Microfluidic Reactor for Electrochemical Reduction of CO2

page: 1
1

log in

join

posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 09:34 PM
link   


Efficient conversion of CO2 into useful chemicals would address the intertwined issues of domestic energy security and climate change. This approach is much more attractive than simply capturing CO2 followed by sequestration, an approach that is receiving significant attention lately. Chemical conversion of CO2 can in principal be performed locally, at the capture source, whereas the sequestration approach would require transportation from the source to a suitable sequestration site. Furthermore, conversion of CO2 to a useful product would likely make it more economical to capture CO2 and prevent its release to the atmosphere. Also, CO2 can be reduced to formic acid [1], which is a promising fuel for fuel cells [2]. This would provide a means of energy storage that is needed for intermittent renewable sources such as wind and solar to become a major source of electricity. Coupling an electrochemical reactor for reducing CO2 with a fuel cell would allow excess electricity to be stored in chemical form (via formic acid), and later converted back to electricity when supply from the renewable source is insufficient. The formic acid could also be used in fuel cells to make high energy density power sources for portable applications. CO2 can also be reduced to CO to make syngas, which can be use to make longer chain hydrocarbons through Fischer-Tropsch synthesis [3]. These products can serve both as fuels (gasoline) and feedstock for chemical synthesis, which is another large consumer of fossil fuels. More efficient catalytic processes and better electrochemical reactors are needed to make efficient conversion of CO2 into useful chemicals economically feasible.


Source

This seems like the type of technology that could have a profound effect upon the future.

Any thoughts?




posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 09:52 PM
link   
To be honest I would suggest that the best way to handle CO2 emissions is simply to plant more trees. Largely, the North American continent and the European continent have been denuded of trees. In modern housing developments street scape trees have become a thing of the past.

Turning CO2 into other chemicals is what chemical plants do. The idea of saving the environment by changing CO2 into acid is hilarious if one has the appropriate sense of humor.

We have the tech, now, today to base our entire energy needs on solar panels used to hydrolyze water into H2 and O and then fuel cells to provide power that results in H2O as the only emission. Many will comment that it is not efficient, the only efficiency lacking is the efficiency of making $$$.

P



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 09:59 PM
link   
reply to post by pheonix358
 


Actually in the 80's some scientist informed all concerned to stop turning the Amazon Rainforest into farmland, a reason being the earth needed the oxygen.

They did not stop.

I am thinking this kind of technology could be used on a spacecraft or in some futuristic version of a space suit.




edit on 11-4-2013 by Kashai because: added content



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kashai
reply to post by pheonix358
 


Actually in the 80's some scientist informed all concerned to stop turning the Amazon Rainforest into farmland, a reason being the earth needed the oxygen.

They did not stop.

I am thinking this kind of technology could be used on a spacecraft or in some futuristic version of a space suit.

edit on 11-4-2013 by Kashai because: added content


The scientists that said stop were living in cities that had once been huge forests. What they were saying was that the Amazon Basin were the lungs of the world. Well, they are now, after everyone else turned their forests into farmland. The double standards are just too funny. You have to stop because we destroyed ours.

In a space craft, hydroponics is the way to go, you get food too! They already have CO2 scrubbers and such like. It just seems to me to be a backward step. Now if a simple method could be developed to separate the C and the O2 we may have a winner.

P



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by pheonix358

Originally posted by Kashai
reply to post by pheonix358
 


Actually in the 80's some scientist informed all concerned to stop turning the Amazon Rainforest into farmland, a reason being the earth needed the oxygen.

They did not stop.

I am thinking this kind of technology could be used on a spacecraft or in some futuristic version of a space suit.

edit on 11-4-2013 by Kashai because: added content


The scientists that said stop were living in cities that had once been huge forests. What they were saying was that the Amazon Basin were the lungs of the world. Well, they are now, after everyone else turned their forests into farmland. The double standards are just too funny. You have to stop because we destroyed ours.

In a space craft, hydroponics is the way to go, you get food too! They already have CO2 scrubbers and such like. It just seems to me to be a backward step. Now if a simple method could be developed to separate the C and the O2 we may have a winner.

P


That is what I am considering developing the means to separate the C from the O2.



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Kashai
 


Great! Once you have the Carbon separated you only need high pressure and you can make diamonds, or better yet, Diamond Armor for space ships.

P



posted on Apr, 12 2013 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by pheonix358
 


In that regard, how much hydrogen is out there?



posted on Apr, 12 2013 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Kashai
 


There is lots of hydrogen in space as long as you have the means to collect it.

P



posted on Apr, 12 2013 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by pheonix358
 


Carbon can also release energy and so act as a fuel and it can serve other purposes....

Have you ever heard of a Bussard ramjet?



posted on Apr, 12 2013 @ 12:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Kashai
 


Yes, now how do we build one?

P



posted on Apr, 12 2013 @ 07:31 AM
link   
If they make this and it reduces CO2 in the atmosphere there will no longer be a need for the carbon tax.

It should also prove that CO2 is not the reason for climate change.



posted on Apr, 12 2013 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by pheonix358
 


Sure I will need about 25 billion dollars and about 35 years for the research


Getting back to the Microfluidic Reactor I can see how this would be very useful Mars as well as help with pollution on Earth.

Imagine a vessel that can fuel up at a station that orbits both Venus and Mars.

With the fusion issue we need to learn to create pressures with respect to the core of a star for a price that makes the energy worth using. The problem itself is not insurmountable, lets say at current funding perhaps in the next 100 years or so.


edit on 12-4-2013 by Kashai because: modfied content





top topics
 
1

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum