![]() The reactor is made up of a cathode set up to perform oxygen reduction, an oxygen evolution reaction-performing anode and a compact yet porous solid-electrolyte layer that allows efficient ion conduction. “This is great news considering that renewable electricity is becoming more and more cost-effective,” Wang said. Wang noted that the process has “no carbon footprint or a very limited footprint” if powered by electricity from renewable sources such as solar or wind. ![]() “The electricity used to power a 50-watt lightbulb for an hour will yield 10 to 25 liters of high-purity carbon dioxide,” said Peng Zhu, a chemical and biomolecular engineering graduate student and lead author on the study. The reactor developed by Wang and his team can continuously remove carbon dioxide from a simulated flue gas with efficiency above 98% using a relatively low electricity input. We’ve heard from space technology companies interested in using the device on space stations to remove the carbon dioxide astronauts exhale.” “We could, for example, pull carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and continuously inject that concentrated gas into a greenhouse to stimulate plant growth. “The technology can be scaled up to industrial settings ⎯ power plants, chemical plants ⎯ but the great thing about it is that it allows for small-scale use as well: I can even use it in my office,” Wang said. By contrast, the system developed in the Wang lab is a scalable, modular, point-of-use concept that can be adapted to a variety of scenarios. We also don’t need to heat up or pressurize our device, we just need to plug it into a power outlet and it will work.”Īnother drawback of current carbon-capture technologies is their reliance on large-scale, centralized infrastructure. “There are literally no chemicals produced or consumed with our process. For calcium carbonate-based processes you need temperatures as high as 900 Celsius (1652 Fahrenheit). “Traditional amine scrubbing methods require temperatures of 100-200 degrees Celsius (212-392 Fahrenheit). Peng Zhu (left) and Haotian Wang beside their carbon-capture device prototype. “Once the carbon dioxide is trapped in these solvents, you have to regenerate it,” Wang said. Next, the carbon dioxide is regenerated from the solution through heating or by injecting a low-pH liquid. Most carbon-capture systems involve a two-step process: First, high- pH liquids are used to separate the carbon dioxide, which is acidic, from mixed-gas streams such as flue gas. This technological feat could turn direct air capture from fringe industry ⎯ there are only 18 plants currently in operation worldwide ⎯ into a promising front for climate change mitigation. Capturing carbon and then turning it into products isn’t a novel idea.New technology developed by Rice University engineers could lower the cost of capturing carbon dioxide from all types of emissions, a potential game-changer for both industries looking to adapt to evolving greenhouse gas standards and for the emergent energy-transition economy.Īccording to a study published in Nature, the system from the lab of chemical and biomolecular engineer Haotian Wang can directly remove carbon dioxide from sources ranging from flue gas to the atmosphere by using electricity to induce a water-and-oxygen-based electrochemical reaction. That’s hardly an economically viable business. The Business of Capturing CarbonĪ few years ago we asked the question, How Can We Reduce Carbon Dioxide in the Atmosphere? In that article, we looked at a company called Climeworks which was removing carbon for $100-per-ton and selling it for $26 a ton. ![]() We’re looking for an enterprise that can profitably capture carbon and show us a worthwhile ROI. The alternative is to subsidize carbon capture, but that’s not going to scale, nor will it show green tech investors a return on their investment. The amount of carbon that needs to be reduced is so massive that such a lofty goal will only be accomplished if the end solution can generate a profit for investors. You will not be able to capture carbon at scale, and at a sustainable rate, unless you can do so profitably. But here’s something both camps need to consider. The second camp believes that because so much money is being thrown at solutions to reduce carbon, you can’t help but make money by investing in carbon capture technologies. The first camp believes that reducing carbon will save the planet, and therefore we must pursue this mission at all costs, profits be damned. If you’re looking for a carbon capture stock, you might pitch your tent in one of two camps.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |