Making Gasoline from Carbon Dioxide

A solar-powered reaction turns a greenhouse gas into a valuable raw material.

Chemists have shown that it is possible to use solar energy, paired with the right catalyst, to convert carbon dioxide into a raw material for making a wide range of products, including plastics and gasoline.

Researchers at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), recently demonstrated that light absorbed and converted into electricity by a silicon electrode can help drive a reaction that converts carbon dioxide into carbon monoxide and oxygen. Carbon monoxide is a valuable commodity chemical that is widely used to make plastics and other products, says Clifford Kubiak, professor of chemistry at UCSD. It is also a key ingredient in a process for making synthetic fuels, including syngas (a mixture largely of carbon monoxide and hydrogen), methanol, and gasoline.

...snip....

At least at first, such a process will not make a significant impact on reducing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere--that would take quite large-scale operations, Kubiak says. But "any chemical process that you can develop that uses CO2 as a feedstock, rather than having it be an end product, is probably worth doing." He adds that "if chemical manufacturers are going to make millions of pounds of plastics anyway, why not make them from greenhouse gases rather than making tons of greenhouse gases in the process?"

It is very promising to see us be able to turn a negative into a positive. This is what industry should be designed around.

If we could revive the Thomas Gold/abiotic oil theory, energy needs start looking a little further away.

Making Gasoline from Bacteria

The biofuel of the future could well be gasoline. That's the hope of one biotech startup that on Monday described for the first time how it is coaxing bacteria into producing hydrocarbons that could be processed into fuels like those made from petroleum.

....snip.....

Producing hydrocarbon fuels is more efficient than producing ethanol, del Cardayre adds, because the former packs about 30 percent more energy per gallon. And it takes less energy to produce, too. The ethanol produced by yeast needs to be distilled to remove the water, so ethanol production requires 65 percent more energy than hydrocarbon production does.

The U.S. Department of Energy has set a goal of replacing 30 percent of current petroleum use with fuels from renewable biological sources by 2030, and del Cardayre says he feels that's easily achievable.

BP has bought into this fairly largely, as well. They are paying to have the bacteria located in oil reserves analysed to see if more clean burning fuels can be created (or, so that is what is claimed. Environmental concerns are not normally the motive of big oil).

Thanks for these 2 articles big.

Am I missung something here, (probably), I know this gets right into the conspiracy vein but what about Stan Meyer's work.

Surely fuel from water has to be the most elegant answer, even if the equipment to use it was under lease there would be income for the fuel companies who produce a viable setup.

Clearly I have not reserched this in any depth, I may do this sometime.

reply to post by sherpa



Honestly? Yeah, the technology in this thread sucks compared to water cars. That sucks compared to other threads i have.

I am trying to get some alternative energy ideas pumped into this forum. At least then people are ignorant due to their own choice.

We don't have to settle for the way it is. It CAN and SHOULD be better.

If you have anything on the water power, let me know.

This is a good topic. We in catalysis have long been trying various options. I list a few:

CO2 + H2 --> methanol

CO2 + H2 --> hydrocarbons (oil)

CO2 + H2 --> methane (natural gas)

CO2 + CH4 --> CH3COOH

CO2 + CH4 --> CO + H2 + H2O, CO + H2 --> Hydrocarbons, methanol, etc.

The only problem is that CO2 is at the low bottom of the energy scale. In order to incorporate CO2 into the high energy compounds, a lot of energy is needed to conduct the reactions.

That is why we need breakthrough in solar or nuclear.

reply to post by fuelcell


The first link in this thread discusses a breakthrough in solar, which you refer to needing above.

The "new" breakthrough comes from some of the newfound/newly applied properties of silica.

Researchers at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), recently demonstrated that light absorbed and converted into electricity by a silicon electrode can help drive a reaction that converts carbon dioxide into carbon monoxide and oxygen.