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

Catching CO2 from trucks and reducing their emissions by 90%

nuadox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 103 posts

Re: Catching CO2 from trucks and reducing their emissions by 90%

#61

Post by AnimalMuppet »

detaro wrote: post #23
Erlich_Bachman wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Building an electric car emits a ton of CO2 as well And building a regular fuel car doesn't? (Assuming we need to build some kind of car anyway?) "Electric cars are bad for environment because of building them and producing batteries" is plainly just a myth.

> (Assuming we need to build some kind of car anyway?) Why do you assume that, given the parent comment explicitly talks about retrofits?

Some retrofits will happen. I would guess, though, that 90% of electric vehicles will be manufactured as electric vehicles, rather than as retrofits. So to focus only on retrofits to make the argument is rather misleading.

Re: Catching CO2 from trucks and reducing their emissions by 90%

#62

Post by joe_the_user »

Wow, umh, hmm

This and technologies like it sound like something that could literally save the planet. If this sort of thing could be used for trucks, it could be used for trains, ships and stationary engines.

As far as I can tell, the approach involves recycling the CO2 into other fuels and I assume eventually burning everything in a fashion that creates other pollutants but I assume much less CO2. I assume that at greater cost, you could just sequester the CO2 also.

So what's stopping this?

Re: Catching CO2 from trucks and reducing their emissions by 90%

#63

Post by Iv »

joe_the_user wrote: post #62

Wow, umh, hmm This and technologies like it sound like something that could literally save the planet. If this sort of thing could be used for trucks, it could be used for trains, ships and stationary engines. As far as I can tell, the approach involves recycling the CO2 into other fuels and I assume eventually burning everything in a fashion that creates other pollutants but I assume much less CO2. I assume that at…

"So what's stopping this?"

In US? Climate denialism.

In EU. Not much, this is after all something reasearch in Switzerland that has already done other CO2 extraction research, despite scorn and cynicism by misguided ecologists.

I think the time for this tech has finally come. There used to be an argument that if we talk too much about these, emissions habits may never change. Now it is clear that simply cutting down emissions will bring us to +2C degrees at best. Every additional tech we can have to cut down emissions or extract CO2 from atmosphere is welcomed.

Re: Catching CO2 from trucks and reducing their emissions by 90%

#64

Post by olejorgenb »

mhandley wrote: post #25

Seems like this might be a better solution for shipping than for trucks. Batteries are not really a viable solution for shipping, except on short routes. They're probably stuck with hydrocarbon fuels, but this might work, and the extra mass of CO2 carried wouldn't really be a big deal for a ship. Probably won't work with current dirty bunker fuel though, as I expect that contains too many contaminants; it would need…

New regulations coming in effect in 2020: [1]

"What is the current regulation on SOx in ships emissions and by how much is that going to be improved?

We are going to see a substantial cut: to 0.50% m/m (mass by mass) from 3.50% m/m."

[1] http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/Sulphur-20...

Re: Catching CO2 from trucks and reducing their emissions by 90%

#65

Post by catalogia »

gus_massa wrote: post #5

This is too complicated and I'm not convinced, but the research paper has more details that make more sense that the short press release https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fenrg.2019.0014... They don't use the collected CO2 to make diesel fuel, they make methane. Some trucks may use methane as fuel. IIUC they don't expect every gas station to have a converted from CO2 to fuel, but to have the conversion in…

> They use the heat from the exhaust gases to power the device, the calculations are in the paper.

Wouldn't this effect the efficiency of catalytic converters? As I understand it, those need to be hot to work well. Or is the heat taken out of the exhaust after it passes through the cat? Skimming through the paper, I don't see mention of this.

Maybe it would make sense to shrink the engine's radiator and use some of the engine heat instead of exhaust heat.

Re: Catching CO2 from trucks and reducing their emissions by 90%

#66

Post by catalogia »

Ericson2314 wrote: post #33
crca wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re manufacturing a car either way aren’t you?

In fairness, I hear that the lifespan of large working trucks is far longer than vanity consumer cars.

Does that actually matter though? They'd replace the batteries, not the full truck.

Re: Catching CO2 from trucks and reducing their emissions by 90%

#67

Post by thereisnospork »

What a stupid idea[0]. Massive distributed capital expenditure for the express purpose of collecting CO2 for an uneconomic (but technically feasible) conversion to methane.

If converting CO2 to methane made sense in any form[1], it would happen first at point sources (e.g. breweries) long before this Rube Goldberg-esque inanity.

[0] No really, it's awful. Might as well try and collect the water cars emit to try and reduce our dependence on bottled water.

[1]It, as a rule, doesn't per thermodynamics and Coloumb's constant.

Re: Catching CO2 from trucks and reducing their emissions by 90%

#68

Post by twblalock »

nothrabannosir wrote: post #12
perfunctory wrote: post #4

Brilliant. Now let's force the governments to put in place the right incentives. How do we do that?

With a carbon tax. It will automatically make fossil fuels more expensive, while this device produces a fuel not subject to the tax.

What will prevent a carbon tax from ending up like any other form of corporate tax, e.g. full of loopholes?

Re: Catching CO2 from trucks and reducing their emissions by 90%

#69

Post by on_and_off »

manicdee wrote: post #53
on_and_off wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that's quite a nice strawman you have there. I haven't claimed that electric cars are bad for the environment, just that replacing a perfectly working vehicle by another one is not necessarily a win. Cars don't appear out of thin air and that manufacturing process ? it pollutes a ton.

If the replaced vehicle is used in some way, it’s a net win.

It sound like a tough sell to me if the vehicle can be retrofitted to capture 90% of the CO2 it emits.

To be fair, once it is captured, I am guessing (e.g. no data) that using it as fuel would release CO2 as well, so we would be somewhere below these 90%.

Still, the new vehicle won't appear out of thin air, and the electricity it uses won't either (hopefully it is nuclear or renewable).

Either way, I don't see why such a tech gets rejected outright. I hate gas cars as much as everybody and can't wait to see them replaced by good public transit systems, LMV and yes electric cars.

In the meantime, we have an enormous pool of gas car in circulation, anything that can help reduce their environmental impact is a win in my book.

Re: Catching CO2 from trucks and reducing their emissions by 90%

#70

Post by AnthonyMouse »

tptacek wrote: post #34
crca wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here’s a comprehensive study from the Union of Concerned Scientists. https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/11/Cl...

The numbers in this report compare the emissions cost of a new BEV to that of a new ICE. But I don't see anyone seriously arguing that people should buy new ICE's; rather, the claim seems to be that people should keep modern ICEs on the road as long as possible before replacing them (with something better than an ICE). This analysis says it takes 19,000 miles of driving to make the acquisition of a BEV emissions-neut…

It's questionable whether keeping your car longer seriously affects how many new cars get made. If you buy a new car and sell it in three years then somebody else can buy it. If you keep it for six years then the person who would have bought it still needs a car for those three years, so now they have to buy a new car in your place. Selling your completely functioning car just puts it in the hands of someone else. What really takes them off the road is wrecks and unjustifiably expensive repairs.

So how long your car lasts isn't really a question of how long you personally own it, it's a question of whether you maintain it well so that it stays on the road for the next guy and don't get into a wreck.

If you can afford to do it, it would actually help to buy a new electric car, keep it for only a short period of time and then sell it and buy another new one. Because then you're the one buying new cars and you're choosing a BEV, and every one you sell into the used market is someone who then doesn't have to buy a new car that might have been ICE.

Post reply on HN