Generating electrical energy from carbon_di_oxide

Discussion in 'General Science' started by Rohaib azhar, Oct 6, 2018.

  1. Rohaib azhar

    Thread Starter New Member

    Oct 6, 2018
    I want to ask a question my apologies if it seems a stupid question.
    I wanna ask is that its a fact that Co2 is increasing at alarming rate so why dont we utilize the heat traping effect of CO2.
    We just have to store the CO2 and concentrate suns energy/sun light onto co2 if its not that much to boil water or heat the paltier compres it to make it hoter and then utilize it to make electricity. In this way we can trap the gas utlize its energy and can eradicate the extra by plating trees in certain close environment and leting co2 reach there I know that specific heat of water is much greater but still can we.
  2. dl324

    AAC Fanatic!

    Mar 30, 2015
    Rohaib azhar likes this.
  3. WBahn


    Mar 31, 2012
    To put that in perspective, a gallon of diesel fuel produces about 22 pounds of CO2 when burned. As best I can determine, the average heavy-truck mileage is about 6.5 mpg and the average truck travels 45,000 miles annually, so each truck produces, on average, about 76 metric tons of CO2 annually. So this plant will just about be able to keep up with the CO2 emissions of a whopping two such trucks.

    Further putting some perspective on the number, the best estimate I can find is that an acre of forested land sequesters about 9 to 10 tons of CO2, so about 15 to 17 acres of forest does what this plant will do.

    I'm guessing that if someone were to plant fast-growing trees they could probably lower the land needed by quite a bit, but I haven't been able to find numbers.

    I did, however, run across an interesting article (from 2009) about an artificial tree prototype (the term "artificial tree" appears to be more descriptive of effect rather than form or function -- it seems to be just a machine) that absorbs about 1000x the CO2 of a natural tree.

    However, I'm not a big believer in what any outfit that begins with the word "Popular ..." touts (and, it would seem like if this were likely to do anything it would have received some very widespread attention in the last decade).

    The article claims that each tree could collect 90,000 tons of CO2 a year. However, as best I can tell, natural trees can collect about 50 pounds (not tons) of CO2 a year. So 1000x that would only be 25 tons a year. Now THAT's about the quality of work that I expect from a Popular Whatever publication -- neither the author nor the editor managed to catch a discrepancy of 3.5 orders of magnitude. However, the fact that the publication screwed the pooch doesn't mean that there's nothing of value there.

    This is the best I've been able to find quickly that is recent:

    Note that the other research has a system that uses a stack of absorbers about the size of a tractor-trailer to remove about 1000 tons annually, or about the same as 13 trucks.
    Rohaib azhar likes this.
  4. Glenn Holland

    Active Member

    Dec 26, 2014
    I'm not alarmed by the amount of man made CO2 emissions or the purported threat of global warming and climate change. From April to July of this year, a single volcanic eruption in Hawaii spewed 1000s of tons of various toxic gases into the atmosphere. There are hundreds of active volcanoes around the world so I wouldn't worry about the amount of CO2 contributed by cars and trucks.