Guest DSCCPrez Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 Time to put the pencil to the paper. There may be a great deal of cash in it for you if a solution is reached. There is a large Corporation in America that emits excess amounts of CO2 into the atmos each day. If someone could figure out a way to fuse the Carbon Dioxide molecules with another element that could be used as a fuel in any way, saving the environment, and saving this company money, let me know! I have been at it all day, but maybe I'm not thinking along the right lines... I know some of you stoich for fun, and that's who I'm looking for to reach a solution. Keep in mind, anything goes- we'll narrow things down as the company sees fit.
JaKiri Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 Carbon dioxide is really rather inert. There are things you can do with it, but they're all inefficient. And we know about them already.
Primarygun Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 Ya like fermentation by anaerobic bacteria. but, is the method rather efficient?
YT2095 Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 using Plant life might be an idea, but I think Mother Nature beat us to it
ed84c Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 i Think the laws of thermodynamics will stop you there DSCC, seing as you GET energy from combustion.
ed84c Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 wouldnt want to sit in a car with a tank of it though. 'Tiredness Kills', in this case more than one way.
YT2095 Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 the CO2 could be used to make metal carbonyls, if you had a use for that perhaps?
YT2095 Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 Time to put the pencil to the paper. There may be a great deal of cash in it for you if a solution is reached. There is a large Corporation in America that emits excess amounts of CO2 into the atmos each day. If someone could figure out a way to fuse the Carbon Dioxide molecules with another element that could be used as a fuel in any way' date=' saving the environment, and saving this company money, let me know! I have been at it all day, but maybe I'm not thinking along the right lines... I know some of you stoich for fun, and that's who I'm looking for to reach a solution. Keep in mind, anything goes- we'll narrow things down as the company sees fit. [/quote']as I stated above, the solution is very very simple (a 10 year old could do it in his moms kitchen with simple chems!) the only problem is the fuel is NOT without Significant dangers to Health! and by that I don`t mean as a fuel but as a Poison. take a read here, and then asses if your company can deal with this material, and then I`ll explain how to make it (if you hadn`t already worked it out). http://ptcl.chem.ox.ac.uk/MSDS/NI/nickel_carbonyl.html edit: erm... you do realise that ANY fuel you make, whether it be a carbonyl or otherwise, the combustion products will still be CO2!
jdurg Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 Yeah, I wouldn't want to have a tankful of Nickel Carbonyl ANYWHERE near me.
Martin Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 If someone could figure out a way to fuse the Carbon Dioxide molecules with another element that could be used as a fuel in any way' date=' saving the environment, and saving this company money, let me know! ...[/quote'] CO2 will react with hydrogen gas over various catalysts to produce some familiar fuels (plus water) for example it will produce methane (main component of natural gas) which is CH4, plus water or methanol ("wood alcohol") plus water some carbon monoxide will be produced, typically, but that can be removed from the product stream and further reacted with hydrogen to produce either methane or methanol so IF YOU HAVE AN ECONOMICAL SUPPLY OF HYDROGEN (a big if) you can indeed use waste CO2 with hydrogen to synthesize safe fuels, and some other chemicals too if so desired However hydrogen takes energy to produce! So under present circumstances these are not real options. You should be congratulated for trying to come up with a constructive idea, maybe sometime in the future. Better luck next time! Futuristic idea: wind turbines are built on Aleutian islands far out to sea and generate electricity. what to do with the electricity? suppose the electricity is used to electrolyze water to make hydrogen gas. what to do with the hydrogen gas? liquifying it is considered but seems too expensive CO2 will liquify comparatively easily under pressure. Suppose some liquid CO2 goes to the island in a tankership, and is reacted to make methanol, and the tankership brings the methanol back home, and turns around and takes another load of CO2 out to the island it is a way to transmit energy, you see, without running an undersea power cable out to the island the problem with ideas like this is usually the cost----they dont pay in todays market
YT2095 Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 indeed if treated incorectly it is indeed nasty! but as a fuel in a proper plant, it`s perfectly workable, I`m not thinking of letting Joe Public near the stuff but as I outlined before, the problem still remains... the combustion product will still the CO2 you started with, and so you may as well let the plants deal with it. that way you can at least STORE IT until needed but CO2 to a usable fuel in no time is stupidly easy
budullewraagh Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 CO2 can be used as a reducing agent at really, really high temperatures, as it will oxidize to carbonate... but it takes loads of energy so it's pointless to even consider that. it's mostly inert and is not apt to decompose...ever
Martin Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 CO2 can be used as a reducing agent at really, really high temperatures, as it will oxidize to carbonate... but it takes loads of energy so it's pointless to even consider that. it's mostly inert and is not apt to decompose...ever question for you budu, if you have a bucket upside down in the ocean, and you bubble CO2 into it, so now you have an upsidedown bucket of CO2, and you tie a weight on the handle so it sinks. How deep will it sink before the CO2 turns into liquid? or if that doesnt happen what do you think happens I am picturing the water temperature as somewhere between 4 and 6 celsius once you get deep that is.
folder Posted January 8, 2005 Posted January 8, 2005 question for you budu' date=' if you have a bucket upside down in the ocean, and you bubble CO2 into it, so now you have an upsidedown bucket of CO2, and you tie a weight on the handle so it sinks. How deep will it sink before the CO2 turns into liquid? or if that doesnt happen what do you think happens I am picturing the water temperature as somewhere between 4 and 6 celsius once you get deep that is.[/quote'] Well, CO2 will liquify at room temperature at about 800-900 Pounds per square inch pressure.
budullewraagh Posted January 8, 2005 Posted January 8, 2005 oh man this is a fun physics question, but i am intrigued nonetheless. hold on, let me check the temperature-pressure phase statistics for CO2... actually, scratch that. read below: if you have a bucket upside down in the ocean, and you bubble CO2 into it, so now you have an upsidedown bucket of CO2, and you tie a weight on the handle so it sinks. How deep will it sink before the CO2 turns into liquid? or if that doesnt happen what do you think happens I am picturing the water temperature as somewhere between 4 and 6 celsius once you get deep that is. even if you could bubble CO2 into it, it wouldn't take long for the CO2 to start dissolving in water, where some of it will form carbonic acid. this would create a vacuum and it wouldnt take long for the water to fill the bucket
Silencer Posted January 8, 2005 Posted January 8, 2005 Well, assuming it is cut off from the water, just convert the pressures folder provided to atmospheres and look up what depth of water gives that pressure (there is probably a calculation to do it).
Babbler Posted January 8, 2005 Posted January 8, 2005 You can a phase diagram like one in my chemistry textbook. In any case, remember that as you go down, pressure increases, so that the CO2 will freze quick, I think.
Ophiolite Posted January 8, 2005 Posted January 8, 2005 Fresh water has a pressure gradient of 0.433 psi/ft.
YT2095 Posted January 8, 2005 Posted January 8, 2005 not 100% sure of the EXACT details but on the Ocean floor in some place or another, there is Methane leaking out, but due to the extreme pressure and low temp, it "fuses" with the water to make a solid (looks a bit like snow). Occasionaly this can get dislodged and rise, liberating HUGE amounts of flamable gas in volumes that can easily overturn a large fishing vessel. some was brought up on deck, still solid as set fire to, it burned remakably well too! sorry for just Half a picture, It did have a name, but it was a long time ago.
Primarygun Posted January 13, 2005 Posted January 13, 2005 Why some big countries do not try to implement the biological method to produce energy, such as methane from respiration? That's help to save fuel and thus it is a big benefit to relieve the tie of energy supply.
jdurg Posted January 13, 2005 Posted January 13, 2005 Because making all the enzymes synthetically is not easy, or cheap to do and the cost/benefit ratio falls way out of whack. Also, animal rights activists and various other 'protest' groups would probably go crazy if they heard that a biological entity was being used to clean up chemicals. (Even though they have no clue what they're talking about, they would just go by what little they read and go crazy about it).
USMA German Posted January 13, 2005 Posted January 13, 2005 Going off of what Jdurg said. Economically the process is not viable. There are plenty of great ideas out there however they never make it to society because it is to expensive. This is why you do not see every car with fuel cells. Changing the infrastructure of our gas stations to provide a large quantity of hydrogen alone would be a major cost. Speaking of making more energy that is carbon based check this out. http://www.changingworldtech.com/ Fischhaber Go Army Branch: EN
Primarygun Posted January 14, 2005 Posted January 14, 2005 So faster evolution of bacteria is a problem?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now