Recycling of synthetic fuel CO2?

[NCSH]

forgetting the essential: CO₂ must come mainly from atmospheric capture...

I still don't understand why using naturally highly charged CO2 sources would be stupider than treating air at 400 ppm....except being able to do it anywhere.But we are still waiting for the power consumption associated with the DAC? New?
Moreover, the German examples that you cite go in this direction, cement plant fumes (x%, perhaps around 10?) or biogas whose CO2 content is around 50%

To these 2 questions, the answer was to be found in what I have already written, on the thread "Collapsology ... Kezaco" previously this summer for the need to use CO capture as a priority₂ atmospheric,
and in the pdf files which have been made accessible since November 17, 2021 on this thread regarding the energy balances of the ClimeWorks type DAc.

You still have to take the trouble to read them!

Stirring air requires much less energy than heat to de-adsorb the amines that capture CO₂.

[sicetaitsimple]

Stirring air requires much less energy than heat to de-adsorb the amines that capture CO₂.

You can continue to sausage, citing studies on this or that point in the chain...
What I would like to see is a diagram of an integrated electrolysis + DAC + e-fuel production process, with the electricity and e-fuel inputs-outputs, at least that would be clear. So much electricity (1), so much e-fuel production (2), (1)/(2) = electricity consumption/liter of e-fuel.
Do you necessarily have this on hand?

[Remundo]

To these 2 questions, the answer was to be found in what I have already written, on the thread "Collapsology ... Kezaco" previously this summer for the need to use CO capture as a priority₂ atmospheric,
and in the pdf files which have been made accessible since November 17, 2021 on this thread regarding the energy balances of the ClimeWorks type DAc.

You still have to take the trouble to read them!

In any case easy to find the page here: biofuels/recycling-co2-into-synthetic-fuel-t9275-30.html#p474741

Stirring air requires much less energy than heat to de-adsorb the amines that capture CO₂.

oh there NCSH, we have some stirrings on econology.

[NCSH]

Stirring air requires much less energy than heat to de-adsorb the amines that capture CO₂.

You can continue to sausage, citing studies on this or that point in the chain...
What I would like to see is a diagram of an integrated electrolysis + DAC + e-fuel production process, with the electricity and e-fuel inputs-outputs, at least that would be clear. So much electricity (1), so much e-fuel production (2), (1)/(2) = electricity consumption/liter of e-fuel.
Do you necessarily have this on hand?

Indeed, there are more recent ones.

This comes from the European refining community, the Concawe organization which publishes numerous reports on the environmental aspects of refining, which for 30 years has had to comply with drastic European environmental standards.

Please note that this report was produced in collaboration with... ARAMCO!

Nov 2022 - Rpt_22-17.pdf

Massive production of e-fuels.
Perspective for 2050.

(7.52 million) Downloaded times 124

For those who are not put off by 266 pages of technical English! With numerous diagrams and graphics.

Despite 266 pages, not all options are considered, the Finnish options are missing: only photovoltaic, in the tropics, by far the least expensive of the possibilities.

[sicetaitsimple]

Stirring air requires much less energy than heat to de-adsorb the amines that capture CO₂.

You can continue to sausage, citing studies on this or that point in the chain...
What I would like to see is a diagram of an integrated electrolysis + DAC + e-fuel production process, with the electricity and e-fuel inputs-outputs, at least that would be clear. So much electricity (1), so much e-fuel production (2), (1)/(2) = electricity consumption/liter of e-fuel.
Do you necessarily have this on hand?

Indeed, there are more recent ones.

Thanks for the document. I note that:
- the use of CO2 from “concentrated” sources is more efficient than that from DAC, which confirms what I said above.
-that the theoretical yields of the different possible processes (from page 198) would be roughly between 40 and 50% depending on the product and the process considered, which takes us quite a long way from the 17kWhe/l mentioned previously.

[NCSH]

You can continue to sausage, citing studies on this or that point in the chain...
What I would like to see is a diagram of an integrated electrolysis + DAC + e-fuel production process, with the electricity and e-fuel inputs-outputs, at least that would be clear. So much electricity (1), so much e-fuel production (2), (1)/(2) = electricity consumption/liter of e-fuel.
Do you necessarily have this on hand?

Indeed, there are more recent ones.

Thanks for the document. I note that:
-the use of CO2 from “concentrated” sources is more efficient than that from DAC, which confirms what I said above.
-that the theoretical yields of the different possible processes (from page 198) would be roughly between 40 and 50% depending on the product and the process considered, which takes us quite a long way from the 17kWhe/l mentioned previously.

Certainly, more "efficient".
But in future decades, taking into account climate commitments, it will not be possible to sustain concentrated sources of fossil origin, with the possible exception of fatal carbon dioxide from the manufacture of cement, whose European potential is limited to a maximum of a few dozen Mtep/year, especially since concrete is no longer the preferred construction material (expected shortage of sand...).

Hence the cardinal importance of capturing atmospheric CO2.

The 17 kWhe/liter only concerns Norwegians, thanks to Sunfire's SOEC electrolyzers (80% efficiency, possibility of co-electrolysis, etc.), operating on a 24-hour basis thanks to the hydraulic + wind combination.
Most of the other projects will be wind or wind + PV, with alkaline electrolyzers of 65% efficiency (75 expected in the long term), and therefore 20 to 25 kWhe/liter, or 40 to 50 overall efficiency.

It is therefore sufficient to have abundant renewable electrical resources at low cost.

[sicetaitsimple]

It is therefore sufficient to have abundant renewable electrical resources at low cost.

Well, that says it all.

[Remundo]

20 electric kWh mobilized per liter of fuel in a favorable scenario.

With these same 20 kWh in an electric car, we will be able to cover around 130 km (15 kWh/100km)

But with a single liter of fuel, the same car will consume around 6L/100 km, so only 100/6 = 17 km

It still hurts quite a bit, we have a factor of 130/17 = 8, almost 10.

So we realize that these liters of fuel will be an expensive elixir to be reserved only for uses where fuel is essential.

I think we don't realize how precious current fossil resources are and should not be squandered...

In my opinion, the gasification of organic materials has not said its last word and has the advantage of not mobilizing a lot of electricity. It can use part of the combustion load to power the thermolysis furnace.

[NCSH]

20 electric kWh mobilized per liter of fuel in a favorable scenario.

With these same 20 kWh in an electric car, we will be able to cover around 130 km (15 kWh/100km)

But with a single liter of fuel, the same car will consume around 6L/100 km, so only 100/6 = 17 km

It still hurts quite a bit, we have a factor of 130/17 = 8, almost 10.

So we realize that these liters of fuel will be an expensive elixir to be reserved only for uses where fuel is essential.

I think we don't realize how precious current fossil resources are and should not be squandered...

In my opinion the gasification of organic materials has not said its last word and has the advantage of not mobilizing a lot of electricity. It can use part of the combustion load to power the thermolysis furnace.

Unfortunately, climate change is happening everywhere.
The availability of dry materials, i.e. biomass-energy, will be increasingly threatened in future decades.
Not sure that the quantities remain as large...
Increasingly irregular rainwater, increasingly numerous heatwaves, various insect pests, etc.

Difficult to bet on large quantities of synthetic fuels.

[Remundo]

don't worry NCSH, in France we are not about to run out of organic materials, whether natural or artificial.

In the desert, it's something else of course.