Comments
Wagamaga OP t1_j3mz5qf wrote
The researchers, from the University of Cambridge, developed the system, which can convert two waste streams into two chemical products at the same time – the first time this has been achieved in a solar-powered reactor.
The reactor converts carbon dioxide (CO2) and plastics into different products that are useful in a range of industries. In tests, CO2 was converted into syngas, a key building block for sustainable liquid fuels, and plastic bottles were converted into glycolic acid, which is widely used in the cosmetics industry. The system can easily be tuned to produce different products by changing the type of catalyst used in the reactor.
Converting plastics and greenhouse gases – two of the biggest threats facing the natural world – into useful and valuable products using solar energy is an important step in the transition to a more sustainable, circular economy. The results are reported in the journal Nature Synthesis.
[deleted] t1_j3ndugq wrote
[removed]
dasimers t1_j3nfro0 wrote
Does it make any mention of the catalyst? The catalyst would have to be something quite abundant to catch up with all the CO2 and plastic waste, not to even mention the scalability of these projects.
OralCulture t1_j3nyktv wrote
Is plastic considered renewable?
luminarium t1_j3oe92e wrote
This is kind of why I wasn't ever concerned about there being too much plastic trash building up in the world. In light of technologies such as this (and future ones), it kind of makes plastic recycling, and plastic use reduction... kinda stupid.
MalumOptimatium t1_j3ofk72 wrote
This reeks of sensational journalism...
[deleted] t1_j3oqji2 wrote
[removed]
iqisoverrated t1_j3qkm68 wrote
So now we need a concentrated CO2 waste stream...which is exactly what we're trying to get rid off.
Technology like this is nifty and all - but if it were to actually be applied it'd just be a justification for letting coal and gas powerplants run longer. That's counterproductive.
lambda_x_lambda_y_y t1_j3r6vta wrote
Well we still need CCUS for energy sector decarbonisation anyway, but it can be expected to solve by itself the anthropogenic GHG emission problem in any way.
iqisoverrated t1_j3rd4na wrote
Investing in carbon capture and storage (or use) is just a way to throw money at extending a problem instead of using the same funds to replace it with something that doesn't cause the problem in the first place.
Invest in a cure instead of trying to nurse the symptoms.
lambda_x_lambda_y_y t1_j3rfjog wrote
The IPCC and the IEA don't agree.
AutoModerator t1_j3myyqx wrote
Vote for Best of r/science 2022!
Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.