Showing posts with label fuel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fuel. Show all posts

Sunday, October 10, 2010

Reverse Combustion: Can CO2 Be Turned Back into Fuel?

In the 1990s a graduate student named Lin Chao at Princeton University decided to bubble carbon dioxide into an electrochemical cell. Using cathodes made from the element palladium and a catalyst known as pyridinium—a garden variety organic chemical that is a by-product of oil refining—he discovered that applying an electric current would assemble methanol from the CO2. He published his findings in 1994—and no one cared.
 But by 2003, Chao's successor in the Princeton lab of chemist Andrew Bocarsly was deeply interested in finding a solution to the growing problem of the CO2 pollution causing global climate change. Graduate student Emily Barton picked up where he left off and, using an electrochemical cell that employs a semiconducting material used in photovoltaic solar cells for one of its electrodes, succeeded in tapping sunlight to transform CO2 into the basic fuel.

"The dominant thinking 10 years ago was that we should bury the CO2. But if you could efficiently convert it into something that we wouldn't have to spend all that money and energy to put into the ground, sort of recycle it, that would be better," Bocarsly says. "We take CO2, water, sunlight and an appropriate catalyst and generate an alcoholic fuel."

He adds: "We didn't have some brilliant insight here. We had some luck." Luck that venture capitalists are now trying to turn into cash flow via a start-up known as Liquid Light.

Turning CO2 into fuels is exactly what photosynthetic organisms have been doing for billions of years, although their fuels tend to be foods, like sugars. Now humans are trying to store the energy in sunlight by making a liquid fuel from CO2 and hydrogen—a prospect that could recycle CO2 emissions and slow down the rapid buildup of such greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

"You take electricity and combine CO2 with hydrogen to make gasoline," explained Arun Majumdar, director of the Advanced Research Projects Agency–Energy (ARPA–e) that is pursuing such technology, at a conference in March. "This is like killing four birds with one stone"—namely, energy security, climate change, the federal deficit and, potentially, unemployment.
CO2 Be Turned Back into Fuel videos

"When these new technologies get commercialized, those jobs always end up in the U.S.," argues chemical engineer Alan Weimer of the University of Colorado at Boulder, who is working on such solar-fuel generators. Adds chemist Michael Berman of the U.S. Air Force Office of Scientific Research, which is funding research into the possibilities of solar fuels, including Bocarsly's work: 
 CO2 Be Turned Back into Fuel video

"The country, and the Air Force, need secure and sustainable sources of energy…. Since the sun provides enough energy for our needs, our goal is to make a fuel using CO2 and sunlight—and maybe water—as feedstocks to produce the chemical fuel that can store the sun's energy in a form that we can use where and when we need."

Heavyweights Debate Fuels of the Future

A truth that floated to the surface during the BP energy company's Deepwater disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, along with hundreds of millions of liters of oil, is that the world does not have a ready replacement for conventional forms of fuel such as crude oil and likely will not have one for some time, particularly as demand for energy grows worldwide. 
Cleaner energy alternatives, including natural gas, wind, solar, nuclear and biofuel, have gained ground on greenhouse gas–producing oil (as well as coal), but there is still a long way to go before these inexpensive, efficient fuel sources can be phased out, 
according to a keynote panel assembled recently at Technology Review's Emerging Technologies (EmTech) conference  in Cambridge, Mass. (Technology Review is published by Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where the conference is held.)


Fossil fuels (in particular oil and coal) accounted for nearly 90 percent of global energy consumption in 2000 and are projected to remain the dominant energy source throughout the 21st century, supplying 70-to-80 percent of energy demand in 2100, 
according to a 2007 U.S. Climate Change Science Program report (pdf) prepared by the Climate Change Science Program Product Development Advisory Committee for the U.S. Department of Energy.

Increased use of natural gas is the best bet for cleaner energy in the near term, agreed fellow panelist John Reilly, a senior lecturer at M.I.T.'s Sloan School of Management and co-director of the school's Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change. Reilly is also one of the co-authors of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program report.
Energy Industry videos

he amount of solar energy that reaches Earth has the capability to provide terawatts (trillions of watts) of power, according to Harry Atwater, a professor of applied physics and materials science at California Institute of Technology. Atwater pointed out during a presentation following "The Future of Energy" panel that solar still represents less than one percent of energy generation today. 
  Energy Industry video

(Global energy consumption is currently about 15 terawatts.) The dilemma with solar power is that silicon-based photovoltaic cells are fairly efficient but also highly expensive, whereas thin-film cells are relatively inexpensive but inefficient.

Heavyweights Debate Fuels of the Future

A truth that floated to the surface during the BP energy company's Deepwater disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, along with hundreds of millions of liters of oil, is that the world does not have a ready replacement for conventional forms of fuel such as crude oil and likely will not have one for some time, particularly as demand for energy grows worldwide. 
Cleaner energy alternatives, including natural gas, wind, solar, nuclear and biofuel, have gained ground on greenhouse gas–producing oil (as well as coal), but there is still a long way to go before these inexpensive, efficient fuel sources can be phased out, 
according to a keynote panel assembled recently at Technology Review's Emerging Technologies (EmTech) conference  in Cambridge, Mass. (Technology Review is published by Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where the conference is held.)


Fossil fuels (in particular oil and coal) accounted for nearly 90 percent of global energy consumption in 2000 and are projected to remain the dominant energy source throughout the 21st century, supplying 70-to-80 percent of energy demand in 2100, 
according to a 2007 U.S. Climate Change Science Program report (pdf) prepared by the Climate Change Science Program Product Development Advisory Committee for the U.S. Department of Energy.

Increased use of natural gas is the best bet for cleaner energy in the near term, agreed fellow panelist John Reilly, a senior lecturer at M.I.T.'s Sloan School of Management and co-director of the school's Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change. Reilly is also one of the co-authors of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program report.
Energy Industry videos

he amount of solar energy that reaches Earth has the capability to provide terawatts (trillions of watts) of power, according to Harry Atwater, a professor of applied physics and materials science at California Institute of Technology. Atwater pointed out during a presentation following "The Future of Energy" panel that solar still represents less than one percent of energy generation today. 
  Energy Industry video

(Global energy consumption is currently about 15 terawatts.) The dilemma with solar power is that silicon-based photovoltaic cells are fairly efficient but also highly expensive, whereas thin-film cells are relatively inexpensive but inefficient.

Crude Alternatives: Energy Industry Heavyweights Debate Fuels of the Future

A truth that floated to the surface during the BP energy company's Deepwater disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, along with hundreds of millions of liters of oil, is that the world does not have a ready replacement for conventional forms of fuel such as crude oil and likely will not have one for some time, particularly as demand for energy grows worldwide. 
Cleaner energy alternatives, including natural gas, wind, solar, nuclear and biofuel, have gained ground on greenhouse gas–producing oil (as well as coal), but there is still a long way to go before these inexpensive, efficient fuel sources can be phased out, 
according to a keynote panel assembled recently at Technology Review's Emerging Technologies (EmTech) conference  in Cambridge, Mass. (Technology Review is published by Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where the conference is held.)

Fossil fuels (in particular oil and coal) accounted for nearly 90 percent of global energy consumption in 2000 and are projected to remain the dominant energy source throughout the 21st century, supplying 70-to-80 percent of energy demand in 2100, 
according to a 2007 U.S. Climate Change Science Program report (pdf) prepared by the Climate Change Science Program Product Development Advisory Committee for the U.S. Department of Energy.
Increased use of natural gas is the best bet for cleaner energy in the near term, agreed fellow panelist John Reilly, a senior lecturer at M.I.T.'s Sloan School of Management and co-director of the school's Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change. Reilly is also one of the co-authors of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program report.
Energy Industry videos

he amount of solar energy that reaches Earth has the capability to provide terawatts (trillions of watts) of power, according to Harry Atwater, a professor of applied physics and materials science at California Institute of Technology. Atwater pointed out during a presentation following "The Future of Energy" panel that solar still represents less than one percent of energy generation today. 
  Energy Industry video

(Global energy consumption is currently about 15 terawatts.) The dilemma with solar power is that silicon-based photovoltaic cells are fairly efficient but also highly expensive, whereas thin-film cells are relatively inexpensive but inefficient.