Capitol Hill Blue
Posted By: TatumAH Carbon Sequestration - 10/18/21 05:53 PM
A breakthrough in carbon capture and storage: turning CO2 into coal

I ran across this innovative method of carbon dioxide sequestration, while looking up some information about fungi. It is a clever use of Gallium alloys that have melting points near room temperature, to serve as electrodes with doping of other catalytic ions (cerium etc) to reduce CO2, which is pretty hard to reduce. The product of the reduction is a carbonaceous solid, that had previously been a problem as it "coked" up previous electrodes. (Not that kind of COKED UP, you druggies) The advantage of the liquid metal electrodes is that the coke-like product falls off in sheets that are easy to capture.

The black carbonaceous material can be buried, but it sure looks similar to Bio-Char to me.

Does anyone know why this hasn't caught on as a carbon sequestration method, particularly since it produces a product that could be utilized in compost and soil improvements?

I have enjoyed playing with Woods metal, one of the low melting alloys, that was quite toxic from cadmium, unlike Gallium. We cast some spoons of it that melted when used to stir coffee grin
Posted By: logtroll Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/19/21 12:36 PM
That’s interesting but short on practical information and context. Where does the CO2 gas come from? Electricity is needed - how much and from where? (it sounded kinda like the process provided it somehow). Does the carbon produced have significant microporosity, or does it need to be “activated” before being useful in the soil?

Sounds like it is still in the research phase and strategies for scaling and implementation are a ways off. I wonder if they are thinking of flue emissions scrubbing, or general vacuuming of the atmosphere?

While there appear to be similarities to biochar, the lifecycle context and range of associated benefits and costs are probably very different.
Posted By: TatumAH Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/19/21 03:10 PM
Room temperature CO2 reduction to s...aturing atomically thin ceria interfaces

I try, often unsuccessfully, not to overwhelm casual readers with the primary literature detail, but rather the big picture.
But here you go! Room temperature CO2 reduction to solid carbon species on liquid metals featuring atomically thin ceria interfaces. More than you want to know about Galinstan liquid metal cat-a-lists.
Would you like Raman with your energy disspersive x-ray analysis? grin
co2 liquid catalysts

I was interested that some of the carbonaceous produce was reduced not just to elemental carbon, but some areas had unsaturated carbon-carbon bonds. The deposits are planar but this may be due to trying to crank up efficiency by keeping the electrode from coking up, to show potential for practical CO2 reduction.
I suspect that by running the electrolytic process a bit differently you might be able to generate a more three dimensional structure with deep aromatic cores like biochar. This was clearly not their main focus, just something I was considering from the soil side of conservation.

The other advantage is that it take place at room temperature, as well as making a stable solid carbon product with possible uses. I would figure that solar cell electricity would be used to drive this low voltage process.
I feel sad that all those photons hitting SW arid areas are being wasted, not to mention all the newly generated deserts around the world.
I'm buying to Gallium and Cerrium futures, though I coincidentally happen to have a supply of Cerium oxide in the basement, previously used for polishing glassy stones like obsidian. I see an experiment happening in the basement soon grin
TAT
Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/19/21 03:33 PM
Originally Posted by TatumAH
Room temperature CO2 reduction to s...aturing atomically thin ceria interfaces

I try, often unsuccessfully, not to overwhelm casual readers with the primary literature detail, but rather the big picture.
But here you go! More than you want to know about Galinstan liquid metal cat-a-lists
Would you like Raman with your energy disspersive x-ray analysis? grin

I got an error message, says "This site can't be reached", thus I think you maybe mangled the URL?
Posted By: TatumAH Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/19/21 03:46 PM
Thats why I put them in two places! grin Same url as in title, but fixed it in edit anyway!
Posted By: Greger Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/19/21 07:33 PM
Let's turn all this carbon into diamonds and we'll all be rich enough to fly to Mars!
Posted By: logtroll Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/19/21 09:46 PM
Originally Posted by Greger
Let's turn all this carbon into diamonds and we'll all be rich enough to fly to Mars!
"And who will buy all of the diamonds?" said the Little Red Hen. "And who will get all of the carbon credits?"
Posted By: Greger Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/20/21 12:38 AM
All the other rich people will buy the diamonds. Like bitcoins they will forever rise in value and as soon as all the carbon is sequestered they will become more and more rare!

It's a win-win situation.
Posted By: logtroll Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/20/21 12:48 AM
Sounds like solid science… I’m in!
Posted By: TatumAH Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/20/21 01:59 AM
Wellog,
You're no fun anymore grin
When looking into low melting alloys, the typical GalInStan goes for about $120/0.25 pounds, so almost $500/K.
This looks like something that would be fun to play around with! Thus there may be a problem with liquid alloy theft. It's a very liquid asset if there was a market, and notoriously difficult to dust for prints. Its too late for me to get out of my pure metals futures, but I may be lucky and find a way to get completely out of Galinstan!

TAT

Galinstan
Posted By: logtroll Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/20/21 11:31 AM
Here is a genius solution - what’s not to like?
It hits the highest priority, which is making sure the fossil fuels industry remains in control.

I’d like to know the cost per ton of CO2 sequestered so that we could see if the biochar scam is competitive…
Posted By: TatumAH Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/20/21 02:14 PM
Efficiency of gallium

Yes it seems a valid process, as I didnt see a major problem with it, unless it doesnt scale well. Even if it didnt do well on a large scale, many smaller units might even help with local CO2 production as in autos/trucks.

I didnt notice in the previous work that sonication and lots of nano-technology was involved, and I need to look into the term triboelectrochemical reactions for Dummies. See below!
Triboelectric A Chemical Potential ...l Reactions on Solid–Liquid Interfaces
This wouldnt inhibit my experiments as I have lots of sonicators around including a flow cell sonicator.

I bet it would work with liquid mercury, what could go wrong with that? Other than a mad hatter scenario, but who would notice?

TAT

The reactor also contains nano-sized solid silver rods that are the key to generating the triboelectrochemical reactions that take place once mechanical energy (e.g. stirring/mixing) is introduced.

Quote
“We have already scaled this system up to 2.5 liters dimensions, which can deal with around 0.1 liter of carbon dioxide per minute.”

“And we’ve tested that running continuously for a whole month and the efficiency of the system did not degrade.”

The process dissolves captured carbon dioxide gas into a solvent around nanoparticles of gallium. The reactor also contains nano-sized solid silver rods that are the key to generating the triboelectrochemical reactions that take place once mechanical energy (e.g. stirring/mixing) is introduced.

A triboelectrochemical reaction occurs in solid–liquid interfaces due to friction between the two surfaces, with an electric field also created that sparks a chemical reaction.

The reactions break the carbon dioxide into oxygen gas, as well as carbonaceous sheets which ‘float’ to the surface of the container due to differences in density and can therefore be easily extracted.

The scientists obtained 92% efficiency at the remarkably low input energy of 230 kWh for the capture and conversion of a ton of carbon dioxide.

They estimate this equates to a cost of around $100 per ton of carbon dioxide.
Posted By: pondering_it_all Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/20/21 10:55 PM
If we can scale this appropriately for cars and trucks, maybe they can "poop" out carbon logs on the highway, much like horses used to do. But with much less methane production. If we really got it to work well, maybe they could "poop" out diamonds!

I'm thinking there might be a little Second Law problem though: The process probably takes more energy than you got out of making the CO2 to begin with. I think that's the problem with all industrial carbon sequestration schemes. It would be more efficient to just stop burning fossil fuels. Solar, wind, geothermal, tidal, hydroelectric, and nuclear don't have that problem.
Posted By: logtroll Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/20/21 11:22 PM
Originally Posted by pondering_it_all
It would be more efficient to just stop burning fossil fuels. Solar, wind, geothermal, tidal, hydroelectric, and nuclear don't have that problem.
Of course, best of all is pyrolyzing woody biomass, burning the smoke for energy, and utilizing the sequestered biochar/carbon in all manner of wonderful ways!
Posted By: TatumAH Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/21/21 02:34 AM
It is depressingly ironic that natural gas leaks are such a major climate problem, and one so easy to solve by simple, but expensive, plumbing. We have a huge problem with gas leakage as a result of trying to cut emissions and wean ourselves from coal. Only now with satellite methane monitoring do we have a way to find big sudden leaks internationally.
Russia will never willingly deal with it. So why should we even try to work or CO2?

Quote
On the morning of Friday, June 4, an underground gas pipeline running through the ancient state of Tatarstan sprang a leak. And not a small one.
In a different era, the massive leak might have gone unnoticed.

NO NOT ANCIENT TATARSTAN frown
Very nice interactive graphics on this WAPO major report!
TAT

Russian gas leaks
Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/21/21 03:47 AM
Originally Posted by TatumAH
It is depressingly ironic that natural gas leaks are such a major climate problem, and one so easy to solve by simple, but expensive, plumbing. We have a huge problem with gas leakage as a result of trying to cut emissions and wean ourselves from coal. Only now with satellite methane monitoring do we have a way to find big sudden leaks internationally.
Russia will never willingly deal with it. So why should we even try to work or CO2?

Quote
On the morning of Friday, June 4, an underground gas pipeline running through the ancient state of Tatarstan sprang a leak. And not a small one.
In a different era, the massive leak might have gone unnoticed.

NO NOT ANCIENT TATARSTAN frown
Very nice interactive graphics on this WAPO major report!
TAT

Russian gas leaks

There's no way in Hell Russia can even afford to fix all the leaks and even if they could, repairs would be well nigh impossible in certain parts of the country, or if performed, would not hold through one change of seasons.
Ask any pipeline worker how long a repair lasts in climates where 50 below zero is normal.
Posted By: TatumAH Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/21/21 06:02 PM
Originally Posted by Jeffery J. Haas
There's no way in Hell Russia can even afford to fix all the leaks and even if they could, repairs would be well nigh impossible in certain parts of the country, or if performed, would not hold through one change of seasons.
Ask any pipeline worker how long a repair lasts in climates where 50 below zero is normal.

This almost makes the point that just maybe drilling and pipelines in the Arctic are not a great idea! grin
These wells and pipeline need to be shut down if they cannot be maintained without creating destructive climate change emissions.
TAT
Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/22/21 06:25 AM
Originally Posted by TatumAH
Originally Posted by Jeffery J. Haas
There's no way in Hell Russia can even afford to fix all the leaks and even if they could, repairs would be well nigh impossible in certain parts of the country, or if performed, would not hold through one change of seasons.
Ask any pipeline worker how long a repair lasts in climates where 50 below zero is normal.

This almost makes the point that just maybe drilling and pipelines in the Arctic are not a great idea! grin
These wells and pipeline need to be shut down if they cannot be maintained without creating destructive climate change emissions.
TAT

They can definitely be repaired however in most cases a repaired section fixed in minus 50 degree weather might bust wide open again when the temp his 45 above, or 70, or whatever.
Even the SPACE SHUTTLE suffered disastrous fuel leaks when it took off in 30 degree weather because they didn't follow the advice of Morton-Thiokol & Parker Hannifin to wait for warmer weather, and that's the Space Shuttle...this is just a section of pipeline, maybe not quite built to precision tolerances of a NASA rocket.

Russia doesn't give a flying ****, and I still say even if they did, it's something built not to "Russian" standards but more likely to DRUNKEN Russian standards. And they probably would bankrupt themselves trying to keep it fixed.
Posted By: logtroll Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/22/21 10:48 AM
Schlurping CO2 from the atmosphere and storing it in the soil
Posted By: TatumAH Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/22/21 02:16 PM
I start a lot of my posts with "ironically" lately!
Ironically the development of no-till farming to save the rapidly eroding topsoil, required the use of herbicides like glyphosate to control weeds previously controlled by tillage, Note that they use the "when applied as directed on the label" but larger and larger doses are needed to control increasingly resistant weeds.
. Tillage vs Herbicides

Quote
In his post, he documents a number of studies that look at the effects on soil of glyphosate, insecticides, fungicides, tillage and synthetic fertilizers.

For example, he references a 2016 meta-analysis of 36 glyphosate studies (Nguyen et al.) that found “‘field application rates [of glyphosate products] had no significant effect on SMR [soil microbial respiration] or SMB [soil microbial biomass].’ They did find effects when applied at higher rates, but that is why we have the EPA and pesticide labels.”

He cites several other studies that make similar statements and says “While not conclusive, this evidence does not raise any red flags about the use of herbicides and their effect on the soil.”

A study by Bunemann et al. that reviewed all agricultural inputs suggests that some insecticides and fungicides “proved to be quite toxic,” yet a review by Imfeld and Vuilleumier (2012) said “the literature on the effects of pesticides on soil micro-organisms suggests that they only have minor or transient effects when they are applied at the recommended doses.”

McGuire also referenced a meta-analysis of 107 data sets from 64 long-term trials that looked at the effects of synthetic fertilizers and concluded that fertilizer applications actually led to increased microbial biomass compared to unfertilized control treatments.

Tillage, on the other hand, as no-tillers know, degrades soil structure, causes erosion and compaction, kills earthworms and destroys the soil ecosystem. As the NRCS says, “Tilling the soil is the equivalent of an earthquake, hurricane, tornado, and forest fire occurring simultaneously to the world of soil organisms. Simply stated, tillage is bad for the soil.”

Granted, these studies are limited to looking at the effects of these products on soil microbes and don’t get into effects on human health, persistence in the environment and the like. Nor do they look at the potential benefits of a no-till organic system.

But in terms of how pesticides and fertilizers compare to tillage and the long-term outlook for soil degradation, McGuire clearly makes the case that “if protecting the soil is the first requirement for sustaining agricultural production, then clearly tillage is not our first choice if other, less damaging tools, like herbicides, are available. The tradeoffs between herbicide use and tillage favor herbicides.”

With the help of cover crops and new weed management tools, many no-tillers are making headway toward reducing these inputs as well, which is fantastic. But as the population continues to grow, it’s comforting to know that no-tillers are on the right path where soil health is concerned and that the judicious use of fertilizers and pesticides can be part of a sustainable agricultural system.
Posted By: logtroll Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/22/21 02:49 PM
Ironically, weeds can be controlled through permaculture techniques and steering of the soil biology over time.

Ironically #2, healthy soil can support more vegetation due to better moisture management capability and higher productivity. What we delusional humans have come to believe is undesirable competition is actually biodiversity, a good and necessary thang.

Ironically #3, why do humans revere competition in business interactions, but strive to eliminate competition in plant communities?
Posted By: TatumAH Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/22/21 03:33 PM
I was very impressed by those Nordic studies where they showed that a directly mixed diversity of vegetation led to rapid formation of topsoil. It is hard to have mixed crops veggie crops, but it seems a perfect solution for grazing fields. Just plant a mix of suitable plants like my lettuce mesclun patch, no not Mescalin, you druggies.
Then just let the herds loose to provide poop compost. I see rotation of such mixed flora fields with monocultures after soil regeneration, as the long term solution.

TAT
Posted By: pondering_it_all Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/22/21 05:40 PM
On Youtube, I like to watch Goldshaw Farm, and the farmer was just talking yesterday about what his new cattle will do for his soil with rotational grazing on his pastures. He even had video of their most important contributions: Cow pies and trampled grass. Turns out his ducks love the insects those bring, too.
Posted By: TatumAH Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/22/21 05:56 PM
That sounds similar to Michael Pollans farm where the chickens rotate following the cow rotation to eat the maggots out of the cow poop. Free range chicken sounds so much better than, cowshiet maggot fed chicken! sick
They never mention who harvests the cowpie schrooms! crazy
TAT
Posted By: jgw Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/22/21 06:52 PM
I thought this might be of passing interest:

https://www.myclallamcounty.com/202...uestration-energy-plant-to-port-angeles/

We also have a paper mill. The last owner spent a LOT of money setting up a boiler supported with stuff like burning slash. it was really impressive. They brought the stuff in on trucks then the truck would drive onto a lift which would raise the entire truck up on edge so the stuff to burn just slid out of the truth. Then we got a new owner and the first thing they did is to take that and sell it off as well as a lot of the machinery inside of the plant. Now the mill is making cardboard and the new owners, basically, sold off enough of the mill to almost pay for their investment.
Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/22/21 08:23 PM
Originally Posted by logtroll
Ironically, weeds can be controlled through permaculture techniques and steering of the soil biology over time.

Ironically #2, healthy soil can support more vegetation due to better moisture management capability and higher productivity. What we delusional humans have come to believe is undesirable competition is actually biodiversity, a good and necessary thang.

Ironically #3, why do humans revere competition in business interactions, but strive to eliminate competition in plant communities?

In the last four decades the love of competition grew stale.
Turns out the most powerful among us detest competition and would rather buy everyone out instead.
I guess big business loves monopolies now.

All I know is, purity is something almost NEVER found in Nature.
Posted By: logtroll Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/22/21 08:31 PM
Originally Posted by pondering_it_all
On Youtube, I like to watch Goldshaw Farm, and the farmer was just talking yesterday about what his new cattle will do for his soil with rotational grazing on his pastures. He even had video of their most important contributions: Cow pies and trampled grass. Turns out his ducks love the insects those bring, too.
The key is to keep them mooving.
Posted By: TatumAH Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/23/21 02:54 AM
Head em up, Mooove em out!
Posted By: pondering_it_all Re: Carbon Sequestration - 10/23/21 07:28 AM
Farmer Gold has no trouble getting them moving. They are pretty wild and wary of him and his 4-wheeler. His problem is getting them to go where he wants! They already have found a nice shady spot with yummy lush grass they like. Maybe once they munch the grass down, they will move on naturally to another spot. He envisions moving them from paddock to paddock intentionally, but I suspect he will discover it's far easier to just make the adjacent lush paddock available and they will move on their own. He could help them along by filling water troughs and putting out salt licks in the new paddock.

He's in Northern Vermont, so he's going to have an interesting time convincing them his barn is a nice place to hang out over the winter. I warned him cattle were going to be a whole new ball game from raising ducks and geese. He has all of his ducks trained to go in their house when he yells: "All ducks go to bed." at dusk. Dairy cows that want to be milked twice a day are trainable. Free-range beef cattle, not so much.
Posted By: TatumAH Re: Carbon Sequestration - 11/13/21 02:07 AM
Black Pigment Matters

Waste Paper Derived Biochar for Sustainable Printing Products
Staples Sustainable Innovation Laboratory Project

Here is an exhaustive study to determine if Biochar can replace Carbon Black for printing inks. Carbon Black was historically produced by burning hydrocarbons in low oxygen generating soot. I haven't followed up on this, but it seems reasonable if the demand for printed hard copies hasn't disappeared from competition by electronic media. Regardless, the article is a treasure trove with many cheerful facts about the chunks of micro-Biochar!

TAT


[quote][The Golisano Institute for Sustainability (GIS) at the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT)
performed a research and development assessment in conjunction with the Staples Sustainable
Innovation Laboratory (SSIL) to determine the potential of pyrolyzed waste paper as a novel, cost-
effective, environmentally friendly and sustainable black pigment for use in common consumer
and commercial printing applications (e.g. inkjet, lithography and flexography). To do so, the
primary focus of the project was the creation and testing of a stable form of elemental carbon called
“biochar” (BC) to replace the heavy fuel oil derived “carbon black” (CB) pigment ubiquitously
used in inks since the late 1800’s. /quote]
© ReaderRant