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.

 

18-year-old invents cheaper CO2 capture tech to fight climate change

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 12:29 PM
link   
Metal organic framework!

Transition metal dichalcogenides!

Graphene doped with gold nanoparticles!!

Porous carbon aerogels!!!

Amine soaked water like a giant bong! The CO2 will stick to the ammonia which can then be heated to a couple hundred degrees, the ammonia re-solidifies out (precipitates) and can be re-used.

Those are ideas of creating and using power company's flue gas to capture CO2 (plus a couple other technologies that sound cool to say!
). The last one is how it is done more of the time. It is like CO2 scrubbers on Stargate Universe (when they had to find a planet to replenish their supply to keep flying through space). It is proven technology. I believe that plant in Europe (Swiss IIRC. ATS search is wonky. Thread is something like "Machine sucks CO2 from the air") is doing just that: sucking the surrounding atmosphere in, running it through a filter, capturing the CO2, and feeding a greenhouse while using residual heat from some commercial power plant.

Thing is, that takes energy to do. And when you tie it to a commercial power plant, you may be looking at 15 - 20% of your power generation. Not cool.

Basic science to the rescue!


[Salting out] is an effect based on the electrolyte-non electrolyte interaction, in which the non-electrolyte could be less soluble at high salt concentrations. It is used as a method of purification for proteins, as well as preventing protein denaturation due to excessively diluted samples during experiments. The salt concentration needed for the protein to precipitate out of the solution differs from protein to protein. This process is also used to concentrate dilute solutions of proteins. Dialysis can be used to remove the salt if needed

Wikipedia - Salting out.

OK. True. They are talking about proteins, not molecules but the idea is the same. CO2 is passed through a solution and reacts with salt to create a molecule and precipitates out. You can boil away the water and you are left with a powder. Another proven technology. Now check this out! ETA, I did not pick the titles (both have the toxic, "climate change" in their title. Going with the less politically charged one...)


[Ethan] Novek made the discovery that would lead to his potentially game-changing technology in his high school chemistry laboratory. CO2 capture technology has traditionally drawn on a substance such as amine that selectively reacts with just CO2 as other gases escape. The substance is then heated to break the chemical bond for a release of the greenhouse gas that can be converted into products. But the amines used are expensive, and it takes a lot of heat to break that bond. Novek’s discovery could overcome these issues.

In his high school laboratory, Novek was hoping to utilize a technique known as salting out to cheaply produce urea, a nitrogen-based fertilizer. He realized he could actually use the process to separate out and capture CO2 after fossil fuels are burned.

Here’s how it could work: at a fossil fuel plant, exhaust gases could be piped into a mix of water and ammonia. Inert gases like oxygen would escape as ammonia reacted with CO2, forming a salt. A solvent could break the salt back into CO2 and ammonia. Distillation could separate the ammonia and solvent mix so each component could be recycled. And the CO2 could be transformed into chemicals like acetic acid or synthetic gas. The CO2 capture process needs 75 percent less energy than others.

Inhabitat.com, Dec. 8, 2017 - 18-year-old invents cheaper CO2 capture tech to fight climate change.

You can save a ton of money by doing it this way! And use the energy instead of heating up your solution. Lord knows there are plenty of chemicals around so why not put them to good use?!

There is a contest called the Carbon X Prize where they have competing teams trying to figure out what to do with CO2 from flue gas. One team wants to turn it into concrete pre-cursors, another to carbon nanotubes, I've mentioned the guy from Harvard with the pilot plant north of Vancouver already testing this out (MIT Tech Review, July/August 2016. ETA: online link - only 5 free views!). That guy wants to turn it back into fuel pre-cursors.

The thing is, they are all supposing the CO2 capture part! Kind of like: Step 1, collect underpants; Step 2, ??; Step 3, profit!

Now there is a cheap method to actually capture the CO2 from a flue stack.

I would take it one step further. Take the CO2 from the flue stack, turn it supercritical, pump it through an SCO2 turbine a few times, then turn it into whateverz. That is what I have been referring to as "upcycling" where a waste product is turned into at least one useful product. In this case, you get the original electricity, some extra electricity, whatever product you want to make, and as a bonus, the CO2 is scrubbed from the exhaust before being pumped into the atmosphere.

I don't care if you think it is some tree-hugger, AGW, leftists, liberal, Gore loving, anti-Trump, blah-blah-blah, it is about doing something for our civilization and our environment. The environment does not care about your political labels. She is perfectly set to continue without us. Me, I just want to not add to the problems.

And it all started with basic science!

For the sappy, feel good story (caution, TL;DR), see Quartz.com - The teenager inventor who could change the way the world fights climate change.

Should we at least try? Who cares? Go back to the Mud Pit, liberal!! Thoughts? Better solutions? I miss Stargate U!?

I know there is a lot to discuss on this!
edit on 12-12-2017 by TEOTWAWKIAIFF because: add url




posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Planting more trees also helps with CO2 sequestration.

DOH!

And is actually 'Green'.



posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 12:58 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Oh and stop deforestation.
edit on 12-12-2017 by intrptr because: change



posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 01:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: neo96

Oh and stop deforestation.


Isn't that the idea ?

Reforestation is a big thing these days.



posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 01:01 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Doesn't capture enough. Takes too long.

It should be done in addition to active atmospheric reduction. This is not an either/or question.



posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 01:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: neo96

Oh and stop deforestation.


Isn't that the idea ?

Reforestation is a big thing these days.

So is oxygen.



posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 03:25 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

getting carbon out of the air isnt the problem, we've had hundreds of effective solutions to that for years.

doing it for a profit. that is the problem, that is what they seek, we dont do anything in this country unless it profits. thats the bottom line, thats capitalism.



posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 03:33 PM
link   
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

I will go with more plants, and trees...no additional science needed



posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 04:18 PM
link   
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

I dont think humanity has the capabilities to fight climate change in any kind of meaningful manner even if our actions have indeed contributed to or sped up the process somewhat.

Fact is that climates change over time and we will either need to adapt to this new circustance or become extinct.

My monies on us adapting to our new surroundings over time, as it's kind of what we do best, that being adapt and overcome obstacles, ether natural or of our own creation.



posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueJacket

As I stated earlier, trees and plants is not enough to offset what is being pumped into the atmosphere. That is because the hydrocarbons being pumped out had previously held the CO2.

I also said we should do both. This no longer a "do our best effort" but an all out assault.

a reply to: andy06shake

True (we will adapt), but that does mean "anything goes" as well. We at least need to try. When, not if, people see the benefit of upcycling then it will become all the rage. One man's trash...



posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 04:44 PM
link   
When I was a kid my mom used to yell at me for standing at the refrigerator door open looking for something to eat, along with leaving the front door open and letting the air conditioning out. I still do these things, but now I'm fighting global warming.



posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 04:47 PM
link   
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

"True (we will adapt), but that does mean "anything goes" as well."

Of course not, but i don't imagine humanity will change significantly or adopt another paradigm anytime soon that will address the issues we face as a race.

I mean we have had the best part of recorded history to do so, yet still seem hell-bent on our own superiority, displaying the same penchant for destruction and refusal to learn from our mistakes from one generation to the next.
edit on 12-12-2017 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 05:15 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Looks like one generation is doing something about it!


Kid is 18 and has his own company. Probably sell licenses off, make a boat load of money, and save the environment.

Why go to college? Live in you mom's basement for free and join CT sites like the rest of us!



posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 07:58 PM
link   
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

Just insert chloroplasts dna in the human genome and we can convert sunlight and CO2 into sugars to provide energy for our bodies.



posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 08:42 PM
link   
Al Gore is gonna be all over this calling it a scam.
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 02:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Bramble Iceshimmer

Go green, or go home!

I like the lateral thinking on that one!

a reply to: gimcrackery

Al Gore would probably attack an 18 year old!! And get his butt kicked. LOL.



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 03:08 PM
link   
Well this conservative has no heartburn with efforts to improve scrubbing the environment of potential problems, and the fact that this kid has come up with a new way should be encouraged we need the young to feel they can make a difference their youth will allow them to approach the problems with a new perspective.

Bravo young un.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 01:47 PM
link   
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

SOUNDS REALLY COOL BUT I LIKE MY WAY BETTER plant trees bushes and vegatables but this way be more efficient.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: proteus33

Uh, not much of a reader of the thread, huh?

Already suggested, already explained why it is not enough and takes too long. Active filtration is more efficient at extracting massive quantities of CO2. Like was stated earlier, you need to do something beneficial with the CO2 that makes money. The OP is about a cheap and efficient method over other strategies.

It is not a question of "if" this should be done.

No "devil" necessary!



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 03:09 PM
link   
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

Actually i glanced over it . and when i said it might be more efficient than plant i was not serious . i live by the coast and according al manbearpig gore should already be underwater so global warming is considered bs where i live by most locals but we have a lot fools moving here from nyc and they trying to badger us on the subject. but truthfully you want to pull carbon out of air plants do it best and can make you real money.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join