Let us hope it goes into commercial production.



Closing the loop: Engineers want to convert carbon dioxide into industrial products
Charlotte Barkla by Charlotte Barkla  June 21, 2020


Closing the loop: Engineers want to convert carbon dioxide into industrial products

New technology that can convert carbon dioxide into chemical building blocks could see harmful emissions turned into industrial products.

Developed by Dr Rahman Daiyan and Dr Emma Lovell from the University of New South Wales (UNSW) School of Chemical Engineering, the process involves the production of zinc oxide nanoparticles through flame spray pyrolysis (FSP).

These nanoparticles then act as the catalyst for turning carbon dioxide into ‘syngas’: a mixture of hydrogen and carbon monoxide used in the manufacture of products such as fuel and plastics.

“Syngas is often considered the chemical equivalent of Lego because the two building blocks — hydrogen and carbon monoxide — can be used in different ratios to make things like synthetic diesel, methanol, alcohol or plastics, which are very important industrial precursors,” Lovell said.

“So essentially what we’re doing is converting CO2 into these precursors that can be used to make all these vital industrial chemicals.”

A new solution
While past attempts have used materials such as palladium, in their recent research the team used zinc oxide as a catalyst.

“This is the first instance where a very cheap and abundant material, mined locally in Australia, has been successfully applied to the problem of waste carbon dioxide conversion,” Daiyan said.

The use of the FSP flame system also means the new method is more easily scaled to the requirements of heavy industry.

“THIS IS THE FIRST INSTANCE WHERE A CHEAP MATERIAL, MINED LOCALLY IN AUSTRALIA, HAS BEEN SUCCESSFULLY APPLIED TO THE PROBLEM OF WASTE CARBON DIOXIDE CONVERSION.”
Dr Rahman Daiyan

“We don’t need to worry about complicated synthesis techniques that use really expensive metals and precursors,” Lovell said.

“We can burn it and in 10 minutes have these particles ready to go. And by controlling how we burn it, we can control those ratios of desired syngas building blocks.”

Closing the carbon loop
In the future, the technology could be scaled up for use in converting waste carbon dioxide emitted by a power plant, helping to close the carbon loop.

“The idea is that we can take a point source of CO2, such as a coal fired power plant, a gas power plant, or even a natural gas mine where you liberate a huge amount of pure CO2, and we can essentially retrofit this technology at the back end of these plants,” Lovell said.

“Then you could capture that produced CO2 and convert it into something that is hugely valuable to industry.”

https://www.createdigital.org.au/engineers-convert-carbon-dioxide-into-industria...

Of course the Socialist knockers are out and about. They HATE any new ideas and are determined to "show" it won't work.

juliar wrote on Jun 26^th, 2020 at 1:08pm:


You think lee is a socialist?

Haha...

Good one.  You're so instantly triggered the moment anyone comments in reply and aren't 100% in support, even lee who is posting the real challenges about the idea but hoping it works.

We've been there before too, I support the idea of hydrogen as a fuel source (and because you're anti-solar so did you) but I brought up the challenges that are facing that technology and emerging industry and the hopes of them being overcome and you trolled me for a year until I started to ignore you...

You're worse than the snowflakes you claim to hate so much.

Boing Boing Boing!!!!!   The Greeny Kangyroo hops by. Hope he/she keeps going.

The Socialist knockers and mockers are always ready to try and rubbish and ridicule any new idea that they did not think of.

The simple truth is that they are JEALOUS.

Now wait for the indignant response.

juliar wrote on Jul 5^th, 2020 at 3:26pm:


All that DESPITE the big slowdown due to covid 19. How strange is that? Perhaps the estimates of natural emissions are low.

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 5^th, 2020 at 6:19pm:



Yes petal. A lot less.

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 5^th, 2020 at 6:19pm:



nope. The largest CO2 emitter is the ocean. But you don't understand that.

lee wrote on Jul 5^th, 2020 at 6:40pm:


Damn General you got me before I even said it.

I was about to say that this time you may know what you re talking about but them you just proved me wrong before I got to even say it.

juliar wrote on Jul 5^th, 2020 at 3:26pm:


This, after you were engaged in a technical discussion by someone who is far from a socialist, yet it still triggered you because it was discussing the technical challenges facing the idea you brought up and you then try to shut down the debate with personal attacks as if you're trying to create some sort of safe space?

Well done.

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 6^th, 2020 at 3:09pm:


You mean the one you pretend to know something about?

So why all the interest in CO₂ ? 

It has nothing to do with the Greenies Climate Change SCAM but it has everything to do with MONEY from products synthesized from CO₂.


Look at all the valuable products synthesized from CO₂

juliar wrote on Jul 17^th, 2020 at 7:58pm:


Do you think we're disrupting the natural cycle by pumping so much CO2 into the air with our emissions?

Or does this only work the way you want it to?

I know I know I know, hop along blah blah

Continues on Page 2...

If carbon dioxide is treated as a pollutant, everything that emits carbon dioxide can be restricted or taxed. The long-term impact of forgoing fossil fuels – the largest source of human-induced carbon dioxide in the atmosphere – will cause energy and all that depends on it to become more expensive.

Costs of growing food, developing clothing, building housing, providing fuel for heating, cooling, and cooking, and transporting the goods (and even people) needed to provide these necessities of life will skyrocket. Do we want the poor to choose between food and heating their homes?

Raising the price of energy will make living more difficult for all but the country’s richest citizens. The so-called “solution” to global warming will have no influence on the Earth’s climate but instead, will adversely impact most Americans.

The irony of the “Endangerment Finding” is that while the EPA’s Clean Air Act was designed to protect the environment, the ruling that carbon dioxide is a pollutant will, in fact, lead to environmental degradation.



Moreover, when the poor lack food, clothing, shelter, or security, how can they be good stewards of their environment?

Inexpensive energy can lift the poor from conditions of poverty. Energy allowed our economy to develop, our citizens to have more free time for innovation and recreation, our public health to increase, and our environment to become cleaner.

Abundant, affordable, and reliable energy – the kind provided by fossil fuels – is necessary for all to be better stewards of our environment.



Isn’t guaranteeing inexpensive energy a better solution to protect our environment and the poorest among us?

https://morningmail.org/co2-reductions-endangers-you/#more-118855



And the COMMENTS suggest people are a lot wiser these days about the Greeny scams.

uk1955 17/07/2020, 8:19 am
“If carbon dioxide is treated as a pollutant, everything that emits carbon dioxide can be restricted or taxed.”

This sentence says everything about the scam. Restriction and taxation is the only reason for CO2 to be a pollutant. This was the scam perpetrated at the 1989 conference in Rio, where the CO2 scam became the object of every government on earth.


Penguinite 17/07/2020, 9:25 am
Does the “Clean Air Act” effectively stop people from planting trees? After all, trees are the main generator of C02. What a dilemma! These clever types pass Laws classing CO2 as a pollutant and, simultaneously insist on the planting trees that produce the self same “gas”.


Big Al 17/07/2020, 1:28 pm
P, perhaps you meant to say ‘that during the trees’ photosynthesis of the CO2, the O2 goes into the atmosphere, and the C goes into the tree’; something along those lines, perhaps.

Unquestionably, CO2 has never, ever, been a pollutant, and its concentration in the atmosphere has varied widely ever since planet earth formed over four billion years ago.


Neville 17/07/2020, 5:59 pm
All true enough, BA.
Of course, it depends entirely on just what one (Lefties? Of course!) define is actually “pollution”. And more importantly, WHY they’re doing that.


Aktosplatz 17/07/2020, 10:24 am
We should be increasing atmospheric CO₂ levels not reducing them. Even lands and continents covered in desert have experienced ‘greening’ due to plant growth during higher CO₂ levels


Lorraine 17/07/2020, 10:52 am
Wuhan flu may have put Climate change, Greta and the C0₂ on the back foot for many years….It costs money to go so green, and we just went broke,,,not able to go woke,,,

Is your Virus face mask suffocating you with trapped CO₂ ?


Health officials respond to claims of carbon dioxide poisoning from face coverings
by KATU News staff and Duane Pohlman, WKRC Friday, June 26th 2020

PORTLAND, Ore. – There have been several claims surfacing online that allege masks and face coverings can cause a buildup of carbon dioxide and a lack of oxygen.

Health officials want people to know the facts.

According to the Oregon Health Authority, people are not at risk of inhaling too much carbon dioxide while wearing a face covering.

Some of the posts online claim that masks can cause carbon dioxide toxicity, but they do not specify what kind of face coverings they are referencing.




The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) strongly encourages covering your face in public. In its guidelines posted online, CDC states, "Everyone should wear a cloth face cover when they have to go out in public."

It also warns, "Do NOT use a face mask meant for a healthcare worker." That’s important to know because the carbon dioxide issue raised by many of these posts are specifically about those tight-fitting masks worn by health care workers, not the loose-fitting cloth coverings recommended for the general public.

A representative from CDC recently talked about the carbon dioxide (CO2) issues associated with those professional masks, which are technically called respirators, telling Reuters, “CO2 will slowly build up in the mask over time. However, the level of CO2 likely to build up in the mask is mostly tolerable to people exposed to it."

The same representative also said it’s unlikely any of the issues would produce any severe side effects.

"You might get a headache, but you most likely [would] not suffer the symptoms observed at much higher levels of CO2," the CDC representative said.

Keep in mind, these concerns are primarily dealing with the respirators for medical professions, NOT the masks and coverings that you and I are told to wear. And since you are supposed to remove the mask when you’re alone or with your immediate household, experts say the risk of carbon dioxide issues with the general population is very low.

KMTR

Lane County Public Health spokesperson Jason Davis says a surgical mask is designed for proper breathing, effective exhalation without carbon dioxide building up. However, there are problems with improperly made home-made masks.

If the wrong kind of cloth or too many layers of cloth are used in a homemade mask it can cause an individual to become lightheaded because they're breathing in that carbon dioxide,” said Davis.

He says that's not good enough to discourage mask use.

Davis says there are plenty of masks that do not cause hypoxia or carbon dioxide poisoning. He recommends persons with a pre-existing lung condition to speak with their doctor.

The CDC's website contains information on proper homemade masks.

https://katu.com/news/local/health-officials-respond-to-false-claims-of-carbon-d...

juliar wrote on Jul 19^th, 2020 at 8:39pm:


The broken clock was right, one of the two times today.  Good post.

Oh, were you twiggerwed petal?

Yep.

Oh well, sorry petal.

At least hopefully you'll practice what you preach and wear your mask too

juliar wrote on Jun 26^th, 2020 at 12:04pm:


Still trying to flog snake oil to the masses socko ??? LOL

What happened to the never-ever "clean coal technology" LOL

Who cares about CO₂ when hydrogen will make it obsolete. The dead end dud Electric Car Fans spewing pollution from the coal power stations will drive on over the cliff to obsolescence.

Won't it be wonderful when all those smelly noisy diesel trucks hauling containers from the wharves are replaced by clean quiet hydrogen powered trucks.




Japan to be 1st country to reach 100 hydrogen filling station milestone
KYODO NEWS KYODO NEWS - Mar 23, 2018 - 19:34



Japan will open eight hydrogen filling stations this spring for use with fuel cell vehicles, taking the total across the country to 100, the industry ministry said Friday.



From March to April, the eight stations will open in five prefectures -- Hokkaido, Fukushima, Kanagawa, Gifu, and Okayama -- as the country aims to make hydrogen an energy source that is more widely available, the ministry said.

Fuel cell vehicles, or FCVs, combine hydrogen and oxygen to produce electricity which powers an electric motor. Unlike conventional vehicles running on gasoline or diesel, FCVs emit only water and heat. Toyota and Honda are among automakers to offer models using fuel cell technology.

While the government aims to put around 40,000 FCVs on public roads by 2020, the high cost of establishing hydrogen filling stations, estimated at 400 million to 500 million yen ($3.8 million to 4.8 million) each, has been considered a barrier to the take up of FCVs.



Mar 23, 2018 | KYODO NEWS

https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2018/03/1e50efc636ca-japan-to-be-1st-country-...