comScore
Uncategorized Tuesday, July 24th 2012 at 3:14 pm

Capturing CO2 from the Atmosphere May Be More Feasible Than Once Thought

By ( ) Comments

It’s no secret that the amount of carbon dioxide in Earth’s atmosphere is steadily rising. A variety of factors contribute to this increase but one thing is for sure: It’s kind of a drag. However, we aren’t totally screwed quite yet. Researchers at the Georgia Institue of Technology have not only developed techniques for absorbing CO2 directly from the atmosphere, but have also determined that these techniques are much more economically feasible than originally anticipated. Learn more about the logistics of Georgia Tech’s methods below.

The level of carbon dioxide in Earth’s atmosphere hovers around 400 parts per million as of 2012 and has been projected to follow the trend of recent years by increasing. As a greenhouse gas, CO2 in the atmosphere has a number of effects on the planet’s climate and is frequently blamed for global warming.

A team at Georgia Tech has been developing methods to reduce the level of carbon dioxide in the air for several years. With the help of funding from the U.S. Department of Energy, the team has developed an absorbent material that can extract 90% pure carbon dioxide from air containing flue gas. The extracted carbon dioxide could then be put to industrial use in such areas as fuel production using algae and enhanced oil recovery.

Sounds expensive, right? You’d be surprised. PhysOrg reports:

In a detailed economic feasibility study, the researchers projected that a CO2 removal unit the size of an ocean shipping container could extract approximately a thousand tons of the gas per year with operating costs of approximately $100 per ton. The researchers also reported on advances in adsorbent materials for selectively capturing carbon dioxide.

Christopher Jones, a professor in the Georgia Tech School of Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering, estimated that once the process is refined and perfected, it would prove even cheaper than the estimates in the study. It should be noted that the study did not consider the capital cost of the capture facilities or any materials required for said facilities.

Although we are a long way from seeing any CO2 units implemented, this is a step toward reducing carbon dioxide in Earth’s atmosphere. Hopefully, this innovation will serve as inspiration for other researchers to devote their energy to finding methods for lowering CO2 levels in the air.

(via Phys.org)

relevant to your interests

Filed Under | • • • •
  • http://www.facebook.com/paul.pardee Paul Pardee

    Carbon is one of the essential building blocks of life.  Through the normal process of geology, it gets naturally sequestered, reducing the capacity for life on Earth.  The single most important thing we can do as a species for the future of the planet’s flora and fauna is to release this CO2 back into circulation by drilling for and burning fossil fuels.  Removing carbon from the air is counterproductive and will have serious unintended consequences.

    Also, 400 ppm is 4 parts per 10,000.  That puts it at 0.004% of the atmosphere. It is an insignificant amount of a very weak greenhouse gas.  Does anyone think that such a small amount of any gas will cause catastrophic catastrophe?To put it into perspective, take a sheet of paper and make a 10 by 10 grid.  Cut out one of those grid squares. That is 1%.  Then, make another 10 by 10 grid on that little square and cut out one of those grid squares.  That is 0.01%.  Now, take that little little square and cut it in half.  That half of a little little square is still a larger percentage of the original sheet of paper than the current CO2 levels are a percentage of the total atmosphere.

  • Rick Astley

    Actually, 400 ppm is 0.04% of the atmosphere. To put that in perspective, 400 ppm of carbon monoxide is enough to give a headache.

  • Reptile686

    I’m going to go set my car on fire right now! To help save the planet.

  • Anonymous

    Carbon Monoxide is not Carbon Dioxide.  That’s like comparing Water (H2O) and Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2).  A compound reacts extremely different compared to another. 

  • Jack Bond

    Cows produce magnitudes more CO2 than humans do. If you REALLY want to “go green” you should stop buying beef and milk. As long as it doesn’t hamper technological progress by putting stupid restrictions on emissions that really are insignificant.

  • Rick Astley

    I was responding to “Does anyone think that such a small amount of any gas will cause catastrophic catastrophe?”, I should have used Chlorine in my example instead.

  • Anonymous

    Your example reminds me of someone explaining the earth isn’t round because if you stand on the bottom of a round object you would fall off.
    In nature, the result of introducing a material into a system and how much it affects that system is going to be very widely, depending on the material.

  • Troyldailey

    Hmm….amazing that something that sounds like it’s based in good math and science can yet be so misleading and stupid.  Nice try.  How about mathematically proving your head isn’t in your ass.