Chemists changing carbon dioxide into hydrocarbons

[ThierrySan]

For my part, I greatly respect research and it still proves that we do not know all the processes acting in nature ... But, I think it is a discovery that deserves its weight in gold !!
What's the point?! Quite simply to succeed in reprocessing CO2 directly at the factory chimneys as mentioned in the text. Now they are looking to improve performance and I am convinced that one day we will be able to reprocess almost all of what is produced !!
All the more, that another American study succeeded in concatenating several molecules of hydrocarbons of short length towards molecules of hydrocarbons of longer lengths (see in the 12 to 15 atoms of carbon, if I remember correctly! !)

I take my hat off to science, because it is among other things thanks to it that man advances ... even if science sometimes does bad things, we must recognize that it also does beautiful things !! As in cancer too for example ...

[Cuicui]

In theory, researchers believe that this material should be able to reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere 300 times more effectively than plants. I do not know if the figures given are realistic, but 300 times more efficient than natural photosynthesis, that makes you dream ...
On the other hand, it will be necessary to explain to me how they intend to do photosynthesis at the outlet of the exhaust pipe since they need solar energy .... it would surprise me that the surface of the roof a car is sufficient. But hey it's encouraging isn't it?

It is true that the yield of photosynthesis is extremely low. A process allowing 300 x more efficient use of solar energy would indeed be interesting. When will the solar collectors produce our fuel with CO2 from the atmosphere?

[ThierrySan]

It's clear!! A refinery each at home ?!

This is the war with OPEC ...

[Targol]

I take my hat off to science, because it is among other things thanks to it that man advances ... even if science sometimes does bad things, we must recognize that it also does beautiful things !! As in cancer too for example ...

but hey it's encouraging isn't it?
what if science finally got us out of the climate mess?

Here are 2 sentences that I can't help but comment on.
Since science (or technology, the two being intimately linked) came into being, certain discoveries and inventions of a century have the main purpose of repairing the results of the inventions of the previous century.

Take the example of ThierrySan: indeed, advances in medicine mean that we are now able to treat certain cancers. But if we start to ask the question of who (or what) caused this rise in the disease, we come across inventions (or discoveries) from the previous century: asbestos, food additives, cigarettes, the car, ....

For Pollux, I would remind you that the concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere are the result of industries and cars. All 2 issues, at one time or another of this same science.

Now, to refocus on the subject, let's take a closer look at how these marvels of technology work.

With nanoparticles.

How much one bet that not mastering this diffusion of these technos will be responsible for the next great challenge of medicine?

Let's be clear, I'm not anti-scientist. I just wish,

• from time to time, scientists replace the question "How ...?" by the question "Why ...?"
• marketing decisions are not always governed only by questions of cash.

Science without conscience is only ruin of the soul.

... he could have added "and the planet"

[ThierrySan]

I agree with you Targol

I am not for progress at all costs either!
I am for reflected progress. And precisely, in this case there, a project of European route carried by French, by a person whom I do not like bcp, but whose project greatly delighted me brought modifications on the studies of the new products on the market . I don't know if any of you have heard of it ...

This required that each new product created, we give a list of toxic agents. If no study had been done, the company had to give a study plan to study the positive and negative aspects, and those that were negative had to be improved after a certain time ... Finally, something like that...

I find the idea very good because in our time it might be time to not only praise the merits of a product but also its inconveniences ... If we go this way, we become fast and we are quickly showing of the finger as anti-commercial!
However, we will avoid having suspicious products on the market, only in order to make cash!

[zac]

And precisely, in this case there, a project of European route carried by French, by a person whom I do not like bcp, but whose project greatly delighted me brought modifications on the studies of the new products on the market . I don't know if any of you have heard of it ...

This required that each new product created, we give a list of toxic agents.

Hello

on the bottom you have reason but read the bill well and you will see which has no bearing on the chemical industry but which blocks all the little ones who would like to make their organic products or other (see the shot of the nettle manure ).

example: I stock vegetable oil, I have the right. I put soda in it to make soap, I no longer even have the right to have it at home without going through the mysteries of the administration.
infinancable by a small business or an individual.

If you want to make things happen there are only 2 solutions: black or exile !!!!!!!

@+

[Christine]

+1 with Targol and ThierrySan. It is better not to make dross than to have to clean them - well unless you are a seller of cleaning machines... it's confusing but I understand myself

a european loie project

Without doubt the REACH project. If I understood correctly, it would no longer be for the regulatory authorities to prove that a product is dangerous to ban it, but for the chemical industries to prove that a product is harmless if they want authorization to market it. . It is much more logical and the costs are no longer borne by taxpayers but by manufacturers.

[renaud67]

Hello,
in general the price of a product placed on the market includes the whole development cycle, if there is a new stage in the cycle, the price will certainly change (increase).
That said, I find the approach to require the industrialist to prove "his good faith" of good quality !! It is also necessary that the counterpart in case of error of the latter is dissuasive ... to be continued

[FPLM]

Crack CO2 to make fuel to burn it and make CO2 that must be cracked in fuel, ... Pfff.

For the moment, I do not know of any industrial process that can operate in a closed circuit while remaining profitable.
Remember that hell is paved with good intentions.

On the other hand, cracking the CO2 to emit dioxygen while waiting for the trees that we have massacred to regrow, yes because that will reduce the greenhouse effect, it would be our mea culpa and the cost of this operation the final argument to get out of our production of polluting and obsolete energies. On the other hand, I am in favor of putting the carbon back where it comes from. Nature and time will recycle it and everything will return to normal.
I had heard of a CO2 "ice" torpedo project that would be propelled to the bottom of the ocean, huge cost of the operation and hypothetical chance of success. The carbon alone can be agglomerated in solid form without risk of sublimation or evaporation and therefore burying becomes easier to achieve.

[Capt_Maloche]

CO2?

It is one of the greenhouse gases, and so much the better.
methane has an important action too, so instead of letting go, burn it

remember that the first greenhouse gas is ... water vapor, eh yes, clouds what

You can see it in winter, it is much milder in overcast weather than clear sky

The CO2 emissions have a share on the variations of T °, ​​but are all quite modest, but the balance and that's what we have to talk about, is in any case precarious

There is another, much more influential reason for the rapid changes in temperature.
see here https://www.econologie.com/forums/nouveau-ra ... t2991.html

http://rustyjames.canalblog.com/tag/La%20persistance%20de%20l%E2%80%99inactivit%C3%A9%20solaire%20a%20conduit%20la%20NASA%20%C3%A0%20publi

This discovery of NASA could well revise all the IPCC theories because if we know that this mechanism of solar tasks remains unexplained to this day, we know that there is an indisputable correlation between solar activity and climate, as Maunder discovered by associating the small ice age with the absence of sunspots, between 1645 and 1715, which had been observed at that time. time.

http://www.amanchure.com/?p=895
Solar spots at the maximum of the cycle (left) and at least (right).


Ultraviolet filter:

And our sun has shown exemplary inactivity for 3 years, to the point that, as you have surely noticed, our winters have been getting harder and harder for 3 years (see the weather DJUs in France)

Which seems more likely in the medium term according to the surveys of the ice cores over a period of 800 00 years (I posted this somewhere on the forum) is the return of a 70-year cyclical ice age interspersed with 000-year breaks favorable to the development of life like the one we have been living in for ... 10 years.