A Unicorn (Cambridge scientists create fuel from CO2)

[agricola]

Somewhat incredible, this:

Cambridge scientists turn pollution into fuel in climate breakthrough

Solar-powered reactor takes inspiration from photosynthesis to turn CO2 into car fuel

www.independent.co.uk

 

[A380]

Paywall innit.


But isn’t this what plants do? Use sunlight to turn CO2 into water and sugar?

 

[PTK]

I have copied and pasted the article.​

Cambridge scientists turn pollution into fuel in climate breakthrough​

Solar-powered reactor takes inspiration from photosynthesis to turn CO2 into car fuel​

Anthony Cuthbertson
Friday 14 February 2025 16:36 GMT


Scientists have developed a solar-powered device that can pull pollution from the air and convert it directly into fuel for cars and planes.
The new reactor, built by a team from the University of Cambridge, takes its inspiration from photosynthesis, requiring no cables or batteries in order to turn atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) into syngas.

The researchers say the reactor offers a new solution to the climate crisis, providing an alternative to current Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technologies.

​

CCS has been touted as a way of slowing down or even reversing the worst effects of climate change, with the UK government recently committing £22 billion to the technology.
Current CCS methods have been criticised for being too energy-intensive, and for not recycling the captured CO2. Safety concerns have also been raised about storing pressurised CO2 underground.

https://news.reassured.co.uk/articl...nvXFV75WCfoowYG56IBnCDQvkwo0v_w2OSAl8IVMK-WPg
“What if instead of pumping the carbon dioxide underground, we made something useful from it? said Dr Sayan Kar from Cambridge’s Yusuf Hamied Department of Chemistry.

“CO2 is a harmful greenhouse gas, but it can also be turned into useful chemicals without contributing to global warming... If we made these devices at scale, they could solve two problems at once: removing CO2 from the atmosphere and creating a clean alternative to fossil fuels.”
The device works by soaking up CO2 from the air at night through specialised filters, then using sunlight during the day to start a chemical reaction to convert it into syngas, which can serve as an alternative to gasoline.

​

Syngas can also be used to create chemicals and pharmaceutical products, while the ease of use would allow individuals living and working in remote locations to create their own fuel.
“Instead of continuing to dig up and burn fossil fuels to produce the products we have come to rely on, we can get all the CO2 we need directly from the air and reuse it,” said Professor Erwin Reisner, who led the research.

​

“We can build a circular, sustainable economy – if we have the political will to do it.”

https://web.theecoexperts.com/windo...nvXFV75WCfoowYG56IBnCDv7T4ovqSB-Zvxv4kjMK-WPg

The device was detailed in a study, titled ‘Direct air capture of CO2 for solar fuel production in flow’, published in the journal Nature Energy.
The scientists are now hoping to commercialise the technology through the support of Cambridge Enterprise.

 

[xenon]

Paywall innit.


But isn’t this what plants do? Use sunlight to turn CO2 into water and sugar?

I was able to read it but try sticking the URL in archive.ph otherwise.

Sounds very promising but as always.

How well can it scale.
Can it break even in terms of investment to build such a plant.

Got to be worth seriously looking at building a commercial scale proof of concept.


A very quick read on syngas suggests it's difficult / possibly expensive to clean and turn into products. But so are oil petrol and plastic products if you honestly look at their whole life externalities.

 

[lazythursday]

I had a scan of this and associated paper. I'm a bit none the wiser as I'm not a chemist, but the questions it raises for me are:

Scaled up, how much carbon dioxide would likely be absorbed over a year by a typical plant? (I suspect it might be a drop in the ocean)

How much land would be required per plant, and therefore how much per tonne of CO2? (So often these solutions require too much land)

What are the byproducts of burning the produced 'syngas?

 

[WouldBe]

What are the byproducts of burning the produced 'syngas?

CO2 and water.

Does nothing to reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.

 

[Idaho]

The question is how much energy is used to do this, and where does that energy come from?

 

[Winot]

The question is how much energy is used to do this, and where does that energy come from?

^ this

 

[SpookyFrank]

Paywall innit.


But isn’t this what plants do? Use sunlight to turn CO2 into water and sugar?

Sugar and oxygen. The process consumes water.

 

[SpookyFrank]

The question is how much energy is used to do this, and where does that energy come from?

Solar powered reactor, so I'm guessing the answer to your question is 'the sun'.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Scaled up, how much carbon dioxide would likely be absorbed over a year by a typical plant? (I suspect it might be a drop in the ocean)

Well none, because all that carbon will end up back in the atmosphere when the fuel is burnt.

But net zero carbon is a big improvement on 'net shitloads' which is what we get from petrol and diesel.

 

[PTK]

The article says: "The researchers say the reactor offers a new solution to the climate crisis, providing an alternative to current Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technologies."

It is not an alternative to CCS, though. (Accepting for a moment that CCS is viable). Carbon Capture and Storage reduces the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, whereas this new technology does not.

 

[xenon]

CO2 and water.

Does nothing to reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.

The article says: "The researchers say the reactor offers a new solution to the climate crisis, providing an alternative to current Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technologies."

It is not an alternative to CCS, though. (Accepting for a moment that CCS is viable). Carbon Capture and Storage reduces the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, whereas this new technology does not.

Using this process though, is it definite that any syngas used as fuel releases the same amount of Co2 into the atmosphere as has been consumed in it's production. I know fuck all about chemistry....

If it can be used to create plastics, other products which currently are derived from oil, that's in it's favour too.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Using this process though, is it definite that any syngas used as fuel releases the same amount of Co2 into the atmosphere as has been consumed in it's production. I know fuck all about chemistry....

Assuming the energy powering the machine is coming from somewhere carbon neutral, yes. The natural photosynthesis/respiration cycle doesn't in itself change the concentration of carbon in the atmosphere for the same reason.

There will be embedded carbon emissions from anything you build using diesel-powered machines, but the same is true of wind turbines and whatever else.

 

[Crispy]

Have read the paper as well as I can. The main innovation is the night-capture, day-process part which lets them greatly concentrate the captured CO2 without having to expend much energy. The conversion to H2 and CO (syngas) is an existing process, made easier by the higher CO2 concentration. They use ethyl glycol as the H donor; water would be simpler, but the reaction is less efficient.

Syngas isn't an amazing fuel, mind you - about half the energy density of natural gas - so it would need a fair bit of processing before being useful in vehicles or power plants.

 

[lazythursday]

Given that this is basically just a renewable fuel, no carbon removal involved really, they would have to show how this is more efficient/scalable than green hydrogen I guess.

But seems one of those magical new techs that is less impressive the more you delve.

 

[tim]

Given that this is basically just a renewable fuel, no carbon removal involved really, they would have to show how this is more efficient/scalable than green hydrogen I guess.

But seems one of those magical new techs that is less impressive the more you delve.

Being more efficien/scalable than green hydrogen does not seem to be a particularly high bar to jump, going by the little that I have read ( probably on threads here) on the topic

 

[Pickman's model]

I have copied and pasted the article.​

Cambridge scientists turn pollution into fuel in climate breakthrough​

Solar-powered reactor takes inspiration from photosynthesis to turn CO2 into car fuel​

Anthony Cuthbertson
Friday 14 February 2025 16:36 GMT


Scientists have developed a solar-powered device that can pull pollution from the air and convert it directly into fuel for cars and planes.
The new reactor, built by a team from the University of Cambridge, takes its inspiration from photosynthesis, requiring no cables or batteries in order to turn atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) into syngas.

The researchers say the reactor offers a new solution to the climate crisis, providing an alternative to current Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technologies.

​

CCS has been touted as a way of slowing down or even reversing the worst effects of climate change, with the UK government recently committing £22 billion to the technology.
Current CCS methods have been criticised for being too energy-intensive, and for not recycling the captured CO2. Safety concerns have also been raised about storing pressurised CO2 underground.

Compare Over 50s Life Insurance Quotes
“What if instead of pumping the carbon dioxide underground, we made something useful from it? said Dr Sayan Kar from Cambridge’s Yusuf Hamied Department of Chemistry.

“CO2 is a harmful greenhouse gas, but it can also be turned into useful chemicals without contributing to global warming... If we made these devices at scale, they could solve two problems at once: removing CO2 from the atmosphere and creating a clean alternative to fossil fuels.”
The device works by soaking up CO2 from the air at night through specialised filters, then using sunlight during the day to start a chemical reaction to convert it into syngas, which can serve as an alternative to gasoline.

​

Syngas can also be used to create chemicals and pharmaceutical products, while the ease of use would allow individuals living and working in remote locations to create their own fuel.
“Instead of continuing to dig up and burn fossil fuels to produce the products we have come to rely on, we can get all the CO2 we need directly from the air and reuse it,” said Professor Erwin Reisner, who led the research.

​

“We can build a circular, sustainable economy – if we have the political will to do it.”

https://web.theecoexperts.com/windows-for-a-shocking-price/?utm_campaign=44092440&utm_content=4092843455&cid=67adf54be383d&utm_source=taboola&utm_medium=cpc&campaign=WIN-UK-EE-MC-M-RON-All-Launch&platform=Desktop&utm_term=Cheapest+Way+To+Get+New+Windows+if+You+Own+a+Home+in+Enfield&content=http://cdn.taboola.com/libtrc/static/thumbnails/fa05fcaf25c3a6cd3936362989a139bb.png&network=eslmedia-theindependent&title=Cheapest+Way+To+Get+New+Windows+if+You+Own+a+Home+in+Enfield&click-id=GiD90N72fiO895L2RqXiZE79NnvXFV75WCfoowYG56IBnCDv7T4ovqSB-Zvxv4kjMK-WPg#tblciGiD90N72fiO895L2RqXiZE79NnvXFV75WCfoowYG56IBnCDv7T4ovqSB-Zvxv4kjMK-WPg

The device was detailed in a study, titled ‘Direct air capture of CO2 for solar fuel production in flow’, published in the journal Nature Energy.
The scientists are now hoping to commercialise the technology through the support of Cambridge Enterprise.

Or you could have pasted an archive link like https://archive.ph/qhRbF instead of going on a cut and paste odyssey which as you should know is against the board rules

 

[Crispy]

Syngas is pretty rubbish, but it's better than hydrogen!

 

[StoneRoad]

Have read the paper as well as I can. The main innovation is the night-capture, day-process part which lets them greatly concentrate the captured CO2 without having to expend much energy. The conversion to H2 and CO (syngas) is an existing process, made easier by the higher CO2 concentration. They use ethyl glycol as the H donor; water would be simpler, but the reaction is less efficient.

Syngas isn't an amazing fuel, mind you - about half the energy density of natural gas - so it would need a fair bit of processing before being useful in vehicles or power plants.

H2 and CO is also "water gas" ; the other "half" of town gas, which was made by coking [not cooking] coal in retort ovens - alternately air and steam blown into the retorts.
The town/water gas mixture is pretty toxic and also explosive when mixed with air ...

 

[CNT36]

Given that this is basically just a renewable fuel, no carbon removal involved really, they would have to show how this is more efficient/scalable than green hydrogen I guess.

But seems one of those magical new techs that is less impressive the more you delve.

I guess it matters how efficient/economical it is compared to other storage technologies. If it can be scaled up and is efficient for capture flogging the fuel may help make it economical to do so. I would imagine some states would want large reserves and take a bit of carbon out of the atmosphere.

 

[Rob Ray]

If it's actually viable at scale (big if) this might actually be a solve for energy storage rather than anything else. If you can use summer solar to produce winter fuel, for example, that's a semi-closed loop which obviates the need for (currently expensive/short-term/destructive) battery tech. It'd also solve the transmission issue which currently makes Sahel solar unviable.

 

[WouldBe]

The town/water gas mixture is pretty toxic and also explosive when mixed with air ...

All flammable gasses are explosive when mixed with air.

As are flammable liquids and very fine solids like custard powder.