It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Sun-powered device converts CO2 into fuel

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 12:41 AM
Seems sound to me so far.

The only issue is it would have to be mass produced. Carbon nano-tubes aren't exactly something you can build at home... well, I lie, there are a few rudimentary attempts out there, but nothing accurate enough to design with.

I've been toying for some time thinking of ways to use the photo-voltaic means of electricity production and turn it into a chemical process. Haven't come up with any designs yet other than HHO electrolysis at a microscopic level... which I can't build with whats at my disposal... and after crunching the numbers, it became apparent to me my version wouldn't be very efficient either, at least no more efficient than simply connecting a solar cell directly to a tank of salt water for electrolysis.

Kudos to these guys.

Most of science really does follow nature, eh?

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 01:01 AM

Originally posted by Phage
Sunlight and CO2 into fuel? Been around for a long time
Just had to point that out. Sorry.

Exactly! Just another way to prove that everything man needs is already found in nature. We need nothing more than what is already provided for us naturally on this planet. Everything we have created has a negative side-effect. Nothing we can create from technology will ever be able to prove more useful or healthful than living, organic items from the natural world. We create, dead, lifeless, inorganic objects that will either rot or litter the planet with garbage, as well as detract from our spiritual evolution.

See my signature.

[edit on 2/22/2009 by pjslug]

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 02:42 AM
reply to post by Phage

Stop being such a Negative Nancy, OK???

No offence.....but I'd like to see this concept get some to speak....

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 02:44 AM
question is how much does it cost to build each unit - and how long does it run for ? [ before catalyst deplition / poinsoning ]

colour me skeptical - but for large scale ` mass energy ` use i can forsee conventional biomass plants being more efficient / cheaper to run

this will possibly be a cool niche product for places like arctic reserarc stations , ships , space craft etc where you cannot take a plantation of fast growing plants with you - and space / weight is at a premium

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 02:48 AM
reply to post by weedwhacker

Having said that.....I am STILL waiting for some conclusive proof that CO2 could, in any way, be useful......except as in a plant as photosynthesis?

I'm not a molecular biologist by any stretch of the imagination.....but how in the hell is CO2 going to help our energy crisis....????

Except, of course, the fact that we exhale it????

maybe it will work with the methane????

We, and the cows, can fart our way to prosperity.......

[edit on 2/22/0909 by weedwhacker]

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 02:54 AM
reply to post by weedwhacker

I tried to joke....maybe prematurely....

Sun-powered, to break down CO2???

Well, what IS CO2, but oxygen and carbon atoms. disrupt those bonds WOULD take a lot of energy....

The result, IF it worked.... a lot of Oxygen, and some Carbon......well, we can breathe the Oxygen......the idea of using the residual as fuel.....ermmmm....I think that's already known as 'coal'.......

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 03:38 AM

Originally posted by spec_ops_wannabe
reply to post by mdiinican

...As for the CO2, there isn't very much need for it since CO2 is beneficial and needed for proper plant growth, in turn providing natural crops/foods, and benefitting the rest of the animal life on Earth.

Not much use for CO2, other than, "needed for proper plant growth"? You don't drink any carbonated beverages? You never have a cold beer? You don't appreciate all the research done in science to create new cures via the use of dry-ice, as well as all the other uses for dry-ice, which is 100% CO2? CO2 is getting a bum-rap in my opinion.

Al Gore has made a fortune demonizing carbondioxide (CO2) for the sole purpose of passing his "carbon tax" so he can take away our cars and force us back to peddling bicycles to get around, while he and his jet-set friends fly their corporate jets to $200,000. speaking engagements.

Most people don't know the difference between carbondioxide and carbonmonoxide and lump them together as the same. Carbondioxide (CO2) is a highly useful by-product man uses everyday for his well-being, and plants need to live and grow. Carbonmonoxide, on the other hand, is a deadly gas. It is good to know that this research into additional good uses for CO2 is going forth!

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 03:57 AM
this is going to have near ZERO impact on atmospheric CO2 concentration - as the fuel it poroduces will be promply burned -

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 05:40 AM

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Red Shield

Nanotube technology is not garage shop stuff. Got a silicon wafer shop in your back room?

God, I wish. You can only put so much on an FPGA

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 06:55 AM
reply to post by CavemanDD

At some point in the future then this could power cars right?
Co2 would be so cheap, people can't wait to get rid of the stuff.
The Water is free.
Powered by Sun, free.

it will never see the light of day, nobody can make any money out
of it. Unless the governments install a Sun Tax.

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 07:31 AM
reply to post by skeptic_al


ahh F'in funny, sun tax.

Those bastards would probably find a way, eh?

Just like the meter on the side of your house, you'll have one hooked up to some solar array, perhaps one on your car. I guess the governments would have to decide to how to extend their territory into space, or sorry, private companies.

Maybe they'll add their corporate tag and succeed in renaming the sun.

If they start taxing sun light, hell with it, I'm leaving society.

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 07:57 AM
How long can this run off of the smog in Los Angelos?

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 08:03 AM
The world of clean energy sources is becoming more plentiful and realistic. And heck, if we can make the breakthrough that is forsaking the culture of official secrecy in general, who knows what nonhuman stuff we can adopt? I'd damn sure like to know what powered that huge rectangular craft that Rick Sorrells (Dublin, TX) saw (of which there's radar evidence). Sure would be nice to have engines or propulsion that can't suck birds into it.

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 08:50 AM
What, are they going to make transfat and splenda at an unprecedented rate?

And no I don't really mean transfat and splenda.

reply to post by skeptic_al

Water is the next oil...

[edit on 2/22/2009 by die_another_day]

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 09:12 AM

Originally posted by mystiq
The real solution for all inventions is to patent them in an open source model for the people ASAP, and then compete to develop devices in a free enterprise model.

[edit on 21-2-2009 by mystiq]

Thats so TRUE! Im researching Open Innovation on a project im working on and thats really the spirit!

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 09:23 AM

Originally posted by Phage
Sunlight and CO2 into fuel? Been around for a long time

Just had to point that out. Sorry.

Oh, come on, we can do better than mother nature (or at least we would like to think we can


posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 09:54 AM
reply to post by johnsky

Johnsky: Salt water would not be a good thing to electrolyze because you would make hydrogen and chlorine. Various electrolytes may be used. Most common are sulfuric acid or an alkalai metal hydroxide.
Plans similar to the thread topic surface about once a month when some lab needs PR. None of these are near commercialization and many happen slowly and at low efficiency, i.e., more energy required than produced. This one requires esoteric carbon and runs in a lab. Commercialization of such a device is decades away if at all. Bet on the "if at all."
Coal fired power plants provide over half the electricity for the country and generally at lowest cost. Carbon taxes will drive the price up by at least 20% but it will still be a bargain.
Nuclear power, a known technology, will take many years to develop further because of costs and permitting but it has the highest power density of any generating system. If you would like to remove CO2 from the air and convert it into fuel, a nuke would be a good think to have. You will need power for separation, power to generate hydrogen, and power to make fuel. The easiest process is CO2 to methanol to gasoline via the ExxonMobil MTG process. There was a paper on making jet fuel (a little more complicated) using nuclear power at the 2007 American Nuclear Society meeting. Costs are hard to estimate accurately, but the present price of oil says that this won't happen soon.
Rumors abound of new technology; cold fusion, free energy, etc. but no one has seen anything yet or they aren't talking.

"It's all about money."

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 11:10 AM

Originally posted by CavemanDD

Powered only by natural sunlight, an array of nanotubes is able to convert a mixture of carbon dioxide and water vapour into natural gas at unprecedented rates. Such devices offer a new way to take carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and convert it into fuel or other chemicals to cut the effect of fossil fuel emissions on global climate, says Craig Grimes, from Pennsylvania State University, whose team came up with the device. Although other research groups have developed methods for converting carbon dioxide into organic compounds like methane, often using titanium-dioxide nanoparticles as catalysts, they have needed ultraviolet light to power the reactions. The researchers' breakthrough has been to develop a method that works with the wider range of visible frequencies within sunlight.


I don't know if I pasted that the proper way. I go to once in a while and I just saw this one today.

Now I don't really care about any energy other then electricity or something of that nature, but using solar power as means of converting co2 back into something useful is still pretty good.

I'm just sharing.

ACTUALLY!!! this can be turned into electricity..... Just look up natural gas generators.... also most cars in south America run on natural gas...........(exept brazil which runs ethanol) Also check out the sterling engine which has an amazing fuel to electricity conversion ratio which is around 60%... with more R&D i am sure it can easily hit 90%!! which is more then 4-5 times more efficient then the combustion engine... here it is below
powered by the sun... imagine a direct heat source?? a sterling engine can be powered by any heat source... imagine a combination of sun+gas????? Imagine a sterling engine powered plant??? instead of heating water to create steam(which takes out most of the energy right there) imagine a generator that is directly connected to a huge sterling engine and with the heat source right below it...... we would probaly need to burn 80% less fuel then we do now.......... theres an amazing technology right at our feet and its REAL.

[edit on 22-2-2009 by thefreepatriot]

[edit on 22-2-2009 by thefreepatriot]

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 11:17 AM
a sterling engine is so efficient that it can be powered by your body heat!!!! thats right... look at the video below

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 11:22 AM

A nice video showing how a sterling engine works... one piston contains the piston with hot liquid pushing the piston and on the other end the cold liquid piston contracts...... essentially a self contained engine with no need for explosions to push the pistons... very efficient and works great as electric generators.........

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in