Notices
Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: C02

  1. #1 C02 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Plutonia
    Posts
    398
    Chemistry is such a weak subject for me... so forgive perhaps the niavety of the question, but...

    Is there no type of material that can filter out C02, or in better words, seperate C02 in a filter?


     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    The carbon dioxide can be scrubbed by passing through a solution such as aqueous ammonia or monoethanolamine (MEA). The carbon dioxide is absorbed in the solution at low temperature then released by heating the solution. The carbon dioxide could then be pumped into subterranean storage reservoirs. The solution can be recycled indefinitely.

    At present the cost of this system would be considerable. Electricity produced at plants with scrubbing capacity would be from 30% to 80% more expensive.


     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Plutonia
    Posts
    398
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt
    The carbon dioxide can be scrubbed by passing through a solution such as aqueous ammonia or monoethanolamine (MEA). The carbon dioxide is absorbed in the solution at low temperature then released by heating the solution. The carbon dioxide could then be pumped into subterranean storage reservoirs. The solution can be recycled indefinitely.

    At present the cost of this system would be considerable. Electricity produced at plants with scrubbing capacity would be from 30% to 80% more expensive.
    Costly... but effective?
     

  5. #4 Re: C02 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Manynames
    Chemistry is such a weak subject for me... so forgive perhaps the niavety of the question, but...

    Is there no type of material that can filter out C02, or in better words, seperate C02 in a filter?
    You can turn it into carbon monoxide, and carbon. One method is hot arcing aluminum in the presence of carbon dioxide.

    Another is a mixture of carbon dioxide and oxygen passed over glowing graphite. It yields almost pure carbon monoxide.

    There are a lot of ways to do it. They used some other chemical in re breathers to do it as well. Sodium Hydroxide I believe, will absorb Carbon dioxide from the air.


    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
     

  6. #5 Re: C02 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Plutonia
    Posts
    398
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Quote Originally Posted by Manynames
    Chemistry is such a weak subject for me... so forgive perhaps the niavety of the question, but...

    Is there no type of material that can filter out C02, or in better words, seperate C02 in a filter?
    You can turn it into carbon monoxide, and carbon. One method is hot arcing aluminum in the presence of carbon dioxide.

    Another is a mixture of carbon dioxide and oxygen passed over glowing graphite. It yields almost pure carbon monoxide.

    There are a lot of ways to do it. They used some other chemical in re breathers to do it as well. Sodium Hydroxide I believe, will absorb Carbon dioxide from the air.


    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Then why can we not use any of these methods in a special type of filter over industrial buildings...?
     

  7. #6  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    You want to pump poisonous carbon monoxide into the atmosphere instead of carbon dioxide? You want to double your energy consumption to produce the filter materials?
     

  8. #7  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt
    You want to pump poisonous carbon monoxide into the atmosphere instead of carbon dioxide? You want to double your energy consumption to produce the filter materials?
    We can do something with the carbon monoxide other then let it fly. Energy is free. But you have to have, the stomach for Benjamin Franklin. And what he discovered.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
     

  9. #8 Re: C02 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Manynames
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Quote Originally Posted by Manynames
    Chemistry is such a weak subject for me... so forgive perhaps the niavety of the question, but...

    Is there no type of material that can filter out C02, or in better words, seperate C02 in a filter?
    You can turn it into carbon monoxide, and carbon. One method is hot arcing aluminum in the presence of carbon dioxide.

    Another is a mixture of carbon dioxide and oxygen passed over glowing graphite. It yields almost pure carbon monoxide.

    There are a lot of ways to do it. They used some other chemical in re breathers to do it as well. Sodium Hydroxide I believe, will absorb Carbon dioxide from the air.


    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Then why can we not use any of these methods in a special type of filter over industrial buildings...?
    Carbon dioxide is not really an issue. Plants love it, that is what they live on.

    But if you wanted to collect it and make use of it, we could. But nobody really cares about it, except for some lame new scheme, or to get grant money.

    It is just another scheme. To get everyone in a panic. To make it seem like the President and Senate are just stymied by the big carbon dioxide issue.

    Years ago General motors boasted about all the water and carbon dioxide they were creating with all the car motors. They were so proud. Because back then we knew it was not a bad gas. Today it is monster. Ha-ha.

    Tomorrow it will be the ice age. You have to keep up on these big issues. And look away from the little 1.2 Trillion give away packages, they are giving to very bad people. People that I would not even want to know.



    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    951
    To what end? Are you separating it out to get rid of it or to utilize it for some other purpose?
     

  11. #10 Re: C02 
    Forum Isotope Bunbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,590
    Quote Originally Posted by Manynames
    Is there no type of material that can filter out C02, or in better words, seperate C02 in a filter?
    If you mean to filter it out of the atmosphere, this can be done but is impractical because of the extreme dilution of CO2 in air. The method John Galt mentions, using amines and sometimes sodium carbonate are only really effective on concentrated CO2 streams such as are found in in a refinery or gas processing plant, or the flue gas from a power plant. The captured CO2 is usually vented to the atmosphere. Some of it is sold to oil companies to inject in oil bearing formations for secondary recovery.
     

  12. #11 Re: C02 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Plutonia
    Posts
    398
    Quote Originally Posted by Bunbury
    Quote Originally Posted by Manynames
    Is there no type of material that can filter out C02, or in better words, seperate C02 in a filter?
    If you mean to filter it out of the atmosphere, this can be done but is impractical because of the extreme dilution of CO2 in air. The method John Galt mentions, using amines and sometimes sodium carbonate are only really effective on concentrated CO2 streams such as are found in in a refinery or gas processing plant, or the flue gas from a power plant. The captured CO2 is usually vented to the atmosphere. Some of it is sold to oil companies to inject in oil bearing formations for secondary recovery.
    I ask because chemistry is not a big subject of mine.

    I don't want to be crucified in asking such questions. Ok?
     

  13. #12  
    Reptile Dysfunction drowsy turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,255
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt
    You want to pump poisonous carbon monoxide into the atmosphere instead of carbon dioxide? You want to double your energy consumption to produce the filter materials?
    We can do something with the carbon monoxide other then let it fly. Energy is free. But you have to have, the stomach for Benjamin Franklin. And what he discovered.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Wait, you want to break up carbon dioxide, which you call 'harmless', into carbon monoxide that can then be broken down using expensive and lengthy reactions? What does this achieve?
    "The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a thing that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot possibly go wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible to get at or repair." ~ Douglas Adams
     

  14. #13 Re: C02 
    Forum Isotope Bunbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,590
    Quote Originally Posted by Manynames
    Quote Originally Posted by Bunbury
    Quote Originally Posted by Manynames
    Is there no type of material that can filter out C02, or in better words, seperate C02 in a filter?
    If you mean to filter it out of the atmosphere, this can be done but is impractical because of the extreme dilution of CO2 in air. The method John Galt mentions, using amines and sometimes sodium carbonate are only really effective on concentrated CO2 streams such as are found in in a refinery or gas processing plant, or the flue gas from a power plant. The captured CO2 is usually vented to the atmosphere. Some of it is sold to oil companies to inject in oil bearing formations for secondary recovery.
    I ask because chemistry is not a big subject of mine.

    I don't want to be crucified in asking such questions. Ok?
    I'm afraid I don't understand your response. Crucified? I gave a straightforward answer to your question, hoping you would find it helpful. That's why this board exists.
     

  15. #14 Re: C02 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Plutonia
    Posts
    398
    Quote Originally Posted by Bunbury
    Quote Originally Posted by Manynames
    Quote Originally Posted by Bunbury
    Quote Originally Posted by Manynames
    Is there no type of material that can filter out C02, or in better words, seperate C02 in a filter?
    If you mean to filter it out of the atmosphere, this can be done but is impractical because of the extreme dilution of CO2 in air. The method John Galt mentions, using amines and sometimes sodium carbonate are only really effective on concentrated CO2 streams such as are found in in a refinery or gas processing plant, or the flue gas from a power plant. The captured CO2 is usually vented to the atmosphere. Some of it is sold to oil companies to inject in oil bearing formations for secondary recovery.
    I ask because chemistry is not a big subject of mine.

    I don't want to be crucified in asking such questions. Ok?
    I'm afraid I don't understand your response. Crucified? I gave a straightforward answer to your question, hoping you would find it helpful. That's why this board exists.
    Sorry, i actually qouted the wrong person lol
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by drowsy turtle
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt
    You want to pump poisonous carbon monoxide into the atmosphere instead of carbon dioxide? You want to double your energy consumption to produce the filter materials?
    We can do something with the carbon monoxide other then let it fly. Energy is free. But you have to have, the stomach for Benjamin Franklin. And what he discovered.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Wait, you want to break up carbon dioxide, which you call 'harmless', into carbon monoxide that can then be broken down using expensive and lengthy reactions? What does this achieve?
    I say let the plants have it. It is not a bad gas. But if you really wanted to get rid of carbon dioxide and I do not see why. We could do it.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    951
    Because there are approximately5,148,000,000,000,000,000 tons of air treat or filter. puny mankind is not going to do it.
     

  18. #17  
    Reptile Dysfunction drowsy turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,255
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Quote Originally Posted by drowsy turtle
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt
    You want to pump poisonous carbon monoxide into the atmosphere instead of carbon dioxide? You want to double your energy consumption to produce the filter materials?
    We can do something with the carbon monoxide other then let it fly. Energy is free. But you have to have, the stomach for Benjamin Franklin. And what he discovered.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Wait, you want to break up carbon dioxide, which you call 'harmless', into carbon monoxide that can then be broken down using expensive and lengthy reactions? What does this achieve?
    I say let the plants have it. It is not a bad gas. But if you really wanted to get rid of carbon dioxide and I do not see why. We could do it.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Ocean acidification is the reason why.

    I'm actually with you on the global warming front; I don't buy it.
    "The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a thing that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot possibly go wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible to get at or repair." ~ Douglas Adams
     

  19. #18  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by fizzlooney
    Because there are approximately5,148,000,000,000,000,000 tons of air treat or filter. puny mankind is not going to do it.

    We could do it. I have no issue about doing just about anything. But why are we going to do it? It is a great gas.

    Do you know why Grumman Aero Space was afraid to send men into space on their own, as a single company?

    Because most of the country was believing, and teaching wives tales to their children. Doctors could not agree upon chemical formulas. Doctors were arguing about what humans breathed in. And what they exhaled.

    The Benjamin Franklin project was started, to find out exactly what humans breath or exhale to live.

    Grumman did not need the high oxygen content in the space craft. Yet they were told they did need a high oxygen content, by the leading doctors and scientists of the time. Even though they had scientific proof of long durations, of men in other atmospheres.

    If there was an accident, Grumman would be held responsible for going against the castle.

    We had science all neatly done in the late fifties. It was over done in the fifties.

    It was too scary for slimy politicians. The politicians used the excuse violent minority types. To introduce a lesser education to American students. To keep the secret of the atom, the building block of the universe. From "violent minority types".

    There has not been any real science since the late sixties. And even then real science only popped its head up, for a breath of air. It immediately came under attack.


    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
     

  20. #19  
    Reptile Dysfunction drowsy turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,255
    Why do divers die if they run low on oxygen during a dive, then, if a high oxygen percentage (22%) is not required?
    "The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a thing that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot possibly go wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible to get at or repair." ~ Douglas Adams
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    951
    How long is Chemboy going to let the Wild Willy show go on? Just send his crap straight to trash can and be done with it. Furthermore look a all the space wasted on this loon, it would be better if forum members just ignored his drivel and quit trying to reason with a stump. I sent a PM to Chemboy awhile back with no reply so I'm taking it to the forum enough is enough. opinion is for politics and religion,science deals in facts.
     

  22. #21  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by drowsy turtle
    Why do divers die if they run low on oxygen during a dive, then, if a high oxygen percentage (22%) is not required?
    I do not believe they run low on oxygen, as they go deep the body actually starts to absorb to much oxygen. As they come up, the oxygen is released.

    That is why really deep subs use helium. They do not want the nitrogen or the oxygen to be in the blood. As you take the pressure off the body both gases are let loose. My money is on the oxygen being the killer.

    They basically run out of a gas to cleanse the lungs.



    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
     

  23. #22  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by fizzlooney
    How long is Chemboy going to let the Wild Willy show go on? Just send his crap straight to trash can and be done with it. Furthermore look a all the space wasted on this loon, it would be better if forum members just ignored his drivel and quit trying to reason with a stump. I sent a PM to Chemboy awhile back with no reply so I'm taking it to the forum enough is enough. opinion is for politics and religion,science deals in facts.
    Did you ever try to discuss any point you do not agree with using, precise accounts of your life. And what you have learned in chemistry?

    A blanket attack against everything I said will prove at least somewhat wrong.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •