Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Quest to Make Gasoline Out of Thin Air: Prometheus (YC W19)

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 291 posts

Re: A Quest to Make Gasoline Out of Thin Air: Prometheus (YC W19)

#11

Post by kortex »

js2 wrote: post #4

There's no way this is a net energy producer right? So it only makes sense if it's powered by carbon-free sources? Basically this has two uses then: - As a stop gap till batteries and electric vehicles take over from ICE. Although if it generates carbon-neutral jet fuel that would be very useful. - Maybe as a carbon capture device, except that gasoline doesn't seem like a great way to store excess carbon. Although th…

Correct, it collects carbon in the form of CO2 and "un-cracks" it back to hydrocarbons. Likely Fischer–Tropsch process.

Re: A Quest to Make Gasoline Out of Thin Air: Prometheus (YC W19)

#12

Post by Hasz »

Soooooo many questions.

Gasoline is a distillate made up of several hydrocarbons -- is he synthesizing all of them, or just octane? What about additives, like anti-knock agents? Plans for diesel?

No amount of fancy CNTs gets around thermodynamics. CO2 and H20 are far more stable, thermodynamically, than octane, it's partially why octane is a good fuel. Where does the extra energy come from? What is the efficiency of the conversion? What kind of thoroughput are we talking about?

How scalable - is the CNT manufacturing mature enough to support large scale rollout?

Who is on his team? Research chemists, or experienced chem Es, both hopefully?

I'm sure he knows these answers (man has a PhD is chem), would have loved to sit through that pitch.

The Bloomberg piece is very light on details; the secrecy is frustrating but understandable.

Re: A Quest to Make Gasoline Out of Thin Air: Prometheus (YC W19)

#13

Post by eganist »

MuffinFlavored wrote: post #9
rayiner wrote: post #5

This is really, fundamentally important technology. Emissions reduction will not work: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/nations-are-not-r... > The authors of the report stated in a press release that the kind of drastic, large-scale action the planet desperately needs has yet to be seen, even though global emissions have reached record levels at 53.5 billion metric tons in 2017, with no signs of peaking. >…

How much do today's "carbon recapture" methods need to grow? What's the timeline on them looking like? P.S. The first Google result for carbon recapture is titled "“Direct air capture” of carbon dioxide won't solve climate change" P.P.S From Wikipedia with a cited source: capturing and compressing CO2 and other system costs are estimated to increase the cost per watt-hour energy produced by 21–91% for fossil fuel pow…

I have to wonder how much of the innovation here will couple advancements in catalytic conversion with accepted inefficiencies in "storing" renewable energy by sourcing from the atmosphere.

Because that's essentially what these initiatives are doing. They're seeking to artificially tighten the carbon cycle so that we can maintain the status quo indefinitely.

Re: A Quest to Make Gasoline Out of Thin Air: Prometheus (YC W19)

#14

Post by toast0 »

js2 wrote: post #4

There's no way this is a net energy producer right? So it only makes sense if it's powered by carbon-free sources? Basically this has two uses then: - As a stop gap till batteries and electric vehicles take over from ICE. Although if it generates carbon-neutral jet fuel that would be very useful. - Maybe as a carbon capture device, except that gasoline doesn't seem like a great way to store excess carbon. Although th…

Gasoline is a reasonably dense and easy to transport energy transfer material, given that we already have a vast network of devices that can use it, and a refining and distribution network.

There's no information from the article to indicate if this is actually commercially feasible though, other than nanotubes will solve everything.

Re: A Quest to Make Gasoline Out of Thin Air: Prometheus (YC W19)

#15

Post by erik_landerholm »

MuffinFlavored wrote: post #9
rayiner wrote: post #5

This is really, fundamentally important technology. Emissions reduction will not work: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/nations-are-not-r... > The authors of the report stated in a press release that the kind of drastic, large-scale action the planet desperately needs has yet to be seen, even though global emissions have reached record levels at 53.5 billion metric tons in 2017, with no signs of peaking. >…

How much do today's "carbon recapture" methods need to grow? What's the timeline on them looking like? P.S. The first Google result for carbon recapture is titled "“Direct air capture” of carbon dioxide won't solve climate change" P.P.S From Wikipedia with a cited source: capturing and compressing CO2 and other system costs are estimated to increase the cost per watt-hour energy produced by 21–91% for fossil fuel pow…

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/02/190212160020.h...

There is a lot of work. I'm not an expert, but it seems like our early attempts are orders of magnitude off in terms of efficiency, but there have been some breakthroughs using nano-tech to create custom structures that are much more efficient, but i'm sure it needs a lot more research and money to become commercially viable.

Re: A Quest to Make Gasoline Out of Thin Air: Prometheus (YC W19)

#16

Post by rayiner »

MuffinFlavored wrote: post #9
rayiner wrote: post #5

This is really, fundamentally important technology. Emissions reduction will not work: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/nations-are-not-r... > The authors of the report stated in a press release that the kind of drastic, large-scale action the planet desperately needs has yet to be seen, even though global emissions have reached record levels at 53.5 billion metric tons in 2017, with no signs of peaking. >…

How much do today's "carbon recapture" methods need to grow? What's the timeline on them looking like? P.S. The first Google result for carbon recapture is titled "“Direct air capture” of carbon dioxide won't solve climate change" P.P.S From Wikipedia with a cited source: capturing and compressing CO2 and other system costs are estimated to increase the cost per watt-hour energy produced by 21–91% for fossil fuel pow…

The author of the article (who does not appear to be an expert in anything) overlooks that renewables only address part of the emissions picture. Even if the U.S. switched tomorrow to 100% renewables and 100% electric vehicles (including trains, cars, planes, and ships), and you ignore the CO2 emissions of making all those new power plants and vehicles, U.S. usage would only go down by 3.5 gigaton: https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indica.... It won't change the CO2 emissions created by home and commercial heating, agriculture, and industrial uses, which add up to another 3.5 or so gigatons.

And even the U.S. and EU going to 0 carbon emissions wouldn't offset the growth in India, China, and Africa. And those places are a long ways away from electric cars and solar power plants. (Also, where would you put them in say India or Bangladesh?) Carbon recapture can do a very important thing renweables cannot--allow the developed world to suck out the developing world's CO2.

The current cost of carbon capture is about $120 per ton. If it follows the same trend as improvements on solar panel cost, that could be $40 per ton in a decade. At that price it would cost $300 billion annually to remove the extra carbon India will be adding to the atmosphere by then. That will be just 5% of India’s GDP by then.

Re: A Quest to Make Gasoline Out of Thin Air: Prometheus (YC W19)

#17

Post by etaioinshrdlu »

Hasz wrote: post #12

Soooooo many questions. Gasoline is a distillate made up of several hydrocarbons -- is he synthesizing all of them, or just octane? What about additives, like anti-knock agents? Plans for diesel? No amount of fancy CNTs gets around thermodynamics. CO2 and H20 are far more stable, thermodynamically, than octane, it's partially why octane is a good fuel. Where does the extra energy come from? What is the efficiency of…

Your car doesn't need a mix of lots of hydrocarbons, it would run fine on pure hexane.

Gasoline is a mix because it's made from natural crude which is also a mix... and there's not a strong reason to purify it further.

Re: A Quest to Make Gasoline Out of Thin Air: Prometheus (YC W19)

#18

Post by tathougies »

js2 wrote: post #4

There's no way this is a net energy producer right? So it only makes sense if it's powered by carbon-free sources? Basically this has two uses then: - As a stop gap till batteries and electric vehicles take over from ICE. Although if it generates carbon-neutral jet fuel that would be very useful. - Maybe as a carbon capture device, except that gasoline doesn't seem like a great way to store excess carbon. Although th…

Batteries have the disadvantage that they require heavy resource extraction and wear out. The advantage of hydrocarbon fuel is that it is basically instantly fillable (no charging), doesn't decrease in capacity (or minimally I suppose), and energy density.

The use here is that we could use a renewable energy source, like solar, and then use the hydrocarbon generated as an energy transfer medium rather than fuel itself. Actually, this is what we do today, since the hydrocarbon in the earth is actually just naturally captured solar energy.

Re: A Quest to Make Gasoline Out of Thin Air: Prometheus (YC W19)

#19

Post by hairytrog »

rayiner wrote: post #5

This is really, fundamentally important technology. Emissions reduction will not work: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/nations-are-not-r... > The authors of the report stated in a press release that the kind of drastic, large-scale action the planet desperately needs has yet to be seen, even though global emissions have reached record levels at 53.5 billion metric tons in 2017, with no signs of peaking. >…

It's still a band-aid solution. Should pursue - but don't have high expectations. It wouldn't address the other pollutants due to fossil fuels. It doesn't address methane (which are a quarter of GHG). If it makes energy more expensive there will be massive resistance and aligning governments worldwide will be intractable. You're not going to convince developing countries to increase their cost of energy.

Root cause solutions will have to be part of the mix.

Re: A Quest to Make Gasoline Out of Thin Air: Prometheus (YC W19)

#20

Post by [deleted] »

hairytrog wrote: post #19
rayiner wrote: post #5

This is really, fundamentally important technology. Emissions reduction will not work: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/nations-are-not-r... > The authors of the report stated in a press release that the kind of drastic, large-scale action the planet desperately needs has yet to be seen, even though global emissions have reached record levels at 53.5 billion metric tons in 2017, with no signs of peaking. >…

It's still a band-aid solution. Should pursue - but don't have high expectations. It wouldn't address the other pollutants due to fossil fuels. It doesn't address methane (which are a quarter of GHG). If it makes energy more expensive there will be massive resistance and aligning governments worldwide will be intractable. You're not going to convince developing countries to increase their cost of energy. Root cause s…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN