CO2 to ethanol

[rushmc 18]

This could be a big deal!
It is still early but, should they develop this to be able to store energy from wind it may be better than batteries.

I am sure there is much to learn yet

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/10/18/serendipity-yields-a-process-to-convert-carbon-dioxide-directly-into-ethanol/

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[gowlerk 1,929]

Also info about it here:

http://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-just-accidentally-discovered-a-process-that-turns-co2-directly-into-ethanol

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[aphid 0]

Research.

Government things that evil taxes pay for.

[billvon 2,435]

Could be a good thing. But there's one critical ingredient we'd need to do this - hydrogen by the ton. And we don't have that right now.

It's certainly possible to get hydrogen from oil, coal or natural gas. But that sort of defeats the purpose.

It's also possible to get hydrogen from water. But then you need energy - either electricity (and if we have electricity we might as well use it as electricity) or very high temperatures from HTGR-type reactors (and we don't have any of them yet.)

And then once you have hydrogen, you might as well use _that_ as fuel. Or better yet, combine it with CO2 to get methane (natural gas) via a much simpler process - the Sabatier process. Cars/trucks/power plants already can use methane.

In the future, if we do end up with a lot of extra hydrogen (say via HTGR buildout) then this ethanol cycle might be a good option for liquid fuels.

[gowlerk 1,929]

Bear with me. I have very little knowledge of chemistry. The article mentions a reaction with CO2 dissolved in H2O. It makes no mention of additional hydrogen. Could the needed hydrogen not be coming from the water? Am I missing something here?

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[headoverheels 291]

Here's a similar (diesel) article from a while back.

http://www.sciencealert.com/audi-have-successfully-made-diesel-fuel-from-air-and-water

[gowlerk 1,929]

headoverheels

Here's a similar (diesel) article from a while back.

http://www.sciencealert.com/audi-have-successfully-made-diesel-fuel-from-air-and-water

That process does require large amounts of hydrogen and suggests that it be produced by electrolysis of water. The more recent article involves only a single stage catalytic reaction between CO2, H2O, and the catalyst.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[billvon 2,435]

>Could the needed hydrogen not be coming from the water?

It is; in this reaction they are effectively using electrolysis to generate the hydrogen needed by the reaction. That has the problem that it needs a LOT of power to make ethanol, and the conversion is at best about 55% efficient. From the paper - "The overpotential required (which might be lowered with the proper electrolyte, and by separating the hydrogen production to another catalyst) probably precludes economic viability for this catalyst."

In other words, if we could make the hydrogen via another method, it might be economically viable.

[gowlerk 1,929]

Thanks. I had a feeling what I was taking from it was too good to be true. Nothing is free, especially energy. They do mention a voltage applied of only 1.2 volts, but do not state the total energy required. The are claiming a 63% efficiency rate.


Edit to add: Following the link to the summary of the actual paper rather that just the pop science article, turns out to answer my questions. Just as you did.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[quade 3]

Rush, billvon,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there already a process by which we turn CO2 into ethanol?

Isn't it called, "growing corn"?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[gowlerk 1,929]

quade

Rush, billvon,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there already a process by which we turn CO2 into ethanol?

Isn't it called, "growing corn"?

Shh... don't tell Rush, that method relies on both solar energy and huge government subsidies.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[billvon 2,435]

>Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there already a process by which we turn
>CO2 into ethanol?

>Isn't it called, "growing corn"?

Well, that turns CO2 (and water, and sunlight, and phosphorous, and nitrogen, and potassium) into corn, which has some starch in it. Then you can add enzymes that convert the starch to sugar. Then you can add yeast that convert the sugar to ethanol. Then you can distill the result so you get relatively pure anhydrous ethanol.

But that's a lot of steps, which is why it's not all that efficient.

If you want to grow something to make fuel, then rapeseed is a lot more efficient; you take CO2 (and water, and sunlight, and phosphorous, and nitrogen, and potassium) and turn it into rapeseed plants, which you then crush to get oil. (Works well in diesel engines.)

Or if you really want ethanol, you take CO2 (and water, and sunlight, and phosphorous, and nitrogen, and potassium) and turn it into sugar cane or sugar beets, which gives you sugar. Then you add yeast and distill. One fewer step than corn-based ethanol which saves you time and energy.

All of the above are hideously inefficient. The only reason that anyone uses them at all is that the primary energy input is solar, which is effectively free.

[rushmc 18]

gowlerk

***Rush, billvon,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there already a process by which we turn CO2 into ethanol?

Isn't it called, "growing corn"?

Shh... don't tell Rush, that method relies on both solar energy and huge government subsidies.

Bill has posted here many times he agrees with ending all subsidies. So what is your point?

Never mind, you usually don't have one...........

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[gowlerk 1,929]

My point is mostly that ethanol production for fuel from corn is a huge waste of both energy and food. It's completely a boondoggle for politicians representing farm districts. Nearly all Republican incidentally.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[rushmc 18]

gowlerk

My point is mostly that ethanol production for fuel from corn is a huge waste of both energy and food. It's completely a boondoggle for politicians representing farm districts. Nearly all Republican incidentally.

On this, you and I agree.

I have posted to this many times in the past.

BUT, it only came to into existence because of enviro wackos and government sticking their nose into it.

Same for wind .....

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[quade 3]

gowlerk

My point is mostly that ethanol production for fuel from corn is a huge waste of both energy and food. It's completely a boondoggle for politicians representing farm districts. Nearly all Republican incidentally.

Agreed. Almost all farm subsidies are a complete waste of tax payer funds at this point.

The problems of the US don't come from a lack of food. Why are we subsidizing it?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 2,435]

>The problems of the US don't come from a lack of food. Why are we subsidizing it?

Farmers vote.

[gowlerk 1,929]

Quote

Why are we subsidizing it?

Because nearly all western countries do. It would be very bad policy to import most of your food just because it's cheaper that way. It would leave your country vulnerable to both supply disruption and social upheaval to abandon food production to a strictly free market.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[quade 3]

gowlerk

Quote

Why are we subsidizing it?

Because nearly all western countries do.

Because we do. And frankly when it comes to the world's food supply we make more excess than anyone (technically #3 in total production, but the other two countries (China and India) have to eat theirs). We freakin' rule food. We make so much excess food we can barely give it away.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[yoink 321]

Can't we just burn the excess corn as fuel?

Corn-fired power stations are the future.

[gowlerk 1,929]

Quote

We make so much excess food we can barely give it away.

Which is a very good thing for hungry people the world over. Unless you would prefer world population control by food shortage. When the price of US crops rises due to over demand or crop failure many people can no longer afford to eat. It causes prices all over the world to rise. In the west we barely notice. While in poor countries people starve.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[rushmc 18]

billvon

>The problems of the US don't come from a lack of food. Why are we subsidizing it?

Farmers vote.

You should hear the wind lobby adds here in Iowa right now!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[gowlerk 1,929]

rushmc

***>The problems of the US don't come from a lack of food. Why are we subsidizing it?

Farmers vote.

You should hear the wind lobby adds here in Iowa right now!

Read about their efforts here

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/02/wind-spin/

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[rushmc 18]

gowlerk

******>The problems of the US don't come from a lack of food. Why are we subsidizing it?

Farmers vote.

You should hear the wind lobby adds here in Iowa right now!

Read about their efforts here

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/02/wind-spin/


the largest owner of wind turbines it the US says none would be built if not for tax breaks . AKA subsidies.
Once they end he will not build anymore because they do not make economic sense without the tax benefits.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/nancy-pfotenhauer/2014/05/12/even-warren-buffet-admits-wind-energy-is-a-bad-investment

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln