Can CO2 be turned into a usable fuel - (economically?) - article in NEW Scientist

[JohnWxy]

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20227054.300-how-to-turn-greenhouse-gas-into-a-clean-fuel.html


CONVERTING a greenhouse gas into a clean-burning fuel offers two benefits for the price of one. That's the thinking behind a novel process for converting carbon dioxide into methanol at room temperature, developed by a team at the Institute of Bioengineering and Nanotechnology in Singapore (Angewandte Chemie International Edition, DOI: 10.1002/anie.200806058).

Molecules of CO2 are very stable, so processes that convert the gas to methanol normally require high temperatures and pressure. They also use catalysts containing toxic metal ions. "Our catalyst isn't toxic, and the reaction happens rapidly at room temperature," says team leader Jackie Ying.

The catalyst used by Ying's team is a type of chemical called an N-heterocyclic carbene (NHC). The mechanism by which the NHC speeds up the conversion is uncertain, but it appears to change the shape of the CO2 molecule, "activating" it in a way that makes it easier for hydrogen to bond with its carbon atom, says team member Yugen Zhang.

The catalyst may also help to release hydrogen from hydrosilane molecules, which are the source of hydrogen in the new process. Hydrosilane is an expensive chemical usually used to make computer chips, so the team wants to find a cheaper source.

(more)

[kristopher]

1. So their answer is "No."

[plcdude]

2. feed it to

algae and they will make lipids out of it.

[Ready4Change]

3. No mention of energy input required.

I cry foul.

I certainly think that taking CO2 from the air and converting it to fuel is a winning idea. But I've no illusions that this can be done without some form of energy input in greater quantities that what the resulting fuel can produce. Basic laws of thermodynamics require this, and nothing we have ever found can break those laws.

So the real issue here isn't 'can this be done?' Given enough time and energy it certainly can be done.

The question is, 'can it be done efficiently enough to be useful?' If this is so inefficient that we have to build twice as many coal plants as we currently need, then it does us no good. The article says NOTHING about efficiency of conversion