Slashdot Mirror
CO2 To Fuel, Closing the "Carbon Loop"
leprasmurf writes "Inhabitat has posted an article detailing a recent announcement of a process to turn CO2 into fuel. The process, which used to be considered too energy inefficient, uses a multi-step, low pressure, and low temperature biocatalyst to break the CO2 into 'basic hydrocarbon building blocks.'"
The process, which used to be considered too energy inefficient, uses a multi-step, low pressure, and low temperature biocatalyst to break the CO2 into 'basic hydrocarbon building blocks.
1) Grow a plant.
2) Stick in the ground for a few thousand years.
3) Dig up resultant black goo.
4) Distill goo into reactive liquid and distribute...
How is this new? When did it become more efficient?
In this house we observe the laws of thermodynamics.
I know the proprietary process:
Get a Snake,
Get some CO2,
Suffecate the Snake,
Extract Snake Oil.
signature is pants
What we need is a fill-in form in the series of the
.)
Your post advocates a
( ) physical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) chemical
approach to global warming. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws
form. This is slashdot. We don't need no stinking optimism here.
I'll compile it, contributions are welcome. Here are mine.
( ) it violates the First Law of Thermodynamics
( ) it violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) the energy needed to accomplish your simple tranformation
Exception at line ("Then keep chopping it down every two years"): Attempt to chop down an already chopped-down tree.
"Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
Dude, put the mouse down and back away from the compiler.
Either that or they convinced the USPTO to grant them a patent on photosynthesis.
I hate printers.