A Discussion of Direct Air Capture of Carbon Dioxide.

[NNadir]

4. Of course, the question is, once it's removed what do we do with it?

Last edited Mon Feb 11, 2019, 12:31 PM - Edit history (1)

I strongly oppose geologic sequestration, but favor carbon dioxide use. (I generally oppose all dumping schemes.)

I am very fond of carbon dioxide splitting, followed possibly by disproportionation of carbon monoxide into carbon and carbon dioxide, with the latter recycled for splitting.

This can only be economically and environmentally sustainable with nuclear heat.

With this type of approach the carbon can be "sequestered" as an alloying agent (or reduction tool) for metals, for incorporation into other carbon based materials, silicon carbide, MAX phases, carbon fibers, and polymers. This kind of use is economically positive and eliminates the need for metallurgic coal and in electrochemical settings, dangerous fossil fuel derived anodes.

One very big criticism, among many, I have of so called "renewable energy" is that because of its low energy to mass ratio it has high material intensity, particularly with respect to steel and aluminum. The latter two require significant dangerous fossil fuels, steel for coal based coke, and petroleum coke for anodes in aluminium reduction. The FFC metallurgic process also requires carbon anodes.

I most recently wrote about carbon dioxide splitting here: Cerium Requirements to Split One Billion Tons of Carbon Dioxide, the Nuclear v Solar Thermal cases.

I wrote about anodes in this space, here:

Can Biocoke Address the Anode CO2 Problem (Owing to Petroleum Coke) for Aluminum Production?

...and here:

Another Discussion of Biomass Derived Anodes to Replace Petroleum Coke in Aluminum Production.