Exclusive: The scientists who turned fresh air into petrol

Originally posted by tomten
reply to post by ollncasino

 

If you need to add sodium hydroxide.
Then it is not made from air..

It was too good to be true...

The hydroxide is recycled when the CO2 is stripped. After the initial charge, all you would need is makeup for losses in the system from reaction with other acid gases, SOx and NOx.

Originally posted by LanceonW
reply to post by pteridine

 

Ok i'll take your word for it, i dont know a whole great deal about MTG and exxonmobil site claimed it was needed for both. I only really know about GTL via FT because my company make catalysts for it. I'll see if we have the book in work library sometime next week.

One variant is the formation of ethylene by running at a higher temperature and then oligomerizing that to diesel/jet. This would require more processing. They had something called ZSM-11 with larger pores, but I haven't seen that in a while. As the book is old, maybe ExxonMobil discovered that their process doesn't work as well as was claimed in the meantime. I'll look at their website as my comments were from memory. Look at DKRW past press releases. They are in a partnership with Arch Coal to make synfuels in Medicine Bow, Wyoming. They went from F-T to MTG because of the capital cost requirements of F-T.

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by Josephus
Gee you got this up fast. I heard this like 3 minutes ago on BBC World News. They haven't even run the story yet. It could be significant if it's scale-able. Maybe paired with solar or wind electricity generation.

What concerns me is that it doesn't appear to be an energy source as much as converting electrical energy into petrol. I wonder if it wouldn't be more energy efficient to just use electricity in the first place?

Still, time will tell.

The thing is you can't use electricity for some applications, such as fueling airplanes or certain heavy machinery, and you certainly can't make plastic out of it. (though there are a few bio plastics, some products can only be made from hydrocarbons)

So we're gonna be needing oil even when it runs out, and biofeul is contentious because of the cultivatable farmland it occupies while some people are starving.

Eventually, with the cost of fuel on the rise, this technology will become feasible.

While I think this is cool and all, I don't see why this is better than just making hydrogen?

I do that now and a lot of other people do too. The sun runs the cell and the hydrogen is stored until use. You can make your own system for under $1,000 and make enough hydrogen to run a small engine for an hour or two every day its sunny. If you store it as a gas you need to use it faster due to it's ability to find exits in anything you store it in.

reply to post by polarwarrior


I don't really think people are starving because of lack of farmland/production...

Just a thought there.

I think this might spark more new technologies , or get others to rethink this oil dependency a little.

Ladies and Gentlemen and kids of all ages, the day when oil as the only fuel has come to the end.

When this and other technologies finally get moveing and get passed the first few stepping stones, or (baby steps). Then when power / oil companies aren't makeing record high profits year after year it's then power because becomes cheap.

If in 15 years this technology is self efficent, and makeing more then it takes in, then that will begin a new era for man kind.

How ridiculous just make ethanol it's renewable and more efficient...

Sounds like a good reason to build wind turbines... but then again, why bother going to the effort of building huge wind turbines to create electricity (from the air) to create petrol (from the carbon in the air) - why not just build a wind turbine engine so that everything is contained within the vehicle itself? That would eliminate the need for creating massive quantities of electricity, petrol, and of course, storage and distribution... and would be a heck of a lot better for the environment, at least I would think so. But I guess people need jobs, right?

www.gizmag.com...

Originally posted by Time2Think
Sounds like a good reason to build wind turbines... but then again, why bother going to the effort of building huge wind turbines to create electricity (from the air) to create petrol (from the carbon in the air) - why not just build a wind turbine engine so that everything is contained within the vehicle itself? That would eliminate the need for creating massive quantities of electricity, petrol, and of course, storage and distribution... and would be a heck of a lot better for the environment, at least I would think so. But I guess people need jobs, right?

www.gizmag.com...

The turbine generates electricity but at the moment we cant easily apply that to the vehicles that already exist. If the infrastructure doesn't exist to make it work it doesn't matter how efficient your turbine is.

Battery technology is insufficient (and what there is in limited use requires minerals that are in themselves limited commodities).

Am electric airliner isn't going to appear any time soon. An airliner powered by hydrocarbon fuel created using renewable power sources (as opposed to extracted from the earth) could be.

Thats the difference.

Originally posted by scarybear
reply to post by polarwarrior

 

I don't really think people are starving because of lack of farmland/production...

Just a thought there.

Yeah your right about that, the world actually produces enough food to feed humanity 1.5 times over (or about 10.5 billion people). It's just a problem of distribution (sharing) and waste.

Still, biofuel is a contentious issue amongst many people because the farmland used for it would be cheap, low quality i.e. farmland in third world countries like parts of Africa might be used to grow fuel so that fat westerners don't have to walk.

Exclusive: The scientists who turned fresh air into petrol, has turned up dead. sarc


well thats great news, if i were them id be hiding in the mountains or in an underground bunker, doesnt matter we wont see it, if they use it, they wont tell us, and still charge us and arm and a leg, welcome to capitalism.

this doesnt make any sense to me, you cant form hydrocarbons chains from nothing, im no chemist but it doesnt sound plausible to me that you can create short chain hydrocarbons to make fuel from just Co2 and hydrogen. i call bull#e

Actually the US navy is looking to implement this system on its aircraft carriers...

Step 1: A processing plant would extract carbon dioxide from 2.35 billion gallons of water — enough to fill the 2012 Olympic swimming pool 2,400 times. This water would yield about 11.9 million gallons worth of carbon dioxide. Step 2: Another process will produce hydrogen from ocean water. Through reverse osmosis, fresh water will be extracted from ocean water. The two hydrogen atoms from the freshwater molecules will be separated from the oxygen atom. The hydrogen atoms will be collected while the oxygen atoms will be vented away. Step 3: The hydrogen and carbon dioxide from the first two steps will be used in a catalytic conversion process. The end result is water, heat, and, most importantly, synthetic hydrocarbon, or fuel. Theoretically, the process could be tailored to produce any sort of hydrocarbon fuel, not just JP-5, according to the report.Step 1: A processing plant would extract carbon dioxide from 2.35 billion gallons of water — enough to fill the 2012 Olympic swimming pool 2,400 times. This water would yield about 11.9 million gallons worth of carbon dioxide. Step 2: Another process will produce hydrogen from ocean water. Through reverse osmosis, fresh water will be extracted from ocean water. The two hydrogen atoms from the freshwater molecules will be separated from the oxygen atom. The hydrogen atoms will be collected while the oxygen atoms will be vented away. Step 3: The hydrogen and carbon dioxide from the first two steps will be used in a catalytic conversion process. The end result is water, heat, and, most importantly, synthetic hydrocarbon, or fuel. Theoretically, the process could be tailored to produce any sort of hydrocarbon fuel, not just JP-5, according to the report.

[/url=http://www.navytimes.com/news/2012/10/navy-turn-sea-water-into-jet-fuel-101312w/]/[/url]

The cost is about the same while the risk of underway replenishment of this volatile fluid is reduced as well as the storage and transportation costs.

If you remove the Tankers, Carriers and BIG companies...
And Scale it down...How MUCH in pesos/dollars/yen
MONEY, would it cost to produce 1L....
Edit: Also remove initial cost to buy the stuff that makes it..

Originally posted by Miccey
If you remove the Tankers, Carriers and BIG companies...
And Scale it down...How MUCH in pesos/dollars/yen
MONEY, would it cost to produce 1L....
Edit: Also remove initial cost to buy the stuff that makes it..

edit on 2012/10/20 by Miccey because: (no reason given)

So everything is free now?

Originally posted by BeReasonable
this doesnt make any sense to me, you cant form hydrocarbons chains from nothing, im no chemist but it doesnt sound plausible to me that you can create short chain hydrocarbons to make fuel from just Co2 and hydrogen. i call bull#e

Yes, it is apparent that you are not a chemist.
The F-T synthesis uses a mixture of hydrogen and carbon monoxide to produce long chain hydrocarbons which are then cracked and isomerized to fuels and chemicals. In this case, conversion of CO2 to CO is done with H2 by running the water gas shift reaction in reverse. Adding more hydrogen provides syngas with the proper H2 to CO ratio for synthetic fuel production.

Look at www.fischer-tropsch.org...

For a complete review of Syngas chemistry see Fuel Processing Technology 48 (1996) 189-297.
Reactions of Synthesis Gas
Irving Wender
Chemical and Petroleum Engineering Depurtment, University of Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh, PA 15261. USA
Abstract:
The use of synthesis gas (syngas) offers the opportunity to furnish a broad range of
environmentally clean fuels and chemicals. There has been steady growth in the traditional uses of
syngas. Almost all hydrogen gas is manufactured from syngas and there has been a tremendous
spurt in the demand for this basic chemical; indeed, the chief use of syngas is in the manufacture
of hydrogen for a growing number of purposes. Methanol not only remains the second largest
consumer of syngas but has shown remarkable growth as part of the methyl ethers used as octane
enhancers in automotive fuels. The Fischer-Tropsch synthesis remains the third largest consumer
of syngas, mostly for transportation fuels but also as a growing feedstock source for the
manufacture of chemicals, including polymers....

Originally posted by jazzguy
and now we watch as the evil oil companies kill this mans career, or he just drops dead

Yeah that might happen we could prevent that though if we all started sticking together this wouldn't happen

the main thing the scum are scared of is their kids being killed

Originally posted by boncho

Originally posted by Miccey
If you remove the Tankers, Carriers and BIG companies...
And Scale it down...How MUCH in pesos/dollars/yen
MONEY, would it cost to produce 1L....
Edit: Also remove initial cost to buy the stuff that makes it..

edit on 2012/10/20 by Miccey because: (no reason given)

So everything is free now?

Everything has always been free remember its only our labour, then a boss pays you for your labour and takes a profit, we don't stick together they do thats the only difference between us and the elite.

ask yourself one question how can anyone own the land, Its only because someone tells you it costs money normally they call themselves elite and fool us all into believing them.

Originally posted by boncho

Originally posted by Miccey
If you remove the Tankers, Carriers and BIG companies...
And Scale it down...How MUCH in pesos/dollars/yen
MONEY, would it cost to produce 1L....
Edit: Also remove initial cost to buy the stuff that makes it..

edit on 2012/10/20 by Miccey because: (no reason given)

So everything is free now?

Wut?!?
Were did you get THAT from my POST?!?

I actually asked HOW MUCH it would COST to produce
1L...Not if its free...

Boncho, you become more and more like a disinfo/troll
with your posting...

reply to post by Miccey


I am asking you what is free about it? The NaOH, the electricity for the hydrolysis... what exactly? Enlighten me...