Natural Gas "Cleaning" Extracts Valuable Waste Carbon 73
Al writes "There's been a lot of focus on "clean coal" lately, but a Canadian start-up called Atlantic Hydrogen is developing a way to make natural gas more environmentally friendly. The process involves using a plasma reactor to separate hydrogen and methane in the gas. The procedure also turns carbon emissions into high-purity carbon black, a substance that is used to make inks, plastics and reinforced rubber products. Utility companies could potentially sell the carbon black, making the process more financially attractive."
Another benefit (Score:5, Informative)
After reading the article it is mentioned in the last paragraph that:
"Chibante and his research team are working with carbon-black maker Columbian Chemicals to identify a market for Atlantic Hydrogen's carbon, which has "very interesting carbon nanostructures that we just don't see from industrial production," he says. An early study shows that the material has a high surface area and thin chicken-wire structures called graphene stacks, making it potentially ideal in the production of high-performance batteries and ultracapacitors and for structurally reinforced products."
So this sound like it has additional benefits other than just reducing the total CO2 released by burning natural gas.
Re:Removing the existing CO2 (Score:1, Informative)
In principle, yes. We could "scrub" the existing CO2 from the air and sequester it underground. It's expensive, and there's no real guarantee that the CO2 will stay there for any appreciable length of time. Most of the processes being examined require a lot of energy input, either in the form of heat or electricity. So, if you're going to need a pantload of energy, you might as well couple it to a powerplant (coal or gas). Plus, since the exhaust is very carbon rich compared to the atmosphere at large, capturing it at the source is much more efficient. Finally: nobody is going to pay you to scrub CO2 from the air. People will pay you for electricity -- especially if you're generating it via a "clean" method.
Re:OK, and exactly WHERE does the power (Score:2, Informative)
We also have a nuclear power plant in the province, undergoing a retrofit at the moment. It is one of the larger base load plants in the province. (Second largest I think.)
Point Lepreau [wikipedia.org]
Re:Better for the environment, but (Score:5, Informative)
Woa there Misinformation. You seem to have your facts a bit twisted around. First off, I own a TDI and I'm a fairly active member on TDIClub.com, second I work for a company that makes diesel engines.
1) Yes, Gen 1 Biodiesel does gel at a lower temperature, but there are additives that people use to make it good down to -40.
2) It doesn't clog injectors nor do you have to startup and shutdown on D2. You're thinking of Waste Vegetable Oil [wikipedia.org] (WVO). Biodiesel is 100% not even the same chemical composition as WVO. People turn WVO into Biodiesel by reacting it with acids, but WVO is not Biodiesel and vice versa. This is the #1 thing the media gets wrong.
Some people swear by WVO, IMHO it destroys injectors, injection pumps and is just a whole mess to deal with. It's best suited to <80s IDI engines.
Biodiesel is one of the best things you can run through your engine IF IT IS SPECIFIED TO TAKE IT. (Newer 2009 engines with DPFs are not). It has a higher lubricity, burns cleaner, cleans the system as it goes. It's like the odd marriage of colon blow and Metamucil at the same time.
3) Biodiesel does not love dirt. D2 loves dirt. The reason you have to change your filter at least once or twice after making the switch is Biodiesel is such a good solvent that it'll actually clean out your tank. Meaning if you ran on D2 for 200k miles and switch to B100. You have 200k worth of crap in your tank that the D2 left there. The Biodiesel will break it up and suck it through the system. Some people swear by using Biodiesel for cleaning car parts.
4) Finally, you don't HAVE to use corn or soybeans to make BioDiesel. Gen2 biodiesel is more or less a synthetic diesel. Using Gas to Liquid [wikipedia.org] you can take *any* hydrocarbon gas and turn it into diesel. Not just that, you can control the process to more or less make it absolutely perfect (cetane levels, hydrocarbon length, etc). Instead of using natural gas or gassified coal (like the Germans did in WWII), you can use heated human waste, heated trash, if you can convert it to a gas hydrocarbon, you can turn it into Gen2 BioDiesel. (Once we get some Nukes on line and have some energy to do this, this is in my opinion the future since you honestly can't beat the power density of D2).
There's already a company which will sell you SynDiesel [hiperfuels.com]. Back when D2 was creeping way up in cost it was almost getting cost effective.
Re:Energy arithmetic (Score:3, Informative)
It would be a very weak ozone depeletor. CFCs are a problem because the chlorine isn't consumed in the reaction. One molecule of hydrogen can combine with one molecule of ozone, but then it's done.
Re:Better for the environment, but (Score:3, Informative)
Good point. By the same token, they're busily working on finding more uses for glycerin now that the price has dropped. New ways of making products that use it instead of other things. Moisturizing soaps are a lot cheaper now. ;)