[article] CO2 vacuum cleaner -coming soon?

mike65

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/may/31/carbonemissions.climatechange

It has long been the holy grail for those who believe that technology can save us from catastrophic climate change: a device that can "suck" carbon dioxide (CO2) from the air, reducing the warming effect of the billions of tonnes of greenhouse gas produced each year.

Now a group of US scientists say they have made a breakthrough towards creating such a machine. Led by Klaus Lackner, a physicist at Columbia University in New York, they plan to build and demonstrate a prototype within two years that could economically capture a tonne of CO2 a day from the air, about the same per passenger as a flight from London to New York.

The prototype so-called scrubber will be small enough to fit inside a shipping container. Lackner estimates it will initially cost around £100,000 to build, but the carbon cost of making each device would be "small potatoes" compared with the amount each would capture, he said.

The scientists stress their invention is not a magic bullet to solve climate change. It would take millions of the devices to soak up the world's carbon emissions, and the CO2 trapped would still need to be disposed of. But the team says the technology may be the best way to avert dangerous temperature rises, as fossil fuel use is predicted to increase sharply in coming decades despite international efforts. Climate experts at a monitoring station in Hawaii this month reported CO2 levels in the atmosphere have reached a record 387 parts per million (ppm) - 40% higher than before the industrial revolution.

The quest for a machine that could reverse the trend by "scrubbing" carbon from the air is seen as one of the greatest challenges in climate science. Richard Branson has promised $25m (£12.6m) to anyone who succeeds.

Lackner told the Guardian: "I wouldn't write across the front page that the problem is solved, but this will help. We are in a hurry to deal with climate change and will be very hard pressed to stop the train before we get to 450ppm [CO2 in the atmosphere]. This can help stop the train."

Mike.

towel401

but with no carbon dioxide in the air we'd be screwed too. plants probably suck up a load more CO2 than those machines can ever hope to 'scrub'

Húrin

Yes, it makes on wonder, why not just use plants? They are the natural tool to do the same thing. However, they use up more land, water and soil nutrients than many places can take, so that may be a reason why a machine is preferred.

JIMSTARK

As I have said before, anyone who wants to offset their carbon footprints can make a donation of €5000 to me, I will then plant trees in my back garden.

And for anyone who questions my motives and credibility, wait to you see me in my white coat, that normally seals the deal.

Capt'n Midnight

Cheapest way of capturing CO2 is to dump fertilizer into the ocean.

Can't remember if it's phosphates that limit algae growth but there is another problem in that half of the worlds phosphates are in Arab counties.

http://www.soc.soton.ac.uk/GDD/bio/Yool/Diatoms/ - looks like nitrates are limiting
to make nitrates we have to use energy and this usually means more CO2
if we just add phosphates then the nitrogen fixers benefit more

1:16 Phosphate:Nitrate is the norm in oceans if you want to add both.

still not sure if best to produce ammonia or nitrates, both could be produced from air , water and electricity from wave or wind power