
Can CO2 be given value by using it to make plastics? - endswapper
http://www.materialsforengineering.co.uk/engineering-materials-features/can-co2-be-given-value-by-using-it-to-make-plastics/149031/
======
fabian2k
The one huge aspect this article doesn't even mention are the thermodynamics
of the process. Of course CO2 can be used as a building block for plastic, but
it contains far less energy than the plastic you want to create. That means
you have to supply that energy difference somehow.

The reason we use mostly oil to synthesize plastic is that someone else
already put in the energy to convert CO2: the plants.

Even though you can't avoid the thermodynamics here and cheat the energy
difference, of course there could be more efficient, cheaper and cleaner ways
to go from CO2 to plastic, and those would be interesting in terms of dealing
with climate change.

~~~
nojvek
Here's a crazy idea I've been thinking for a long time. Is tthere a way to
artificially create a way to trap sunlight and turn it into gasoline in an
artificial process. Basically what earth does in thousands of years but with
human ingenuity we make it a lot faster and free reproducible in other
countries.

I see the core problem as. We already have great gasoline infrastructure. It's
very energy dense. We just need to learn how to make green gasoline.

~~~
slightleep
The US navy is planning on introducing the ability to generate jet fuel from
seawater on its nuclear aircraft carriers in the 2020s. The process works, it
just takes a tremendous amount of energy (hence the nuclear carrier part) and
it requires a lot of water to create a gallon of jet fuel (20,000 gallons I
believe for a singe gallon of jet fuel).

The toughest part, however, is that the process would release methane gas into
the air. So it's unclear if it's really greenhouse-gas neutral.

In theory, though, if you could trap the methane and then sequester the
hydrocarbons you made, you'd have a way to pull CO2 out of the atmosphere.

------
mchannon
CO2 already has value, if it's concentrated enough (stack emissions,
unfortunately, aren't). There are CO2 mines in multiple western US states
where the CO2 is dug up, sent through pipelines, and reinjected into oil
wells. "Enhanced oil recovery", they call it, and it's big business. So big,
in fact, that the supply from the McElmo dome in the SW corner of Colorado,
pipelined across the entirety of New Mexico, into Texas, is oversubscribed and
you can't buy any.

CO2 needs hydrogen, pure and simple, to become almost any other substance of
value (I suppose lithium extraction could use the gas instead of trona, but
not a big market there considering the supply). Any plastic, polymer, or
vegetation needs hydrogen to exist.

So the CO2 problem is the hydrogen problem, but on steroids. You can't get
reduced atmospheric CO2 with hydrogen if making that same hydrogen molecule
created 2 or 3 CO2 molecules. This leaves you with plant-based approaches
(photosynthesis is ridiculously inefficient, which itself is probably a good
thing considering how much we like some of the greenhouse effect), or "clean"
hydrogen.

------
hannob
Appart from things other comments have already mentioned there's some issue
that the article doesn't properly reflect: Where does the CO2 come from?

You can grab the CO2 from the atmosphere and thus produce (temporary) negative
emissions. But then you need even more energy in the first place. So naturally
you'd get the CO2 from somewhere where you already have large amounts of CO2,
e.g. a coal power plant. So you have created a justification to keep the coal
plant running (with a supposedly imperfect co2 extraction process). How's that
going to work out in a supposedly CO2 free energy future?

Also it should be considered that the CO2 in the plastic isn't gone for good.
Plastic has a limited lifetime and will eventually end up in a landfill or a
waste processing plant where it'll release its stored carbon back to the
atmosphere.

So if your process is "burn coal -> capture CO2 -> use CO2 to create plastics
-> plastic ends up in waste processing plant" you have delayed the emissions
from the coal plant and you can argue that you have used the coal in a more
efficient way, but the CO2 still ends up in the atmosphere.

~~~
andrewtbham
I agree, for this to make sense you have to use renewable power source

~~~
jartelt
But it might not even make that much sense even in that scenario... If our
goal is to reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, it may be more
effective to just add the renewable power source to the grid and further
decarbonize our grid. Getting rid of all our coal plants would probably have a
bigger impact than designing and building a system that sucks a bit of CO2 out
of the atmosphere and makes plastic with it.

------
xyunknown
This was debunked years ago. Making plastics from CO2 is possible, but an
energy hungry process which does not suck up any relevant amount of
carbondioxide from our atmosphere. It isn't going to be the climatesaver they
claim it to be. This is not a manufacturing issue, but depends on basic
thermodynamics.

~~~
worldsayshi
It can be feasible if we suddenly end up with an enormous abundance of energy
right? Like fusion power levels of abundance.

~~~
adwn
Why would fusion power result in "enourmous abundance" of usable energy? A
fusion power plant would not run on magic, it is an extremely complex, very
expensive high-tech system which requires human oversight, maintainance, and
fuel.

~~~
jartelt
Yep - our already built fission plants are starting to go out of business
because the power they produce is too expensive. I don't think we should bank
on fusion plants being incredibly inexpensive to operate.

------
betodo
I don't know of any process that makes plastics directly from CO2, but the gas
can be used to produce several intermediates.

Saudi Aramco recently acquired Novomer's Converge polyol technology, which
uses CO2 to make polypropylene carbonate polyols. Polyols are a main component
of polyurethanes. The Converge-based polyurethanes are used in coatings,
adhesives, sealants and elastomers.

Covestro is also producing polyols made from carbon dioxide.

As mchannon noted, these companies cannot use the CO2 emitted from power
plants. The gas needs to be pure so companies can do chemistry on it.

There are also some renewable routes to making plastics from CO2.

We already produce ethanol from sugar fermentation. This ethanol can be
dehydrated to produce ethylene, the building block for polyethylene. Braskem
is already doing this in Brazil. I believe Braskem is the ONLY company doing
this, so that should tell you how cost effective the process is.

A company called Proterro was in the early stages of using a cyanobacteria
that consumes bacteria to produce sugar. This sugar could then be fermented to
produce ethanol, which could then be the feedstock for polyethylene.

Other companies have developed microorganisms that can ferment sugar to
produce lactic acid. Polymerise this and you get polylactic acid (PLA),
another plastic. This is one of the plastics used to make filament for 3D
printers.

Other companies were developing micro-organisms that could produce
polyhydroxalkanoates (PHAs).

------
ScarZy
I really hope this comes into fruition.There was a great radio 4 program that
highlight the potential uses of CO2 in the production of various items. The
problem was that the cost of production, and how we are used to low cost
plastics.

[http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b081lkm1](http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b081lkm1)

~~~
endswapper
This is something that is currently under development and being licensed for
large-scale commercial production. This is one company active in the space:

[https://www.newlight.com/aircarbon/](https://www.newlight.com/aircarbon/)
[https://www.newlight.com/newlight-technologies-
signs-15-year...](https://www.newlight.com/newlight-technologies-
signs-15-year-production-license-agreement-with-paques-holdings-bv/)
[https://www.newlight.com/newlight-signs-10-billion-pound-
pro...](https://www.newlight.com/newlight-signs-10-billion-pound-production-
license-with-ikea-2/)

------
TeeWEE

      Ted Grozier, flagship programme manager on the EnCO2re initiative, explains the thinking. He says: “The idea of a hackathon is you basically lock people in a room, you give them pizza and energy drinks, and they solve problems quickly.”
    

I always makes me sad when I see people talking about hackatons as a "tool"
the can use by giving "pizza and energy" drinks. Hackatons have become a
corporate tool.

------
Symmetry
Well of course. Plastics are syntasized from hydrocarbons and given sufficient
electric power you can turn atmospheric CO2 and water into hydrocarbons. We've
known how to do this with simple methane for over a hundred years and we have
pilot plants for more complex hydrocarbons. The problem is where that electric
energy comes from.

Here's hoping for continued progress in reducing the cost of solar panels,
etc.

~~~
thinkcontext
Newlight claims to have a new biocatalyst that is 9x more efficient than
previous processes used in converting methane to plastic and that they can
compete w/ petroleum based plastic on price when they scale up.

[http://www.biofuelsdigest.com/bdigest/2015/07/13/one-
billion...](http://www.biofuelsdigest.com/bdigest/2015/07/13/one-billion-
pounds-of-carbon-negative-plastic-made-from-greenhouse-gas-and-pure-air/)

------
adrianN
> The CO2 is captured from a neighbouring facility, thought to be producing
> ammonia.

Nobody knows what it's _really_ producing.

~~~
stephengillie
Apparently, the facility is producing CO2, among other molecules.

------
roryisok
> The Polyol is 80% petroleum and 20% CO2 based.

The 20% CO2 is great, but I'd rather see more innovation in replacing that 80%
Petroleum with bioplastics. When the oil runs out we can solar up the wazoo,
but if we can't find something alternative plastic sources we're going to have
problems

~~~
maxerickson
There are reasonable plant plastic processes. The simple alcohols are pretty
good chemical feedstocks and we are pretty good at making them from plants.

------
stefanix
Yes, see PLA made from corn starch.

------
chirantanpatel
Great Stuff.

~~~
teach
It's one of the social norms on HackerNews that "low-value" comments like
"Love it! Thanks!" and "Great Stuff" are discouraged. Although such comments
are polite to the poster, they add nothing but noise for all the other readers
of the thread.

Instead, it seems to be preferred that you simply upvote the post without
replying.

~~~
piyushco
Nice explanation!!

------
andrewtbham
I have thought about this... and an even worse problem, if this were to be
successful, would be CO2 depletion. Plants need CO2 to "breathe"

