r/science • u/Wagamaga • Feb 13 '25

Chemistry Researchers have developed a reactor that pulls carbon dioxide directly from the air and converts it into sustainable fuel, using sunlight as the power source

https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/solar-powered-device-captures-carbon-dioxide-from-air-to-make-sustainable-fuel
4.3k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

255 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

40

u/Zvenigora Feb 13 '25

 Now you just need to make about a trillion of them, and then keep them all maintained and in working order.

41

u/Kain222 Feb 13 '25

I mean, with Climate Change, you can't let perfect be the enemy of good.

Sure, this thing won't slow stuff down on its own, but we should take every single win we can get.

17

u/OnlyOneChainz Feb 13 '25

It depends, since it's technology it could possibly made way more efficient than a tree. I agree this is probably not going to happen though.

15

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

9

u/twystoffer Feb 13 '25

Given the flow rate and efficiency, more like 100+ trees.

However, this particular experiment was only designed to test the feasibility of solar powered carbon exchange using this particular method.

With some slight tweaks and maybe an introduction of another power source (wind or tidal), you could potentially ramp that up even further.

The biggest issue is that it creates syngas, which breaks down into CO and H if not used, and CO2 if it IS used.

But...

Considering that syngas is a precursor to fertilizer, it might be worth it...

7

u/-Ch4s3- Feb 13 '25

Carbon neutral synthetic gas seems pretty great if it’s commercially viable. If you’re just cycling CO2 out of the air, through combustion, and back into the air then you could replace a lot of things that still couldn’t be battery powered. Synthetic gas for marine fuel could be a huge benefit to overall carbon reduction insofar as it would cut a lot of net emissions.

2

u/twystoffer Feb 13 '25

That's exactly what ethanol is. We have an pretty decent abundance of carbon neutral fuels, but not nearly enough carbon extraction.

2

u/-Ch4s3- Feb 14 '25

Corn ethanol is not in any way carbon neutral. I think something like 40 gallons of diesel go into 1 gallon of corn ethanol production.

-6

u/JBstard Feb 13 '25

I don't think you're going to beat mother nature in efficiency stakes

8

u/Hei2 Feb 13 '25

Mother nature doesn't really care about efficiency; it cares about what works. There are plenty of examples of inefficient design in biology (think the recurrent laryngeal nerve in giraffes, or the optic disc in human eyes).

8

u/irisheye37 Feb 13 '25

Nature has far more variables than the efficiency of a single task.

4

u/Fr00stee Feb 13 '25 edited Feb 13 '25

since corporations only do things if they can make money, some chemical/oil corp would love to be able to put these things everywhere and keep using the output to power gas engines. The only feasible way I see to get these corps to do something that would fix the planet.

2

u/KnottShore Feb 13 '25

The probable case for a chemical/oil corp is to buy an exclusive license and kill the technology.

2

u/Fr00stee Feb 13 '25

there researchers can just patent it then give the ability to use it for free

2

u/bielgio Feb 13 '25

Won't get funding or subsides required

Pay attention, we either have a monopoly or the government to have innovation at scale, right now the richest country in the world has no government

1

u/Fr00stee Feb 13 '25

this is from the UK so idk

1

u/Naritai Feb 14 '25

sure it will, we don't need this kind of doomerism

1

u/klingma Feb 14 '25

Okay? What's the problem though? 

Our issue is that climate change is causing havoc across the Earth and if we can't motivate people to do something about it out of the goodness of their hearts but we can with money, we still accomplish the same end goal, right? 

We don't criticize dogs who follow commands because they want a treat, why would we criticize someone who wants to do something about climate change but also make money? In scenario one the dog sits and in scenario two we get progress fighting climate change. 

0

u/Fr00stee Feb 14 '25 edited Feb 14 '25

there is no problem? I was just saying that it might be a viable solution since companies don't really want to do anything about climate change using current technologies

-2

u/Opie67 Feb 13 '25

Why is it the people that panic and cry about climate change the most are viciously against any real potential solutions

1

u/ThrowbackPie Feb 14 '25

We aren't. But we are very frustrated that our solution is to keep destroying the natural world and replacing it with machines.