Solve : Take CO2 from the Air and make Beer. Or something.?

1.	Solve : Take CO2 from the Air and make Beer. Or something.?
Answer» They can make it into alcohol, which can be made into Beer. This comes from a story in Scientific American in September 2010 In May 2013 a new twist to the story was picked up by CBS news. Quote http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-57576602/rushing-fireball-could-turn-carbon-dioxide-into-biofuel/ Now, researchers at the University of Georgia say they've hit upon a way to take the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and turn it into useable industrial products. The impact of such a discovery is potentially huge. The goal is to remove the CO2 directly from the air and turn it into bio-fuel -- not only helping power the world, but hopefully taking down global temperatures at the same time Here is a short synopsis of the 2010 story. Quote http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=turning-carbon-dioxide-back-into-fuel In the 1990s a graduate student named Lin Chao at Princeton University decided to bubble carbon dioxide into an electrochemical cell. .... He published his findings in 1994—and no one cared. ... Chao's successor in the Princeton lab of chemist Andrew Bocarsly was deeply interested in finding a solution to the growing problem of the CO2 pollution causing global climate change. ... Graduate student Emily Barton picked up where he left off and, using an electrochemical cell that employs a semiconducting material used in photovoltaic solar cells ... [Andrew Bocarsly:] "We take CO2, water, sunlight and an appropriate catalyst and generate an alcoholic fuel." For the full impact, follow both links. BTW: To break the bonds of CO2 requires quite a bit of energy. Thus is is very interesting to curious minds.More interesting... At least math wise...Link given by patio is about prime numbers. My theme is about converting CO2 into something you can enjoy. As for me, I have had enough prime numbers. Here are more links about "CO2 into Fuel" from Google: http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/energy/blogs/new-microbe-makes-fuel-from-co2-in-the-air http://www.gizmag.com/atmospheric-carbon-dioxide-fuel-microorganism/26836/ http://phys.org/news/2013-05-scientists-co2-sequestration-technique-supergreen.html Interesting... Its good that people are working on projects to someday scrub the air of CO2 AMONG other polutants, however the biggest problem is that most reactions create more of a waste product than what is to be gained, so you can design something that scrubs the air of CO2, but how much CO2 is created in the process of doing so? Same goes for people who get sapped into buying the water bottles with 2 electrodes and connect it to their intake of their engines and drive around thinking they are fueling their engines with water and saving on gasoline, when it has already been proven over and over again that the electricity ( energy ) required to split water and seperate the Oxygen and Hydrogen exceeds that of the energy released when oxygen and hydrogen explode and turn back into water. So they are actually making their gas mileage ever so slightly worse. The only way the "Rushing Fireball" project would work would be to have the facility that PERFORMS this CO2 air scrub to be totally off the power grid. Mainly powered off of solar energy or geothermal energy that can be used to create electricity to run the facility, and if it is not geothermal or both, and only solar, then they would likely want to have a large bank of batteries in the basement to power the facility on a cloudy day etc. Energy can not be created nor destroyed, but Solar, Wind, Hydro, and Geothermal is free after the initial large investment to build a generator to tap into it. If the "Rushing Fireball" project was powered off the grid, its CO2 carbon footprint would likely be greater to operate the facility than that of what is scrubbed out of the air, so while it would probably get a 2.1 Billion Dollar Government Grant etc(guess-timation since there appears to be no USA DEBT CEILING and counting), this facility that scrubs the air would be acting as if it is helping when it is actually making CO2 emissions worse because COAL is being burned to power the large facilities that run this "Rushing Fireball" project.Thank you for your response, DaveLembke The scientists are really serious. It is not a gimmick. Everyone convienently IGNORES the fact that Mother Nature makes her own adjustments... Some of them short term...that can be anyalised...others take thousands of years. The folly that Mankind can somehow destroy a PLANET that has survived everything for a few million years simply illustrates the blatant arrogance of Mankind... Quote The folly that Mankind can somehow destroy a planet that has survived everything for a few million years simply illustrates the blatant arrogance of Mankind... Well the planet would survive as in it would still exist unless we find a way to cast it into the sun through some sort of magnetic imbalance etc or accidentally open up a black hole that sucks the earth into it etc ( both not very likely by far and more a thing of a good SCI-FI Flick!!!!), but life on it may be altered as it has in the PAST. The biggest threat to life is probably nuclear contamination and 99% of life on the planet is quickly impacted by death as well as destruction of reproductive systems so whole species are extinct quickly, or within a few generations if not the first generation of exposure. If dooms day ever triggered, the earth would remain, but only 1% of life would probably make it through it, and that is only if those species can survive without the other species that it may have lived off of such as cockroaches etc. Hopefully that day never comes as for we already know that the human race would come to an end or be up against extreme odds against us of survival.

Answer»

They can make it into alcohol, which can be made into Beer.
This comes from a story in Scientific American in September 2010

In May 2013 a new twist to the story was picked up by CBS news.
Quote

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-57576602/rushing-fireball-could-turn-carbon-dioxide-into-biofuel/
Now, researchers at the University of Georgia say they've hit upon a way to take the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and turn it into useable industrial products. The impact of such a discovery is potentially huge. The goal is to remove the CO2 directly from the air and turn it into bio-fuel -- not only helping power the world, but hopefully taking down global temperatures at the same time

Here is a short synopsis of the 2010 story.
Quote

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=turning-carbon-dioxide-back-into-fuel
In the 1990s a graduate student named Lin Chao at Princeton University decided to bubble carbon dioxide into an electrochemical cell. ....
He published his findings in 1994—and no one cared. ...
Chao's successor in the Princeton lab of chemist Andrew Bocarsly was deeply interested in finding a solution to the growing problem of the CO2 pollution causing global climate change. ...
Graduate student Emily Barton picked up where he left off and, using an electrochemical cell that employs a semiconducting material used in photovoltaic solar cells ...
[Andrew Bocarsly:] "We take CO2, water, sunlight and an appropriate catalyst and generate an alcoholic fuel."

For the full impact, follow both links.
BTW: To break the bonds of CO2 requires quite a bit of energy. Thus is is very interesting to curious minds.More interesting...

At least math wise...Link given by patio is about prime numbers.
My theme is about converting CO2 into something you can enjoy.
As for me, I have had enough prime numbers.

Here are more links about "CO2 into Fuel" from Google:
http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/energy/blogs/new-microbe-makes-fuel-from-co2-in-the-air
http://www.gizmag.com/atmospheric-carbon-dioxide-fuel-microorganism/26836/
http://phys.org/news/2013-05-scientists-co2-sequestration-technique-supergreen.html
Interesting... Its good that people are working on projects to someday scrub the air of CO2 AMONG other polutants, however the biggest problem is that most reactions create more of a waste product than what is to be gained, so you can design something that scrubs the air of CO2, but how much CO2 is created in the process of doing so?

Same goes for people who get sapped into buying the water bottles with 2 electrodes and connect it to their intake of their engines and drive around thinking they are fueling their engines with water and saving on gasoline, when it has already been proven over and over again that the electricity ( energy ) required to split water and seperate the Oxygen and Hydrogen exceeds that of the energy released when oxygen and hydrogen explode and turn back into water. So they are actually making their gas mileage ever so slightly worse.

The only way the "Rushing Fireball" project would work would be to have the facility that PERFORMS this CO2 air scrub to be totally off the power grid. Mainly powered off of solar energy or geothermal energy that can be used to create electricity to run the facility, and if it is not geothermal or both, and only solar, then they would likely want to have a large bank of batteries in the basement to power the facility on a cloudy day etc.

Energy can not be created nor destroyed, but Solar, Wind, Hydro, and Geothermal is free after the initial large investment to build a generator to tap into it.

If the "Rushing Fireball" project was powered off the grid, its CO2 carbon footprint would likely be greater to operate the facility than that of what is scrubbed out of the air, so while it would probably get a 2.1 Billion Dollar Government Grant etc(guess-timation since there appears to be no USA DEBT CEILING and counting), this facility that scrubs the air would be acting as if it is helping when it is actually making CO2 emissions worse because COAL is being burned to power the large facilities that run this "Rushing Fireball" project.Thank you for your response, DaveLembke
The scientists are really serious. It is not a gimmick. Everyone convienently IGNORES the fact that Mother Nature makes her own adjustments...
Some of them short term...that can be anyalised...others take thousands of years.

The folly that Mankind can somehow destroy a PLANET that has survived everything for a few million years simply illustrates the blatant arrogance of Mankind... Quote

The folly that Mankind can somehow destroy a planet that has survived everything for a few million years simply illustrates the blatant arrogance of Mankind...

Well the planet would survive as in it would still exist unless we find a way to cast it into the sun through some sort of magnetic imbalance etc or accidentally open up a black hole that sucks the earth into it etc ( both not very likely by far and more a thing of a good SCI-FI Flick!!!!), but life on it may be altered as it has in the PAST. The biggest threat to life is probably nuclear contamination and 99% of life on the planet is quickly impacted by death as well as destruction of reproductive systems so whole species are extinct quickly, or within a few generations if not the first generation of exposure. If dooms day ever triggered, the earth would remain, but only 1% of life would probably make it through it, and that is only if those species can survive without the other species that it may have lived off of such as cockroaches etc. Hopefully that day never comes as for we already know that the human race would come to an end or be up against extreme odds against us of survival.

Solve : Take CO2 from the Air and make Beer. Or something.?

Discussion

No Comment Found

Related InterviewSolutions

Reply to Comment