Chemical Forums

General Forums => Generic Discussion => Topic started by: billnotgatez on April 26, 2007, 05:08:46 PM

Title: Carbon Dioxide Air Capture Technology
Post by: billnotgatez on April 26, 2007, 05:08:46 PM
First Successful Demonstration of Carbon Dioxide Air Capture Technology Achieved

Does this mean we do not have to worry about carbon dioxide any more?
Title: Re: Carbon Dioxide Air Capture Technology
Post by: Donaldson Tan on April 26, 2007, 08:39:18 PM
One of my concerns (as much as a CCS advocate myself) is the effect on the global oxygen balance if air capture is carried out on a massive global scale. Do not forget that green plants swap atmospheric carbon dioxide with oxygen. Oxygen is essential for our survival.
Title: Re: Carbon Dioxide Air Capture Technology
Post by: Yggdrasil on April 26, 2007, 09:00:09 PM
My concern is similar to geo's.  The article advocates using these air capture devices at the point of use (e.g. oil fields, petrochemical plants, areas built for carbon sequestration), but the atmosphere is not a well mixed environment.  I don't know how much carbon dioxide these air capture devices could extract without causing local areas of low carbon dioxide which could be detrimental to plant and other life near air capture centers.
Title: Re: Carbon Dioxide Air Capture Technology
Post by: lemonoman on April 26, 2007, 11:30:44 PM
One of my concerns (as much as a CCS advocate myself) is the effect on the global oxygen balance if air capture is carried out on a massive global scale. Do not forget that green plants swap atmospheric carbon dioxide with oxygen. Oxygen is essential for our survival.

Agreed, but probably nothing to worry about yet.  What we need to do right now is get CO2 concentrations down.  If everyone has one of these, all the government has to do is say, "Okay, we're fine now, turn them off".  In other words, CO2 depletion probably isn't a huge deal at this point lol ... but you're right, too much CO2 disappearing would have CATASTROPHIC consequences, especially on WATER (CO2, after all, is what makes rain, lakes, oceans slightly acidic ... HUGE equilibrium problems would ensue)

My concern is similar to geo's. The article advocates using these air capture devices at the point of use (e.g. oil fields, petrochemical plants, areas built for carbon sequestration), but the atmosphere is not a well mixed environment. I don't know how much carbon dioxide these air capture devices could extract without causing local areas of low carbon dioxide which could be detrimental to plant and other life near air capture centers.

Agree again, totally depends on the capacity of the device.  Horizontal mixing in the atmosphere is PRETTY significant, with winds and everything...
Title: Re: Carbon Dioxide Air Capture Technology
Post by: billnotgatez on April 28, 2007, 01:08:40 AM
You would require that they be used at the point of excess carbon dioxide production. The producers would then be carbon dioxide neutral. That way they would not pay a carbon dioxide release tax. Over capture would not be the issue.

More to the point is that there is no free lunch. The cost to create the energy would be greater and would be passed on to the consumer. That would make many of the consumers effectively poorer. The quality of life would decrease.

By the way on another list I belong to the main detractor stated that this process seemed not to be very robust.

Title: Re: Carbon Dioxide Air Capture Technology
Post by: Donaldson Tan on April 28, 2007, 02:59:01 AM
There will be a point in time when we have start to synthesise oxygen from all the captured/stored carbon dioxide. Carbon sink is still the best approach to capturing and storing carbon dioxide now. Somehow, we have to accelerate photosynthesis, or we have to introduce micro-organisms to carbon storage sites which can reduce carbon dioxide to methanes over time.
Title: Re: Carbon Dioxide Air Capture Technology
Post by: AllanTugwellRoberts on September 07, 2007, 04:44:59 PM
I need Funding (beleve it or not) for the following project I have patent pending on, can you write me back or direct me to a forum I can post on.  Here are ~my~ carbon dioxide recyclers project I have been patenting. If you think my multi-media is entertaining or you know of some one with funding for a project such as this please call or write me.  And also, Very~Very cool web site it is the most important informative web site I have view in my life. Pretty soon, we will all be carbon dioxide recyclers thanks to you!!!! keep up the awesome work. Just print it out on paper and read the presentation while I explain it to you. you have to decompress the files first, they are WMA- windows media player
Patent Pending US11/806,097
Allan Tugwell Roberts


5104 Arrit Ct.

Burke, VA 22015 USA

Attn: To whom it may concern

Below is a 15 minute presentation on “Carbon Dioxide Recycler”. Here is a little bit about my self.  I am a plumbing apprentice licensed in the state of Virginia.  Just last year, I finished Plumbing 3 with the Adult Center for Education program. The main focus of the class taught me to study the “International Fuel & Gas Code 2006” book. I have been going to school in the USA from 5 years old and I am 27 years old now.  I was born here in Fairfax Virginia in 1980. Next year I plan to finish Plumbing 4 and take the “Master’s Plumbing” test to become a plumbing engineer.  I have been in commercial and residential construction for 10 years.  When I was 17 I got my GED at Montgomery County Conservation Corps in Montgomery County Maryland.  I have also gone to school at Northern Virginia Community college where I learned how to become a “Music Production Artist”.  I have been a musician all my life and have been playing guitar for 13 years.  I have been a professional music producer for 5 years and have made over 400 Logic Audio tracks. If you have any questions or requests, call me or email me, and I will be glad to help you with what ever you need.

Allan Tugwell Roberts

 Track 1 Presentation 1                                                                                                           


Carbon Dioxide-

 Carbon dioxide molecules consist of two oxygen atoms that are covalently joined to a central carbon atom. The three atoms lie in a line covalently in every quarter. The central carbon atom is a sphere drawn at the scale of the carbon covalent radius just touching two oxygen atoms drawn at the scale of their covalent radii.

The carbon dioxide emissions are considered a major threat to the Earth because of their capacity modify the climate by insulating the surface and so creating a green house effect.  C02 and the greenhouse effect are representations of the burning of petroleum fuels which there is a major cause of increased atmospheric pollution. There is a major debate of how the future energy resources of the world will be distributed to the super-powers.





What are carbon dioxides? Carbon dioxides, contrary to popular belief, are renewable resources and fuels and can be recycled and re-used in sequestering plants all over the United States. Unhealthy air pollution and heat-trapping emissions of carbon dioxides in the atmosphere should be curbed and are causing global warming. Construction of carbon dioxide recycling plants has been going on for years. Our government has been taking radical steps to reduce carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere.

One of the number one ways that carbon dioxide molecules are released into the atmosphere is from the burning of petroleum based fuels in Internal Combustion Engines. We have been burning petroleum fuels for years and they have been our society’s propellants of the industrial and computer age. Many people believe that CO2 (carbon-dioxide) is a harmful waste product and they are right. However many of us do not know that it can be recycled.

The first step in making a CO2 recycler is to compress the CO2 molecules in air borne exhaust emissions until they liquefy, at the same time removing the excess heat. The CO2 gas exhaust emissions will liquefy once they are pressurized to 870 pounds of pressure per square inch at room temperature. Next, the pressure of the liquid is reduced by sending it through an expansion valve into an empty chamber. Some of the liquid will turn into gas causing what is left over to cool. When the temperature drops to -109.3°F, the temperature of frozen C02, some of it will freeze creating snow. This dry ice snow is then compressed together under a press to form blocks or extruded into various sized pellets. Dry ice is heavier and weighs about double the weight of traditional ice. The left over excess of dry ice pellets or snow will be deposited in a removable container in the trunk or rear portion of the car next to the gas tank. This excess will be put in the recycling depository located at the gas station, then trucked away to CO2 recycling plants where it will be stored or used in sequestration processes.

Track 2 Presentation 2

How to turn 6 pounds (1 gallon) of gasoline into 20 pounds of dry ice:

 One gallon of gas weighs about 6.25 pounds. The weight fluctuates with temperature and octane. Octane contains 8 carbon atoms and 18 hydrogen atoms.  Carbon has a molecular weight of 12 and hydrogen has a molecular weight of 1, so octane has a total molecular weight of 114 (8 x 12 + 18 x 1).  Oxygen has a molecular weight of 16, while CO2 has a total molecular weight of 44 (12 + 16 + 16). Every molecule of octane makes eight molecules of CO2, with a total molecular weight of 352 (44 x 8).

6.25 pounds x (352 / 114) = 19.3 pounds

In other words, say the average internal combustion engine uses 10 gallons of gas a week, multiply the numbers by 10(62.5 pounds x (3520 / 1140) = 193 pounds) and you have a internal combustion engine that produces 193 pounds of dry ice per tank a week.

The cost of dry ice per pound

 On the internet, the cost of dry ice ranges any where from $.22 cents to $1 a pound in pellets, snow, nuggets or blocks.  Assume the average internal combustion engine burns 10 gallons of gas a week and could produce $42.26 - $193 (193 pounds x $.22; 193 pounds $1) in extra revenue a week.                                     

$42.26 - $193(193 pounds x $.22; 193 pounds $1)

 If the average consumer spends $3.00 a gallon on gasoline and burns 10 gallons a week that’s $30.00 a week.             

$42.26 - $193 a week/per tank VS $30.00 a week per tank

The average consumer is wasting a vast amount of this natural resource into the environment, and some one should inform them. Instead of an average consumer they could be an average natural resource recycler. 

Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

The Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is an amendment to the international treaty on climate change, assigning mandatory emission limitations for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to the signatory nations. The objective of the protocol is the “stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.” As of December 2006, a total of 168 countries and other governmental entities have ratified the agreement. Notable exceptions include the United States and Australia. Other countries, like India and China, which have ratified the protocol, are not required to reduce carbon emissions under the present agreement. There is some debate about the usefulness of the protocol, and there have been some cost-benefit studies performed.


Cost Benefit Analysis is an economic tool to aid social decision-making, and is typically used by governments to evaluate the desirability of a given intervention in markets. The aim is to gauge the efficiency of the intervention relative to the status quo. The costs and benefits of the impacts of an intervention are evaluated in terms of the public's willingness to pay for them or willingness to pay to avoid them. Inputs are typically measured in terms of opportunity costs - the value in their best alternative use. The guiding principle is to list all of the parties affected by an intervention, and place a monetary value of the effect it has on their welfare as it would be valued by them.

The process involves monetary value of initial and ongoing expenses vs. expected return. Constructing plausible measures of the costs and benefits of specific actions is often very difficult. In practice analysts try to estimate costs and benefits either by using survey methods, or by drawing inferences from market behavior. For example, a product manager may compare manufacturing and marketing expenses to projected sales for a proposed product, and only decide to produce it if he expects the revenues to eventually recoup the costs. Cost-benefit analysis attempts to put all relevant costs and benefits on a common temporal footing. A discount rate is chosen, which is then used to compute all relevant future costs and benefits in present-value terms. Most commonly, the discount rate used for present-value calculations is an interest rate taken from financial markets. This can be very controversial - for example, a high discount rate implies a very low value on the welfare of future generations, which may have a huge impact on the desirability of interventions to help the environment. Cost-benefit calculations typically involve using time value of money formula. This is usually done by converting the future expected streams of costs and benefits to a present value amount.

Track 3 Presentation 3


This invention relates to a method and apparatus for creating carbon dioxide exhaust recycling and recovery system for use with internal combustion engines. These engines will not only provide a high fuel efficiency reduced emissions power plant, but also complete the second half of the industrialization process; namely the cleaning up of industrial waste exhaust emissions produced when power is generated. These new engines exhaust systems will not only be used for reducing emissions and providing better fuel economy, but will also in turn boost world wide economic growth.  They will be a combination of technological industrial and computer adaptations forming together to make the next generation of internal combustion engines.  They will provide recyclable dry ice to the world’s petroleum starved economy.  New developing technologies are on the rise that can capture energy from the sun, convert it to electrical energy, and split carbon dioxide into carbon monoxide and oxygen using a gallium phosphide semi-conductor(US patent numbers 20010010375, 4228455). The number one pollutant in green house gases (carbon dioxide) would be turned back into its fuel form, carbon monoxide. Just imagine the benefit of being able to re-cycle gasoline by all three branches of the economic spectrum. Give more resources back to the consumer at a reduced rate, giving more availability to the big gas businesses to provide them, and governmental systems will have more economic growth based on them.

How to make a carbon dioxide recycler on an internal combustion engine:

As exhaust carbon dioxide, nitrogen and oxygen emissions are exiting from the catalytic converter on the high efficiency reduced emissions internal combustion engine(US patent number 6968678), before entering the muffler, an air-return vacuum will be installed. 

The said exhaust will flow through the air-return vacuum into the muffler through the air pump into the compression tank, where will be compressed to 870 psi.  Upon entering the compression tank, the exhaust carbon dioxide emissions will liquefy. The other lighter inert gasses nitrogen and oxygen, which are naturally occurring in our atmosphere, will be expelled through individual computerized flow rate control EGR valves at the top of the compression tank, and/or be routed to be expelled out a single directional emergency exhaust pipe into the atmosphere. Because the naturally occurring oxygen and nitrogen rise to the top of the compression chamber due to their lower atomic weights and boiling points (oxygen atomic weight 15.999, boiling point -297.2 °F, nitrogen atomic weight 14.007, boiling point -320.42 °F) than C02, (atomic weight 44, boiling point -108.4°F) they can either be re-cycled through the engine via the EGR valve and its devices, or expelled into the atmosphere.  The specifications of the routing of the exhaust emissions are to be decided by the engines manufacturer.

After liquefaction of the carbon dioxide, a computerized flow rate control expansion valve would exhume the liquid C02 into the re-expansion chamber where 46% of it will flash solidify into dry ice.  The remaining 54% will be recycled back through the bi-directional exhaust recirculation line similar to an exhaust pipe via the air-return vacuum. 

Attached to the re-expansion chamber will be a one way (out only) exhaust pipe that will be used as an emergency exhaust line in case of failure of one of the systems devices (i.e. the air pump failure).  In the case that one of the devices mentioned in the system fails, the air-return vacuum will automatically shut off, and the exhaust will automatically exit the system through the bi-directional exhaust re-circulation line, then the expansion chamber, then the one way tail pipe.  In order to accomplish automatic shut-off of the air-return vacuum and air compression pump, a computerized warning system will have to be installed.  The sole purpose will be to warn the operator of the status of the exhaust system upon occurrence of system failure. 

Upon entering the re-expansion chamber the dry ice will be extruded into blocks similar to those in a conventional refrigerator ice tray, or formed under a press into cubes or rectangles.  It can also be formed by similar devices into pellets or snow, depending on the design of the engines manufacturer. 

When the engine is turned off, after normal operation, the immediate removal of the dry ice from the system for recycling purposes will be recommended. In the event that the left over dry ice in the re-expansion chamber has not been taken out immediately for recycling, the air-return vacuum and air compression pump will turn back on in case of sublimation (melting) of the dry ice back in to gaseous state.  When (wheather) the air return vacuum and air compression pump turn back on after engine shutoff is to be determined by the engines manufacturer. However, the flow control rate expansion valve will remain off until restarting the engine. Dry ice has a 10% sublimation ratio which means it will lose 5-10 pounds from a 200 pound block in 24 hours.  Sublimation emissions will also go out the single directional (out only) tail pipe into the atmosphere, but it will be recommended that the whole exhaust system maintain a pressure capability of  870 pounds or more psi so as not to lose any CO2 into the atmosphere. This would mean that the single directional tail pipe will have a pressure locking mechanism which activates upon shutting off the engine.

All of the said devices mentioned in the description above will have to be designed by the individual engine manufacturers to fit the size of their engines.  For example a 10 gallon gas tank engine will have a 193 pound or larger volume compression tank depending on the amount of the exhaust gas sublimation emissions recycled after engine shutoff.

Title: Re: Carbon Dioxide Air Capture Technology
Post by: enahs on September 11, 2007, 08:41:18 PM
What are you going to do with all the dry ice? Once you flood the market with that much dry ice, or even liquid CO2, the price will drop exponentially. You will also then be making more solid and liquid CO2 then needed in all the industries that use it. You then have this excess solid and liquid CO2 that will just return to gaseous form, no?

Also, the compressing of the CO2 is a very energy demanding process; so you will require more fuel to be used in order to get the same work output to the other system as compared to not compressing the CO2.

Title: Re: Carbon Dioxide Air Capture Technology
Post by: tasmodevil44 on June 25, 2008, 02:43:15 PM
I don't completely agree with concerns by geodome and others that too much localized carbon dioxide removal will be harmful to plant life.The wind and atmospheric currents are always blowing.Even on a perfectly calm and stagnant day invisible currents are still moving to stirr-up and circulate carbon dioxide.

      And furthermore,green plants can handle concentrations in parts-per-million far lower than pre-industrial levels without any harm.They would probably just grow a little slower.

      Not to mention the fact that humanity's voracious appetite for carbon-based fuels is so great(China and India and all those other places rapidly industrializing and plenty more cars) that we may have plenty of difficulty dealing with all the new emissions as it is.. for some time until global warming can at least be slowed-down some.So I think plant life in localized areas of carbon dioxide removal will still do just fine. 
Title: Re: Carbon Dioxide Air Capture Technology
Post by: tasmodevil44 on June 25, 2008, 02:53:52 PM
As for oxygen for people and animals,that too does not seem to be a major problem.As long as we can get cracking on biomass renewables and other energy alternatives instead of continually digging-up more carbon and burning it.

      So therefore,I don't see how we could come anywhere close to depleting oxygen either.. anytime soon by carbon dioxide removal and sequestration.And the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere is still far greater than carbon dioxide.
Title: Re: Carbon Dioxide Air Capture Technology
Post by: tasmodevil44 on July 08, 2008, 05:04:03 PM
Carbon dioxide air capture technology,did you say?

      Shhh ! ! ! very quiet...billnotgatez, don't talk like that...borek and enahs will think you're trying to be a perpetual motion crackpot attempting to get more energy out of it than put in ! ! ! Heh,heh,heh...LOL ! ! !  :D
Title: Re: Carbon Dioxide Air Capture Technology
Post by: AllanTugwellRoberts on October 10, 2009, 02:06:53 AM
Regardless of the the global warming,  you can produce 19.3 pounds of dry ice by burning 6.7 pounds(one gallon) of gasoline by using the compression/flash solidification method.  If you give a dollar value to everything, saying 1 pound is worth 1 dollar, then your return is 11.6 dollars(pounds) per gallon..
Title: Re: Carbon Dioxide Air Capture Technology
Post by: doc30 on December 09, 2009, 02:24:17 PM
Well, the EPA did announce yesterday that CO2 is a dangerous pollutant and a threat to health. I guess we need to suck it out of the air in order to protect the rain forests.