It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

World First. India Chemical Plant Upcycling CO2

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 03:33 PM
link   
Last year was the end of phase one of the Carbon XPrize where the proposals of what to do with CO2 created from industry were selected. The proposals were actually being demonstrated when they were submitted which took the judges by surprise. They figured they would judge proposals then move to phase two where the semi-finalists would create a demo plant for the ideas and complete a 10 month run. A couple submissions were already at the pilot plant stage. The Carbon XPrize ends 2020 but there is already significant movement on several projects. These details are covered in the quoted article below.

Note: A term often repeated in acronym form throughout the article is the following: carbon capture and storage (CCS) (same source as below for XPrize article)


A $20 million global competition to convert flue gas CO2 into usable products aims to incentivize carbon utilization rather than storage [key term: Utilize], and could ultimately point to a new role for coal- and gas-fired power plants.
(introduction to article)


The Global CCS Institute (GCCSI) has identified 38 large-scale projects underway around the world, of which it expects over 20 to be online by the end of 2017. Both the Emirates Steel Industries CCS Project (the first phase of Abu Dhabi's Al Reyadah CCUS project), representing the first large-scale application of CCS for iron- and steelmaking, and Japan's Tomakomai CCS Demonstration Project, which features CO2 capture at a hydrogen production facility, were launched this year. And, in addition to Petra Nova, two large-scale CCS projects are set to come online in the US: the first large-scale bio-CCS project (the Illinois Industrial Carbon Capture and Storage Project) and the first CCS project at a commercial-scale coal gasification power plant (Mississippi's Kemper County Energy Facility). Other projects are underway in Canada, Australia, Europe, South America, Asia and the Middle East, and a number of pilot and demonstration projects are already online worldwide. Of the existing CCS facilities, SaskPower's Boundary Dam project in Canada recently logged the capture of over one million tonnes of CO2 since its startup in 2014.

[Those are the industrial projects already underway]

One group believes it has identified the barriers slowing down CCS development, and in response has launched a global competition aimed at commercializing new carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) technologies. The XPrize Foundation's NRG COSIA Carbon XPrize competition, which will conclude in 2020, offers a $7.5 million prize to each winning demonstration project on two tracks, one to be demonstrated at utility scale with flue gas from a coal-fired power plant, and the other with flue gas from a gas-fired plant. The competition began in 2015 with 47 project teams from seven countries including carbon capture technology companies, academic institutions, non-profits, startups and even a father-and-son team.

Among the carbon utilization projects are teams hoping to produce fuels for power generation and transport, cement, polymers, proteins, chemicals and chemical precursors, and advanced materials such as [carbon] nanotubes and graphene. Canada's Carbon-Cure Technologies aims to produce concrete, while US-based Carbon Upcycling UCLA is aiming for 3D-printed concrete replacement building material. Switzerland's Aljadix is focused on carbon-negative biofuel, and India's Breathe on methanol. US-based Protein Power is aiming for fish food, while Canada's Tandem Technical's goals are health supplements, toothpaste, paint and fertilizers.

PowerEngineeringInternational.com, online version, Vol. 24 (no date) - Carbon capture and utilization: Putting the 'U' in CCUS.

So there is a quick overview of the Carbon XPrize. The article continues explaining a couple in-depth projects. The UCLA entry (3-D printed concrete from CO2) has an issue with scaling up the 3-D printing process to building material sizes (read that at UCLA news while reading about space exploration). To finish that thought…


To this end, the Round 2 semi-finalists will demonstrate their technologies at pilot scale, using either real or simulated flue gas. Over a 10-month period the teams must meet the competition's minimum requirements, including converting at least 30 per cent of the CO2 in a flue gas stream, consuming less than 4 cubic metres of fresh water per tonne of CO2 converted, requiring a land footprint of less than ca 2300 square metres and demonstrating a pathway to overall CO2 emissions reduction. Points will be awarded both for how much CO2 is converted and for the net value of the resulting products.


So that is the XPrize competition. Here is what somebody did in the real world and the main reason for the post (just that both topics go hand-in-hand so figured it was as good a place as any for the share)

Continued…




posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Pfff... not impressed...

I got a few of those too...

In my backyard...

Called:

Plants... hmm same name.. how about that !



posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Two world-leading clean energy projects have opened in the south Indian state of Tamil Nadu.

A £3m industrial plant is capturing the CO2 emissions from a coal boiler and using the CO2 to make valuable chemicals. It is a world first.

And just 100km away is the world's biggest solar farm, making power for 150,000 homes on a 10 sq km site.

The industrial plant appears especially significant as it offers a breakthrough by capturing CO2 without subsidy.


Here's how it works:

1. The plant operates a coal-fired boiler to make steam for its chemical operations.
2. CO2 emissions from the boiler's chimney are stripped out by a fine mist of a new patented chemical.
3. A stream of CO2 is fed into the chemicals plant as an ingredient for baking soda and other compounds with many uses, including the manufacturing of glass, detergents and sweeteners. [Right now they are making sodium bicarbonate—i.e., baking soda].

BBCNews.com (us), Jan 3, 2017 – India's double first in climate battle.

First, the solar plant is good but they need a flow battery hooked up that can handle the atmospheric heat (still, good first step).

The coal powered boiler used to power the chemical plant is zero emission (no CO2) and they are getting a useful product out from what would be considered nothing more than a waste product. While the XPrize article called it, “utilize” the actual term that will be applied heavily throughout 2017 (my prediction) is, “upcycling.” The fact that they are doing this without government subsidy is also key. The two university students created a catalyst or scrubber (sorry, it is BBC with no specifics on the chemical reaction being performed) then a known chemical process is used to create baking soda (for now). Any chemical precursor listed in the XPrize article can also be created.

Without being involved in the XPrize competition a couple students contacted the right people, got some funding, and have demonstrated what can be done if we as a species put our minds to a problem. Just remember, “carbon capture, upcycling, and sequester” will be the new terms that everybody will hit on in 2017.

As for me, as far as it is being done, I do not care what it is called. It is about time! There is still some hope for the environment. And what better way to start 2017 than with some hope!?

I know that opinions abound about this topic in general. So let’s talk about the environment instead all the Mud Pit discussions. Save it, doesn’t need it, we are all doomed, about time, save the penguins… your thoughts?

--End--



posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 03:38 PM
link   
a reply to: EartOccupant

Way to jump the gun! Congrats, missed the whole point but got the first post in...



posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF


No disrespect for your post.

I'm sorry i dit interrupt a continuing post.

If mods could displace it I would be thankful.

Edit: I see your response and I understand, I do apologize Sir.

( Although i do remain at my point, CO2 is not bad, we just need more plants... ( biological ), trees .
And of-course try to reduce our exhaust. But not inventing ways to solve the exhoust, and on..and on.. nature has it ways ! if we would support and assist it )


edit on 3-1-2017 by EartOccupant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: EartOccupant

Or could just leave it as is... no digital ego here. Might serve as an example of why "rushing to post first" is not always the best thing.

The idea here is a closed system that does not produce CO2 emissions. Keeping it out of the atmosphere before it can react with water and create other nasty compounds. It is more than just CO2 and plants. It is the acidification of the ocean killing coral reefs (probably), poor crop yield requiring more fertilizer, less pollutants in the breathable air, and the trend that this is gong to happen on industrial scale as companies realize they can get at least two useful products while making just one.

This news shows the world it can be done without government help.



posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 03:51 PM
link   
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

I'm blushingly agree, i acted on a nerve.

Keep up the good information !



posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 04:45 PM
link   
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF


You know there is a saying that Necessity is the Mother of Invention and we really needed this.




posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Kashai


In the present, he believes the Carbon XPrize can transform both the power sector and a number of other industries. While the project teams are "making claims which not invalid but are hard to evaluate," he says,"we're now giving them chance to prove it.

"I believe them because I've seen the technology," he adds. "If they can all demonstrate [their projects] at scale, against each other, I will be the first one saying 'the world has changed'."

(Same source was the XPrize article in OP)

Taxing your way to clean air does not seem like a really good solution... but doing nothing does not seem like a great option either. And if you can manufacture two products with the other being actually useful, well, seems like a no brainer to do so.

Have you seen the air in Beijing? I would hope that if some small chemical company in India can do this then major power companies in Asia can as well.

So yeah, I choose to hope that this works on an industrial scale and we start the massive job of cleaning up this world.




posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 05:39 PM
link   
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF


Yeah I have seen the situation in Beijing and also lived in Chicago where during the heat of the Summer if your walking in Downtown there is this persistent orange haze throughout the air. During the winter if you decided to leave town to do some skiing and drive back at night.

You can see the same orange haze like a dome as you approach the city. L.A and New York are pretty much the same way.

In Miami Beach today were are starting to have problems when high tide comes in as in daily flooding of the roads near the beach [like Collins Avenue].

The amount of technology with respect to the issue of managing CO2 that has come out recently presents a substantive move forward.



posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 06:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Kashai

Seems like last year there have been large steps forward in not just capturing carbon emissions but converting the CO2 to something useful. I find the industrial scale of actually doing this to be fascinating.

Last year we had threads on: turning CO2 to stone; turning it to methanol; there was one on turning it to ethanol; I've posted about the carbon nanotubes being created from the gas flue stack on the graphene mega thread; and announced a pilot plant going up in Texas with zero emissions sometime last month. I've mentioned the XPrize and turning CO2 to concrete (UCLA) and the plant in Canada sucking CO2 directly from the air (MIT Tech review)... I just hope we haven't reached that point of no return (on the large scale, long term effects to the planet--like we started an avalanche that has not grown massive just yet but is growing. I do not think we have but you never know).

Seems like there will be some options that industry can choose from which will be best fit for them which is good.

Chicago does not need a smog dome! And I like penguins!



posted on Jan, 3 2017 @ 09:22 PM
link   
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF


In that sense we would probably need really good people who cared about what was happening.



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 01:05 AM
link   
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

This will not make a measurable difference in the CO2 emissions. Look at the amount of CO2 being generated just by power plants. Look at the amount of any product that can use the carbon from CO2. The only way that will make a difference, post combustion, is to sequester CO2 in deep brine aquifers.




edit on 1/4/2017 by pteridine because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 08:15 AM
link   
Hopefully the most useful product of this technology will be the philosophy behind it. Amazing what can be accomplished when "Ehrfurcht vor dem Leben" is used as a driving force.

"Reverence for Life says that the only thing we are really sure of is that we live and want to go on living. This is something that we share with everything else that lives, from elephants to blades of grass—and, of course, every human being. So we are brothers and sisters to all living things, and owe to all of them the same care and respect, that we wish for ourselves."

And speaking of philosophy as a driving force:

edit on 4-1-2017 by Michet because: Forgetfulness



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: pteridine

You are 100% correct in your statement. This will not save the planet. If you had read closely, you would have noticed that the XPrize guys say the same thing: The Carbon XPrize winners will not save the planet. They are not meant to. They are to show industry what can be done not what to do. Each industry has their own use and need for CO2 upcycled products. These guys in India happen to be in a position to make use of steam to power their chemical plant and have a use for baking soda. Maybe some other company has a use for carbon nanotubes; or a power company has a sister company that makes concrete so that would be their target for upcycled CO2. Each company will have a specific use, need, or market.

What makes the India announcement special is that the government was not involved. There are no mandates and there are no government subsidies (i.e., tax payers are not paying for this). This is a company that saw potential where others just see a waste by-product. More companies are already doing this (again, stated in XPrize quote, these are the big industry guys that generate power from gas and coal). It makes sense to get TWO usable items out of one process rather than flushing money into the atmosphere.

The Carbon XPrize is supposed to open doors to possibilities not just sequester it underground (the ‘U’ in CCUS). There is going to be a multipronged approach that involves zero emission power plants, less emission regular power plants, sequestration, and upcycling. There is no one silver bullet to cover all the bases. As a world’s first, it not supposed to solve the world’s problems just show one company’s approach to a solution that works for them without the need for the government to be involved.



posted on Jan, 5 2017 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Michet

Proper mind set is necessary for proper mental alignment for many different things!!

Thanks for the vid! We (as a species) need to let go of this greed mind set. Least effort for most profit = pollution. Got an update coming from the plant operator explaining why he decided to do this which is kind of funny.



posted on Jan, 5 2017 @ 03:01 PM
link   

The Tuticorin zero-emission factory is a coal-fueled power plant that has invented a revolutionary system to trap the CO2 emissions from the coal boiler and turn them into soda ash – which can be used to make baking soda and a variety of other compounds with many uses, including detergents and sweeteners. The factory states that the process has reduced its carbon emissions to virtually zero and on top of that, the production of baking soda prevents an estimated 60,000 tons of CO2 emissions from entering the world’s atmosphere each year. Not only is this technique an incredible scientific discovery, it is a revolutionary economic tactic as well.

The Tuticorin factory will be the first factory to make CO2 emission reductions profitable. Ramachadran Gopalan, the factory’s owner, told the BBC, “I am a businessman. I never thought about saving the planet. I needed a reliable stream of CO2, and this was the best way of getting it.”

www.onegreenplanet.com, Jan 4, 2017 – Coal-Burning Plant in India is Turning Carbon Dioxide Into Baking Soda – What’s the U.S. Waiting For?

This is why I don’t like quoting MSM sources instead of scientific sources. There is a difference between sodium carbonate and sodium bicarbonate (aka, baking soda). The “bi-“ is the big difference and it is the old school naming convention which sticks with us to this day. Sodium carbonate has a formula of Na2CO3; whilst sodium bicarbonate is NaHCO3. All that is required go from sodium carbonate to sodium bicarbonate is more heat exposure. The BBC story has it correct in that ammonia and rock salt are heated with CO2 you get sodium bicarbonate (backing soda)… it is called the Slovay Process (Wikipedia, sodium bicarbonate) and is how industrial amounts are made. Most of the ammonia makes it through the process and is recycled. The other product is water. It is a well known process.

So sorry if the above quote above seems confusing; I just wanted to share what kind of numbers of CO2 emissions are being kept from entering the atmosphere at the source. 60,000 tons/year is decent amount!

And I like the statement about "not wanting to save the world" but just do smart business! So, yeah, agree with the source on this... what is the US waiting for?



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Here is another lab crating a carbon capture source that can be used more than once. It also releases CO2 at a lower temperature saving from having to generate even more energy which nullifies the reason to carbon capture in the first place...

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Initially, the ORNL team was studying methods to remove environmental contaminants such as sulfate, chromate, or phosphate from water. To remove those negatively charged ions, the researchers synthesized a simple compound known as guanidine designed to bind strongly to the contaminants and form insoluble crystals that are easily separated from water.

In the process, they discovered a method to capture and release carbon dioxide that requires minimal energy and chemical input.
...
Traditional direct air capture materials must be heated up to 900 degrees Celsius to release the gas—a process that often emits more carbon dioxide than initially removed. The ORNL-developed guanidine material offers a less energy-intensive alternative.

“Through our process, we were able to release the bound carbon dioxide by heating the crystals at 80-120 degrees Celsius, which is relatively mild when compared with current methods,” Custelcean said. After heating, the crystals reverted to the original guanidine material. The recovered compound was recycled through three consecutive carbon capture and release cycles.

Oakridgetoday.com, 1/9/17 - ORNL: Crystallization method offers new option for carbon capture from air.

They are studying how to scale this up, if they could use solar power as an energy source to release the CO2, and if they can create a better crystal absorber.

They said it can be placed on-site (a flue) or as a stand alone plant. Direct air, CO2 scrubbing! That is cool and needed to be done a decade ago, imo.



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 03:18 PM
link   
Fun fact, there are 420+ trees per human, living on this planet. That also trumps the amount of stars in our Galaxy.

We have " a lot " of trees. 3,165,000,000,000 in approximation.




posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 03:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Triton1128


Twelve billion tons of carbon dioxide spew into the air every year from power plants burning coal, oil and natural gas around the world. And energy demand only keeps growing.

Phys.org - A chain reaction to spare the air.

So there is another lab trying to keep excess, man-made, previously trapped in hydrocarbon fuels, from even being belched into the atmosphere. And you can throw cars, trucks, lawnmowers, concrete production, etc. emissions onto that amount. There is still a need to do carbon capture at the source of generation.

That is what upcycling means. You get two (or more) useful products out instead puking out soot and chemicals to make one product.

Trees and mother nature can take of themselves quiet well. It is the stress and load on the humans that is being made by our activity that is being curtailed before any trees need to be involved. We and the trees will all breath easier.




top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join