expected heat losses

edot to add :

my questions assume a given run time - ie 24 hours .

a reply to: ignorant_ape

I'm not asking you to answer your own questions, I just can't research and comment until after work. If you haven't discovered the link already, feel free to have a look...

PDF

Really neat if this works out.

It's too bad you had to derail the good news with a bunch of anti-oil complaining.

ETA: Not trying to tell you how to write your own thread, I'm just saying that I got to the point of rolling my eyes after starting your second post and I didn't even finish it. Maybe that's just me...I just don't like people complaining about profits of private companies.

a reply to: eisegesis

appologies - the question was not aimed at you per se

but this is just the latest process to produce fuels from " something else "

all the others worked - but used far more energy than the fuel they procuced was ` worth `

this is ok when you are desperate - ie nazi germany 1944 / 45 - they had a process to turn 5 tons of coal into one ton of petrol [ gasoline ] , which was " acceptable " to them as aircraft could not run on coal and thier access to crude oil diminished every month .

the energy equation is the vital part of this process - and i dont see it published

thanks for the link BTW