Promising Carbon capture on the fly

Anything that doesn't fit anywhere else below.

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

Promising Carbon capture on the fly

#1  Postby Macdoc » Jan 03, 2020 4:58 am

Capturing CO2 from trucks and reducing their emissions by 90%

December 23, 2019
Source:
Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
Summary:
Researchers have patented a new concept that could cut trucks' CO2 emissions by almost 90%. It involves capturing CO2 within the exhaust system, converting it into a liquid and storing it on the vehicle. The liquid CO2 would then be delivered to a service station and where it will be turned back into fuel using renewable energy.


more
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 122804.htm

Best approach I've seen and can be retrofitted. :thumbup:
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 16798
Age: 72
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Promising Carbon capture on the fly

#2  Postby OlivierK » Jan 03, 2020 9:17 pm

The article states that the conversion itself is without energy penalty, but they seem to ignore the energy penalty of bolting a 2 cubic metres box weighing 7% of the truck's payload above the cabin.

It might yet lead somewhere good, but stating that you can "simply" offload liquid CO2 at a service station doesn't inspire confidence that it will be soon. The whole energy cost of (a) that infrastructure, and (b) what happens to that CO2 is similarly glossed over, as is the investment outlook for the liquid CO2 collection network in an ever-electrifying era.
User avatar
OlivierK
 
Posts: 9462
Age: 53
Male

Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Promising Carbon capture on the fly

#3  Postby Ken Fabian » Jan 03, 2020 10:27 pm

OlivierK wrote:The article states that the conversion itself is without energy penalty, but they seem to ignore the energy penalty of bolting a 2 cubic metres box weighing 7% of the truck's payload above the cabin.

It might yet lead somewhere good, but stating that you can "simply" offload liquid CO2 at a service station doesn't inspire confidence that it will be soon. The whole energy cost of (a) that infrastructure, and (b) what happens to that CO2 is similarly glossed over, as is the investment outlook for the liquid CO2 collection network in an ever-electrifying era.


It wasn't clear to me that what they want to put on top of the cabin includes the tank(s) for the liquid CO2; I think not, if the total weight is as much as 7% of payload, presumably that much with tanks, taking up room elsewhere, full of CO2.

I cannot imagine this as a truck accessory that any truck driver or owner would be pleased with. There would have to be seriously tough emissions regulations forcing them. It makes already very complex machines and the infrastructure servicing them that much more complex.

Then, yes, there is the absence of the service stations that can take the CO2 and turn it into fuel, presumably with inefficiencies. I suppose we have come a long way that there isn't objection to the potential for renewable energy to power the process. Without the CO2 to fuel part it is just a way to turn vehicle fuel into CO2 - which they do too well already. Just pure, liquified CO2.

I think this kind of technology will make ditching fossil fuels and going to battery electric vehicles look more attractive, not less; if you were willing to sacrifice 7% of payload to batteries, how much range might an electric truck have? I don't think we have seen the best that battery technology can deliver; whoever develops significantly better batteries is going to be a trillionaire.
Ken Fabian
 
Name: Ken Fabian
Posts: 40

Country: Australian
Print view this post

Re: Promising Carbon capture on the fly

#4  Postby Macdoc » Jan 04, 2020 12:05 am

7% of payload is miniscule especially when that capture is worth coin in both carbon credits and as chemical feedstock.

That it is able to be retrofitted is an enormous gain as fleets are being required to meet fuel efficiency goals and refitting $100k truck is a lot less than buying a new what ???? Hybrid? EV ??? neither of which exists for heavy vehicles.

Used oil is captured by the barrelful at service stations, propane is refilled at service stations, electric recharging is becoming a thing, liquified CO2 is no stretch at all.

There is no question local delivery will electrify quickly.....transport of goods over distance there isn't even a glimmer of progress other than clean fuel standards, aero-dynamic/engine efficiency gains

just a way
???!!!! do you realize that this cycle is a holy grail. I don't think you understand the challenges the heavy transport faces in terms of range and battery weight ....you kvetch about 7% weight when a sufficient battery would double the weight of a tractor.

There are already catalytic converters on trucks ...what makes you think a carbon capture module is rocket science
Give the scientists developing this a bit more credit.

Example: greenhouse gas calculation for a truck move

Using the formula from above, I’ll walk through a simple emissions calculation example for a truck that travels 1,000 miles with 20 short tons of cargo (a short ton is 2,000 lbs).

Step 1: Determine the total amount of ton-miles. Multiply 1,000 miles times 20 tons, which gives us a total of 20,000 ton-miles.
Step 2: Get the weight-based truck emissions factor for a freight truck. The average freight truck in the U.S. emits 161.8 grams of CO2 per ton-mile.
Step 3: Multiply this emissions factor with the total ton-miles {161.8 X 20,000), which gives us a total of 3,236,000 grams of CO2.
Step 4: Convert the total grams into metric tons. Metric tons are the standard measurement unit for corporate emissions of greenhouse gases. There are 1,000,000 grams in a metric ton. To convert our answer from step three we divide it by 1,000,000. This gives us 3.24 metric tons of CO2 for this one move.


so 1,000 miles for 20 tons of cargo emits 3.24 metric tons of CO2.

Now in Sweden

Should every country on earth copy Sweden's carbon tax ...
https://www.carbonpricingleadership.org › blogs › 2019/10/18 › should-e...
Oct 18, 2019 - The Swedish carbon tax is today by far the highest in the world, with a price of SEK 1180 (€110/US$123) per tonne fossil CO2 emitted.


....recapturing 3.24 tons of CO2 is worth $400 US for a single truck for a single trip.....you think maybe the goal is worth doing some development on???
Even at Canadian pricing of $20 a ton ...that's still $80 in value in carbon credits plus what ever the carbon feedstock is worth.
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 16798
Age: 72
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Promising Carbon capture on the fly

#5  Postby Ken Fabian » Jan 04, 2020 7:45 am

If the CO2 is sold as a commodity it will probably end up back in the air one way or another and it shouldn't - and probably won't - get carbon credits. Without the CO2 to fuel capability - or sequestration - there aren't emissions gains. Sequestration is problematic because it is all cost and effectively you have to pump 3x as much CO2 down the wells as came back up.
Ken Fabian
 
Name: Ken Fabian
Posts: 40

Country: Australian
Print view this post

Re: Promising Carbon capture on the fly

#6  Postby Spearthrower » Jan 04, 2020 7:48 am

Sequestration is problematic because it is all cost and effectively you have to pump 3x as much CO2 down the wells as came back up.


Do you mean that originally came up?

Also, that 3x seems quite specific - do you have a source for that?

Sequestration is 'all cost' in the sense that it is not generating a profit from exploiting the C02, but there's ample justification for considering that as a cost for doing business.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 27415
Age: 44
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: Promising Carbon capture on the fly

#7  Postby Alan B » Jan 04, 2020 1:16 pm

Wiki
Liquid carbon dioxide is the liquid state of carbon dioxide, which cannot occur under atmospheric pressure. It can only exist at a pressure above 5.1 atm, under 31.1 °C (temperature of critical point) and above -56.6 °C (temperature of triple point). Its uses and applications include the extraction of virgin olive oil paste, fire extinguishers, and as a coolant.


So, this container has to be pressurised and/or cooled to below zero...
I have NO BELIEF in the existence of a God or gods. I do not have to offer evidence nor do I have to determine absence of evidence because I do not ASSERT that a God does or does not or gods do or do not exist.
User avatar
Alan B
 
Posts: 9894
Age: 83
Male

Country: UK (Birmingham)
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Promising Carbon capture on the fly

#8  Postby Macdoc » Jan 04, 2020 1:18 pm

yup ...

Just like this

Image

Not rocket science at all.
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 16798
Age: 72
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Promising Carbon capture on the fly

#9  Postby Alan B » Jan 04, 2020 3:56 pm

How much energy is required to maintain the collection and conversion processes?
And what energy source(s) are used?
I have NO BELIEF in the existence of a God or gods. I do not have to offer evidence nor do I have to determine absence of evidence because I do not ASSERT that a God does or does not or gods do or do not exist.
User avatar
Alan B
 
Posts: 9894
Age: 83
Male

Country: UK (Birmingham)
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Promising Carbon capture on the fly

#10  Postby Hermit » Jan 04, 2020 4:31 pm

Macdoc wrote:7% of payload is miniscule...

Reducing the payload by 7% will more than wipe out the profit margin of almost all trucking companies. Unless they all agree to install those devices pretty much simultaneously and increase their prices accordingly, fitting those carbon capture devices won't happen,

Eventually, government laws may be introduced to force them to do just that, but looking at the governments that have been voted into office in recent years, the chances of such legislation being enacted in the near future, or even in the medium term, don't look all that good.
God is the mysterious veil under which we hide our ignorance of the cause. - Léo Errera


God created the universe
God just exists
User avatar
Hermit
 
Posts: 3569
Age: 66
Male

Print view this post

Re: Promising Carbon capture on the fly

#11  Postby Macdoc » Jan 04, 2020 4:39 pm

Read the article. Without a lot of detail it appears to be waste heat from the engine.

First, the vehicle's flue gases in the exhaust pipe are cooled down and the water is separated from the gases. CO2 is isolated from the other gases (nitrogen and oxygen) with a temperature swing adsorption system, using metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) adsorbent, which are specially designed to absorb CO2. Those materials are being developed by the Energypolis team at EPFL Valais Wallis, led by Wendy Queen. Once the material is saturated with CO2, it is heated so that pure CO2 can be extracted from it. High speed turbocompressors developed by Jürg Schiffmann's laboratory at EPFL's Neuchâtel campus use heat from the vehicle's engine to compress the extracted CO2 and turn it into a liquid.
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 16798
Age: 72
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Promising Carbon capture on the fly

#12  Postby Macdoc » Jan 04, 2020 4:43 pm

Better move to Europe. Just because Australia has no carbon tax and weak carbon regulation in no way negates the research. Sweden has thrived with a high carbon tax since 1991..

The refuge of the weak willed ....oh it will wipe out profits etc ....well if the actual cost of carbon emissions were calculated into the fuel cost in the first place .....those profits are simply the result of using the atmosphere as a free sewage system.
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 16798
Age: 72
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Promising Carbon capture on the fly

#13  Postby Ken Fabian » Jan 04, 2020 10:44 pm

@Macdoc-
if the actual cost of carbon emissions were calculated into the fuel cost in the first place

If that were the case then a lot of our choices would be stark and clear and easier to make. I am one who keeps calling for carbon pricing.
@Spearthrower -
that 3x seems quite specific - do you have a source for that?

I took that from the linked science daily article in the opening post -
The researchers' calculations show that a truck using 1 kg of conventional fuel could produce 3kg of liquid CO2

Which sounds about right. After a look - after confusion about volume of fuel but weight of CO2 or Whr or Gj of energy and weight of CO2 - why can't they present it as weight for weight? I found 22.4 pounds of CO2 for 7.1 pounds (1 gallon) of diesel fuel (normally i prefer metric). Of course with inefficiencies and processing there would have been more oil that originally came up to produce the gallon of diesel fuel - with additional emissions.

Worth considering also that inefficient burning emits unburned fuel, which would mostly oxidise over time to CO2, but is not usually counted as emissions.

Also worth considering is that we make more CO2 than almost anything else we produce - several times more than all other waste combined. I think only commodities like crushed rock (which do not add to the total amount of rock in the world) are produced in quantities larger than we make CO2.
Ken Fabian
 
Name: Ken Fabian
Posts: 40

Country: Australian
Print view this post

Re: Promising Carbon capture on the fly

#14  Postby romansh » Jan 04, 2020 11:17 pm

The problem we are trying to solve here is the transport of energy and speed of re-energizing a vehicle. Hydrocarbons are relatively energy dense and the fuel flows easily. If we could have "useful" batteries that had a similar energy density to diesel and could be charged quickly, then we would have waste energy converting CO2 back into fuel and oxygen.

And of course if the CO2 conversion process keeps open a coal powered power station, then this does not make sense.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
User avatar
romansh
 
Posts: 2736

Country: BC Can (in the woods)
Print view this post


Return to General Science & Technology

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest