charleswrivers
Senior Member
- First Name
- Charles
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2017
- Threads
- 43
- Messages
- 3,736
- Reaction score
- 4,468
- Location
- Kingsland, GA
- Vehicle(s)
- '14 Odyssey, '94 300zx, 2001 F-150
- Vehicle Showcase
- 1
It sounds like the practical application of it didn’t meet the expectations of what they’d done on paper. What I’d read about the versions to turn CO2 back to usable fuel sounded good in theory. In the end... you’ll always keep putting more into something that you get out of it.The technology as a whole is kind of interesting... but using a CO2 collector on a CO2 emitting plant and powering it by a CO2 emitting plant to help acquire more CO2 emitting fuel is kind of funny. I assume they were using CO2 as an inert gas to pressurize pool of underground oil to help extract it from the ground. The one that was discussed earlier to make gasoline out of CO2 in the air has always felt like an odd way to try and circumvent the second law of thermodynamics.
I guess it works if the collector it’s powered off of non-CO2 producing energy and hold onto ICE and create a man-made closed CO2 cycle... since gasoline is still much more energy dense by weight and volume than batteries now and for the foreseeable future. If the electrical infrastructure is predominately CO2 emitting... you’d still be losing ground.
In the end, I’m sure the numbers can be crunched to put electrical power from the grid into chemical energy in a battery then convert back to mechanical energy in an electric motors VS electrical energy from the grid into chemical energy in gasoline and converting it back into mechanical energy. Given the relative high efficiency in charging and high efficiency in energy conversion by the electric motor (should be well over 80% if not in the 90s) vs an unknown quality of efficiency in the energy used to convert CO2 back into gasoline and lower engine efficiencies for ICE... I just don’t see it working out for beat it. It’s kind of neat tech and I did read up on it and see some interesting claims. It just doesn’t seem to be panning out as well as hoped.
The navy still builds and depletes its new design reactors through the math has been shown to work. They’ve built full-on designs as proof of concepts too. They’ve been doing it since (power generating) nuclear power’s infancy in the 50s and the math hasn’t changed. There’s enough spent fuel from already used fuel that's being stored for disposition that’s almost totally U-238 that could power the world exclusively for longer than we’ve had electricity. There’s fear in trying something new with fast fission designs. The math works... but folks having wanted to take the plunge with things like PRISM. NuScale just got funded... and it’s cool and all, but it’s still a thermal fission reactor design. I did my college capstone largely around PRISM. It’s be neat if I got to see it in my lifetime. It’ll take NuScale being a success to probably ever see it. Like with fossil fuels... it’s cheaper to use on-hand or pretty easy to acquire new fuel in an already built plant that was expensive to construct than build something new that works on paper but hasn’t been proven through actual use. UK almost built PRISM years ago but got cold feet.
I’m obviously pro-nuke. It’s been part of my life for a long... long time. But it’s an industry that’s stagnated at best and in decline in many parts of the world. Accidents are largely a function of terribly obsolete designs that could be replaced but would cost $$$. The power industry is about making money and you don’t scrap something that works. Once the enormous costs of plant construction are earned back... nuclear power is pretty stupid cheap. I see solar as a good way to help with peak usage... since solar should be at its peak w/the sun overhead... when A/C usage is peaking. There’s all sorts of designs of tank batteries the size of warehouses... charging fluid and circulating it around an anode and cathode to draw off of it so you “store” power when solar is down. Eh. It’s neat, but I do think you’ve got to have a 100% of the time power source and use solar to load-level as you slowly bring more online in the coming decades.
Anyways... I’d said my piece awhile ago on the original topic. Just wanted to share the news bit about the carbon collectors which was a tangent the thread took.
Sponsored
