Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Have Created Batteries Using Carbon Dioxide From Atmosphere (thelatestnews.com)
An anonymous reader writes: While climate change talks progress on how to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, an interdisciplinary team of scientists have worked out a way to reduce carbon dioxide already existing in the atmosphere. The focus is on the batteries used by electric automobiles. Researchers have found out that the graphite electrodes in the lithium-ion batteries could be replaced with carbon electrodes sourced from atmospheric carbon dioxide. The experiment started with the use of a solar-thermal electrochemical process (STEP) to convert carbon dioxide into carbon. STEP uses solar energy as the source of the thermal and electrical energy required for the dissolution of the atmospheric carbon dioxide to its constituent elements -- carbon and oxygen. The team then used the carbon generated to create carbon nanotubes/nanofibers. They then incorporated these carbon nanotubes into lithium-ion batteries by using them as the positive electrode or anode. While the carbon is used in the manufacture of carbon nanotubes, the oxygen is channeled back to the generator to boost the combustion efficiency of the generator. The increased efficiency will balance the electricity consumption of STEP. In the end, the fossil fuel electrical power plant could have zero net carbon dioxide emissions.
If they are going to reduce carbon dioxide to carbon and oxygen, then at a minimum they will need to add -394.39 kJ/mol of CO2 to the system because of the Gibbs Free Energy of Formation, which would yield 12 grams of carbon. and 32 grams of oxygen.
If we're looking at replacing one metric ton of carbon per hour, then this process would need 1,000,000/12 = 83,333 moles carbon*393 kJ/3600 seconds hour = 9.1 MW of energy minimum, assuming 30% efficiency, would yield the need for 30 MW of solar panels. At 5 acres per megawatt, they would need 150 acres of land.
Again, trees look like the better option for carbon removal.
"Who are you?" "No one of consequence." "I must know." "Get used to disappointment."
Researchers have found out that the graphite electrodes in the lithium-ion batteries could be replaced with carbon electrodes sourced from atmospheric carbon dioxide.
Why? What's the benefit of getting the carbon from the atmosphere, as opposed to from less energy-intensive sources? Especially since a large proportion of our energy sources put carbon into the atmosphere.
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
"In the end, the fossil fuel electrical power plant could have zero net carbon dioxide emissions."
Looks to me that in the end it will actually be solar power replacing fossil-fuel power.
Before we get too far into the celebration over the fact that we'll be able to use all the fossil fuels forever and there will never be a downside, I'm just curious. Does anyone know anything about the website that is the source for this story? thelatestnews.com, it's called and it looks a little weird. There isn't a single link in the actual article to anything related to the actual scientists or anything published about this work. Just a YouTube video. I also found this story in the "Business" section of the site:
http://www.thelatestnews.com/b...
They start by saying in the title that this "bitwalking" thing is financial nonsense, but by the end of the article, they're saying why they think it's a brilliant idea.
I'm just a little concerned about who is behind this news site, but then I'm naturally suspicious.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Rooftop solar does a good job of zeroing out the power usage of the single-family home under it, but what happens when those solar panels are on the minuscule roof of a high-rise apartment complex?
And most especially, what happens when your country wants to smelt steel? I suppose you can outsource all the steel production to a nuclear country like South Korea.