facecrockpot
facecrockpot t1_j69atqn wrote
Reply to comment by kemisage in Researchers unveil the least costly carbon capture system to date - down to $39 per metric ton. by PNNL
Thanks for the insight. Have an award.
facecrockpot t1_j68k10w wrote
Reply to comment by kemisage in Researchers unveil the least costly carbon capture system to date - down to $39 per metric ton. by PNNL
It's actually Ru/TiO2 because we've found that using light we are able to produce hydrocarbons to at least C6. These preliminary experiments haven't been done by me that's why I'm not that familiar with the mechanisms that person suspected. The focus will definitely be hydrocarbons, no oxygenates.
I'm definitely planning on using other salts in my preliminary experiments. I think the previous research used Ruthenium chloride so if you got experience with a model component for that I'd appreciate your opinion.
I'm still working on my Masters Thesis (FTS with Co@m-SiO and Co@m-AlSiO) thats why my research into Ruthenium has been sparse so far. I appreciate the heads up about the papers. I also got the impression that the very few results there are, are a bit contradictory.
facecrockpot t1_j68ceof wrote
Reply to comment by kemisage in Researchers unveil the least costly carbon capture system to date - down to $39 per metric ton. by PNNL
Thanks for the paper, I'll look into it. I'm actually about to start my PhD researching the hydrogenation of carbondioxide over ruthenium so I appreciate the reliable source.
facecrockpot t1_j682avo wrote
Reply to comment by kemisage in Researchers unveil the least costly carbon capture system to date - down to $39 per metric ton. by PNNL
I don't think it's chemically as easy as "take oxygen out and connect the carbon" do you have sources for the actual reaction and catalysis? It's probably patented that's why the websites don't tell, but I'm quite curious how they do it.
facecrockpot t1_j5y9j2w wrote
Reply to comment by Pallasite in Researchers unveil the least costly carbon capture system to date - down to $39 per metric ton. by PNNL
How are either of those a byproduct of CC? I haven't worked with CC so I really don't know.
facecrockpot t1_j5y3lz9 wrote
Reply to comment by ukezi in Researchers unveil the least costly carbon capture system to date - down to $39 per metric ton. by PNNL
How is the methanol Synthesis easier than Fischer-Tropsch? Both are energy intensive in and of themselves not to mention the DAC of CO2
facecrockpot t1_j5y0tgd wrote
Reply to comment by ukezi in Researchers unveil the least costly carbon capture system to date - down to $39 per metric ton. by PNNL
Why not turn the CO2 into gasoline then instead of redesigning engines?
facecrockpot t1_j5ximdc wrote
Reply to comment by WinterPiratefhjng in Researchers unveil the least costly carbon capture system to date - down to $39 per metric ton. by PNNL
I've seen turning methanol into gasoline before, but how does that work? Gasoline is hydrocarbon Paraffins, Olefins and isomers plus additives. Not that many oxgenates, or am I wrong?
facecrockpot t1_izwh62z wrote
Usually Metal-Sulphur Batteries have a rapid capacity fading due to sulphide dissolution. This was not adressed in the article and I cant be bothered to read the paper because stuff like that is usually so far away from industrial scale that it will be irrelevant by the time its ready.
facecrockpot t1_jdlls7f wrote
Reply to Scientists have shown how toxic dyes can be filtered out of wastewater using the method and material developed by the group. The procedure uses sunlight as a catalyst and doesn’t involve any pressure or heat. It can remove 80 percent of dye pollutants in wastewater. by Wagamaga
Photocatalysis is not catalyzed by light. It's more like photo-assisted catalysis.