Creating oil from Carbon Dioxide (CO2
  • Register
  • Help
Page 1 of 2 12 Last
Results 1 to 25 of 44
  1. #1
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Melbourne Victoria
    Posts
    11,777

    Icon6 Creating oil from Carbon Dioxide (CO2

    Well seems I might have been premature about waiting for miniturized fusion reactors for motor cars when it seems US researchers have pioneered a way to turn CO2 to oil.

    Is this the future without the threat of Peak oil pushing up prices and also reducing CO2 by using it to make oil - qlmost sounds like perpetual motion andof course must shake the conventional oil industry to its cartel base - how dare they challenge their monopoly!!

    http://www1.umn.edu/news/news-releas...NT_314387.html

    Advertisement


    Or is this an early April fools day joke!!


    Ken

  2. #2
    1000+ Posts Kim Luck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Aus.
    Posts
    17,956

    Default Co2 into oil...

    Don't think it's a fairytale Ken! Can be and has been done in several places. Must work because I sell an oil absorbing sock (to go into a boat bilge) that converts oil into CO2 and water, just the reverse process.....
    Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone............

  3. #3
    Fellow Frogger! Geoff in Gully's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Ferntree Gully
    Posts
    662

    Default

    I dunno about turning stuff into oil - still leaves us with the oil-based problems.
    I do like this idea though.

    http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/20...tories+2%29%29

    Couple of buckets of water, a hydrogen fuel cell, and Bob's your uncle.
    There is a solution to every problem. There is a problem with every solution.
    • Renault R4L '63 - Descartes
    • Renault R4L '64 - Lucy
    • Renault Megane '07 - too young to have a name...

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    sydney, australia
    Posts
    11,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoff in Gully View Post
    I dunno about turning stuff into oil - still leaves us with the oil-based problems.
    I.
    i dont have the slightest idea about the story, but if it could be done, it would certainly avoid all the problems with crude oil based fuels. the problem with them is that they take carbon out of the ground and putting it in the atmosphere. the process the article speaks about would take carbon out of the atmosphere and put it back into the atmosphere ie there would be no net change.

    the biggest problem would be that green/left types would have to come up with some new excuse for stopping people using cars, to which they are ideologically opposed.

  5. #5
    Fellow Frogger! jurgen_s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    707

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alexander View Post
    the biggest problem would be that green/left types would have to come up with some new excuse for stopping people using cars, to which they are ideologically opposed.
    well, then count me to that group of people. The most stupid thing you can do is to keep the oil burning alive. If it were only COČ that was put in the air I could live with it. But burning oil puts other gasses also in the air.

    I see more in the idea that Geoff has posted. If electricity will become that easily to produce than it is better to go that way. At least it is cleaner...
    www.peugeotforum.be
    Belgium Peugeot Club

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    sydney, australia
    Posts
    11,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jurgen_s View Post
    well, then count me to that group of people. The most stupid thing you can do is to keep the oil burning alive. If it were only COČ that was put in the air I could live with it. But burning oil puts other gasses also in the air.
    jurgen, i dont understand your response at all. IF this were possible, it would be NOT burning oil, and it would NOT be putting CO2 into the air beyond what it took out of the air. so it would address both the finite nature, and the increased greenhouse gas concentration, associated with burning fossil fuels.

    what else is there to be concerned about?
    Last edited by alexander; 31st March 2011 at 10:17 AM.

  7. #7
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Newcastle
    Posts
    2,592

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim Luck View Post
    Don't think it's a fairytale Ken! Can be and has been done in several places. Must work because I sell an oil absorbing sock (to go into a boat bilge) that converts oil into CO2 and water, just the reverse process.....
    Hi
    Not sure about the logic here. Just because the Genie can be let out of the bottle does not mean you can get it back in

    My quote is "Minnesota researchers are a key step closer to making renewable petroleum fuels using bacteria, sunlight and carbon dioxide " How many steps?? Perhaps, I would think, that means it is not close yet.

    I also think that making an alternative to current oil will only mean people will just continue on with all the undesirable bad habits that have destroyed the worlds resources and envirnoment. Future generations will look at our age and weep about how we wasted our resources and left a toxic legacy when we did know better.

    We could use our technology and ideas for the better but seem to be happy to leave it for the profit makers to decide what we do. The great bulk of people will just use up what ever is dished up as popular and easy no matter the consquences. Meanwhile the sun keeps supplying energy ever day for 'free'
    Jaahn

  8. #8
    1000+ Posts Haakon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    canberra...
    Posts
    8,747

    Default

    Its just another variation on a number of CO2-oil processes being trialled using bacteria - there is even one going on in Gippsland with the idea of strapping it to a power station there.

    Its like a lot of other status quo extenders like CCS and other biofuels - it maintains the status quo. I will however concede there is a valid role for biofuels and conventional ICE technology for a while, such as remote area use and heavy transport.

    The vast majority of transport can and must be mode shifted to bulk rail movements, and to electric propulsion.

    But bugs for fuel doesn't really divert much R&D dollars from any of that, so more power to them (boom boom tish). Don't think it holds any big solutions though.
    I tried to drown my sorrows in alcohol, but the bastards learnt how to swim

  9. #9
    JBN
    JBN is offline
    1000+ Posts JBN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    8,181

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jaahn View Post
    My quote is "Minnesota researchers are a key step closer to making renewable petroleum fuels using bacteria, sunlight and carbon dioxide " How many steps?? Perhaps, I would think, that means it is not close yet.
    Jaahn
    So, a young researcher who got her doctorate a few months ago has found the magic pudding?

    Give us a break. This is just a plea for research funds so that she and her mates can live a comfortable life in a cloistered society, rather than going out into the hard real world and getting a job. I put this in the same league as the perpetual cancer fundraisers that over the decades have produced huge amounts of money to keep PhDs occupied, yet have not to date come up with a cure for cancer.

    I am prepared to eat my words if this scheme ever happens. Gandolf, Gandolf, wherefore art thou?

    John

  10. #10
    1000+ Posts schlitzaugen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    loneliness capital of the world
    Posts
    8,863

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JBN View Post
    So, a young researcher who got her doctorate a few months ago has found the magic pudding?

    Give us a break. This is just a plea for research funds so that she and her mates can live a comfortable life in a cloistered society, rather than going out into the hard real world and getting a job. I put this in the same league as the perpetual cancer fundraisers that over the decades have produced huge amounts of money to keep PhDs occupied, yet have not to date come up with a cure for cancer.

    I am prepared to eat my words if this scheme ever happens. Gandolf, Gandolf, wherefore art thou?

    John
    Wow.

    I didn't figure you, John, for a narrow minded person.

    If you read more carefully the article linked you'll see the grant was applied for by 3700 other proposals and this is one of 37 selected competitors. So the idea that they are having a plea for money is false. The money is offerred, they are just competing to get it (kinda like applying for a visa to move to Australia from the UK, me thinks).

    Not sure this research goes anywhere though myself, but that is another matter.

    "Perpetual cancer fundraisers" have scored significant progress, and I am pretty sure the money made it happen. Australia is actually attracting foreign money in cancer and HIV research becasue of our reputable teams and success. The US is quite pissed about it (some of their cancer research money actually ends up here).

    If you tried to take a PhD thesis on, you might find that life in a cloistered society is somewhat different to what most people believe. Harvesting enzymes form chicken livers for instance means being up at 4am in an abbatoir and scooping goo from a huge stinking vat. I think it has the potential to put you off chicken for life. Or trying to collect oxygenated blood from the heart of a live gecko again to separate a certain enzyme, is not for the faint hearted. Or perhaps you might want to try working with P32 (that's Phosphorus32, an isotopic enzyme tracer) that can kill you at the most minute contamination because it has the unusual property that it bonds on a certain DNA sequence in your body cells and triggers carcinogenic mutations.

    Or perhaps you want to come with me next time in the field get some fresh rocks out of a volcano's spewing crater? Or go to Antarctica freeze something off counting penguins or studying ice core?

    Enjoy your ignorance, it is your only accesible form of bliss.

    Pray you never need that cancer cure though.

    I never figured you, John, for a narrow minded person. I still hope your post was just a preemptive swipe at the expected such dribble from the usual suspects.
    Last edited by schlitzaugen; 31st March 2011 at 02:17 PM.
    ACHTUNG ALLES LOOKENPEEPERS

    Das computermachine is nicht fur gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist easy schnappen der springenwerk, blowenfusen und poppencorken mit spitssparken. Ist nicht fur gewerken bei das dummkopfen. Das rubbernecken sightseeren keepen hands in das pockets-relaxen und watch das blinkenlights.

  11. #11
    1000+ Posts Haakon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    canberra...
    Posts
    8,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schlitzaugen View Post

    Or perhaps you want to come with me next time in the field get some fresh rocks out of a volcano's spewing crater? Or go to Antarctica freeze something off counting penguins or studying ice core?
    .
    Ooo!! Me! Pick me!!

    Seriously, I would adore the chance to do any of that!! You know you want an assistant. Really.
    I tried to drown my sorrows in alcohol, but the bastards learnt how to swim

  12. #12
    1000+ Posts schlitzaugen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    loneliness capital of the world
    Posts
    8,863

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haakon View Post
    Ooo!! Me! Pick me!!

    Seriously, I would adore the chance to do any of that!! You know you want an assistant. Really.

    A very young lady colleague of mine working on her PhD in Antarctica was killed by a seal. Dragged under water and drowned. Parents flew over form the UK to see her for the last time, unfortunately not alive.

    Not as rare an occurence as we may hope.

    Volcanoes can outgas mainly CO (carbon monoxide) which is odourless, heavier than air and kills you in minutes and without notice. Spending your night next to it is not everybody's idea of cloistered life, and I would prefer to avoid it if at all possible. I have seen a lot of tourists put their lives at risk without even realising. Some end up in statistics you might not ever hear of.

    Still wanna do it?

    You can apply with the Australian Antarctic Division for casual work, they always need people for counting penguins and such.
    Last edited by schlitzaugen; 31st March 2011 at 07:44 PM.
    ACHTUNG ALLES LOOKENPEEPERS

    Das computermachine is nicht fur gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist easy schnappen der springenwerk, blowenfusen und poppencorken mit spitssparken. Ist nicht fur gewerken bei das dummkopfen. Das rubbernecken sightseeren keepen hands in das pockets-relaxen und watch das blinkenlights.

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    sydney, australia
    Posts
    11,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jaahn View Post

    I also think that making an alternative to current oil will only mean people will just continue on with all the undesirable bad habits that have destroyed the worlds resources and envirnoment. Future generations will look at our age and weep about how we wasted our resources and left a toxic legacy when we did know better.
    Quote Originally Posted by Haakon View Post
    Its like a lot of other status quo extenders like CCS and other biofuels - it maintains the status quo. I will however concede there is a valid role for biofuels and conventional ICE technology for a while, such as remote area use and heavy transport.

    The vast majority of transport can and must be mode shifted to bulk rail movements, and to electric propulsion.
    .
    putting hyperbole and platitudes aside (what hope?), what exactly would be the problem with using a liquid fuel created from hydrogen and CO2 from the air? as i noted already, ALL the problems with liquid hydrocarbon fuels relate either to their finite reserves, or the fact that they take carbon from the ground, and put it in the atmosphere. neither of these would be an issue if such a process was made to work.

  14. #14
    1000+ Posts Haakon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    canberra...
    Posts
    8,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schlitzaugen View Post
    A very young lady colleague of mine working on her PhD in Antarctica was killed by a seal. Dragged under water and drowned. Parents flew over form the UK to see her for the last time, unfortunately not alive.

    Not as rare an occurence as we may hope.

    Volcanoes can outgas mainly CO (carbon monoxide) which odourless, heavier than air and kills you in minutes and without notice. Spending your night next to it is not everybody's idea of cloistered life, and I would prefer to avoid it if at all possible. I have seen a lot of tourists put their lifes at risk without even realising. Some end up in statistics you might not ever hear of.

    Still wanna do it?

    You can apply with the Australian Antarctic Division for casual work, they always need people for counting penguins and such.
    Yes. Yes I do. Very very much. A lot. Yes.

    If you're about to tell me your volcano antics were in Erebus's crater, I may have to hate you a little bit though...

    Have not seen any casual ads, and figured they were snapped up in very short order by those in the know.

    If you are in the know and have anyone in particular I should speak to, PM me!!

    I "almost" (as in second choice...) got a policy job at AAD a couple of months back... So close - I'll admit to a sniffle about that


    Anyway, back on topic - as you were gents
    I tried to drown my sorrows in alcohol, but the bastards learnt how to swim

  15. #15
    1000+ Posts Haakon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    canberra...
    Posts
    8,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alexander View Post
    putting hyperbole and platitudes aside (what hope?), what exactly would be the problem with using a liquid fuel created from hydrogen and CO2 from the air? as i noted already, ALL the problems with liquid hydrocarbon fuels relate either to their finite reserves, or the fact that they take carbon from the ground, and put it in the atmosphere. neither of these would be an issue if such a process was made to work.
    Don't have a huge problem with it as I said. But as also noted, there are other emissions from ICE engines burning air. Its also used as another of the "delaying tactics" used by the fossil fuel industry, showing how much they "are committed to cleaning up their act".

    I think there will be a market for it - how big is anyone's guess!
    I tried to drown my sorrows in alcohol, but the bastards learnt how to swim

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    sydney, australia
    Posts
    11,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haakon View Post
    Don't have a huge problem with it as I said. But as also noted, there are other emissions from ICE engines burning air. Its also used as another of the "delaying tactics" used by the fossil fuel industry, showing how much they "are committed to cleaning up their act".

    I think there will be a market for it - how big is anyone's guess!
    i dont think you have to guess how big the market would be. it would be precisely the same size as the market for existing liquid fuels. that is pretty big.

    i must say i am having trouble seeing why this sort of a process would be a 'delaying tactic of the fossil fuel industry', when it would be a permanent solution and NOT a fossil fuel. which bit of the fossil fuel industry would it be extending??

    now correct me if am misinterpreting you, but are you saying that a liquid hydrocarbon fuel, which was infinite and did not add to the greenhouse effect, would still need to phased out, because of other emissions from combustion engines? if that is what you are saying, what damage is caused by these other emissions which would justify the massive cost and inconvenience of that process?

  17. #17
    1000+ Posts Haakon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    canberra...
    Posts
    8,747

    Default

    Liquid fuel market for ICE tech could well diminish eventually as the fleet is electrified/diminished. Not likely any time soon... But who knows.

    Its been touted a lot as a way of reducing emissions from coal/gas fired power stations - hence "extending their viability in a carbon constrained economy".

    As for damage from other noxious emissions, the data is widespread, well established and nothing new. Goes all the way back to the 50's and introduction of the catalytic converter and subsequent emissions controls.

    Annual health costs associated with air pollution (NOx, SOx and particulates) are not particularly contentious or abstract....
    I tried to drown my sorrows in alcohol, but the bastards learnt how to swim

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    sydney, australia
    Posts
    11,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haakon View Post

    As for damage from other noxious emissions, the data is widespread, well established and nothing new. Goes all the way back to the 50's and introduction of the catalytic converter and subsequent emissions controls.

    Annual health costs associated with air pollution (NOx, SOx and particulates) are not particularly contentious or abstract....
    they may not be contentious or abstract, but my question is whether you mean liquid hydrocarbon fuels should in principle be phased out for that reason alone, as you seem to be implying. saying 'i dont have a big problem with it' makes it sound like you do actually have some significant problems with the idea, but we are talking about a (hypothetical at this stage) process which would have zero net greenhouse gas emissions, and be infinite. that would leave only 'other' emissions with which to take issue. they would have to be rather serious to stack up against an easy to handle, high energy density, liquid fuel, used by approximately 5 billion people world wide and which can be carried in quantities to propel a vehicle 1000km or more. or, which can be stored in tins, carried on donkeys to remote places, and used in low tech, low maintenance motors in just about any environmental conditions.

    among the many claims people make, for which i struggle to see any serious evidence, one is that combustion engine emissions are having some significant health impact. they certainly dont appear to be on anyone i know.

  19. #19
    1000+ Posts Haakon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    canberra...
    Posts
    8,747

    Default

    There are serious widespread and long term health impacts associated with the en masse combustion of hydrocarbons in ICEs, home heating and commercial processes (including power generation).

    Yes, I think ICEs should be phased out on that impact alone.

    I also acknowledge that there a number on "niche" applications where they will remain the best option for a very long time. If their use can be brought back to these applications only, the impact is markedly reduced.

    google "epidemiology car emissions" and go nuts
    I tried to drown my sorrows in alcohol, but the bastards learnt how to swim

  20. #20
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Melbourne Victoria
    Posts
    11,777

    Default The bottom line keeps shifting or will cheap fuel keep appearing?

    I suppose we would have to define cheap in terms of what the market will bear. But if we continue to invent, create new fuels, plus improve the bottom line in relation to reduction in use of fuel, plus we have access to fuels of choice, then to me that could be consumer heaven in terms of maintaining a personal transport system.

    This would also go a longway to preventing one fuel supplier (energy conglomerate) from controlling, and for my two cents, I'd like to see that.

    Now if we could just achieve a nil taxation base in crease, we could curb government spending too, or perhaps have a citizens directed taxation system in which actual taxpapyers call the tune over a specified percentage of tax.

    I know I am dreaming.......but its nice to dream, the first step to eventually achieving it Isuppose.

    Wonder what will be the first new fuel to be readily available to the mass market - will the electric car eventually rule our world, or mixture of bio fuel and new fuel agents.?

    Ken?

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    sydney, australia
    Posts
    11,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haakon View Post
    google "epidemiology car emissions" and go nuts
    well, i did just that, and just sticking to the first couple of pages of references, the only thing which is on point is a US website which promotes bicycle use, saying 30,000 people die per year in the USA from car emissions. unfortunately, they got their information from a bicycle map produced in 1998.

    so yet again, i am not getting much in the way of corroboration from the Net. yet again, we are talking about some widespread serious problem in society, but which has never affected anyone i have known in my 49.5 years of life.
    Last edited by alexander; 31st March 2011 at 05:48 PM.

  22. #22
    1000+ Posts Haakon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    canberra...
    Posts
    8,747

    Default

    A good start would be removing the $8 Billion paid annually to the fossil fuel industry in Australia in subsidies and tax exemptions.
    I tried to drown my sorrows in alcohol, but the bastards learnt how to swim

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    sydney, australia
    Posts
    11,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haakon View Post
    There are serious widespread and long term health impacts associated with the en masse combustion of hydrocarbons in ICEs, home heating and commercial processes (including power generation).

    Yes, I think ICEs should be phased out on that impact alone.
    one might like to consider how this sort of reasoning might impact other things in society.
    i will take as a given for the moment, the number of 30,000 car exhaust related deaths per year in the USA. against that, you have to balance the incalculable utility to society from having cheap, reliable, flexible, long distance, high load carrying, low maintenance transport.

    if i look elsewhere (say here: http://www.bhsi.org/stats.htm) i find that each year in the USA, something more than 600 cyclists are killed each year, and over 50,000 injured. against that, you have to balance the miniscule utility bicycles provide, compared with motorised transport.

    conclusion: well, it is a no brainer. you should ban bicycles.

    but it gets worse. the average age of those killed (and presumably the same with injured) is 41 years old. i will lay money that the average age of those noted as killed by car exhaust is a lot higher than that. so if you look at the total number of enjoyable years of life lost, bicycles look a whole lot worse again.

    so, haakon, if there is any principle behind what you are saying about phasing out ICE for that reason alone, then you would also be supporting phasing out bicycles, including your own. what is more, that could be done immediately. like, tomorrow. after all, cyclists could just catch public transport.

  24. #24
    1000+ Posts Haakon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    canberra...
    Posts
    8,747

    Default

    You should be in politics with "logic" like that...
    I tried to drown my sorrows in alcohol, but the bastards learnt how to swim

  25. #25
    1000+ Posts gerry freed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Lauderdale, Tasmania
    Posts
    2,887

    Default

    I wonder if that would get him voted into the Amsterdam city council ?
    Think Global - Ride on Spheres

Page 1 of 2 12 Last

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •