Reduce Co2; Improve Co?

[hazelm]

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/11/181128082744.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily%2Ftop_news%2Ftop_science+%28ScienceDaily%3A+Top+Science+News%29

 

My first reaction was why the poisonous carbon monoxide?  But a little search turns up some facts that scientists are finding.  CO can be of benefit if administered in the right dosage and right method. 

 

 

P. S.  Sorry about those o's.  Can somebody please turn them into O's?  Thank you.

Edited November 29, 2018 by hazelm

[exchemist]

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/11/181128082744.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily%2Ftop_news%2Ftop_science+%28ScienceDaily%3A+Top+Science+News%29

 

My first reaction was why the poisonous carbon monoxide?  But a little search turns up some facts that scientists are finding.  CO can be of benefit if administered in the right dosage and right method. 

 

 

P. S.  Sorry about those o's.  Can somebody please turn them into O's?  Thank you.

Like you, Hazel my reaction to this is what will they then do with the CO?

 

But I think this is really a piece of pure research and the stuff about carbon capture is added to show that one day it could, maybe, become a first stage in some multistage process. (Of course the more stages you add, the less attractive the process becomes, but that's for another day.) 

[hazelm]

Like you, Hazel my reaction to this is what will they then do with the CO?

 

But I think this is really a piece of pure research and the stuff about carbon capture is added to show that one day it could, maybe, become a first stage in some multistage process. (Of course the more stages you add, the less attractive the process becomes, but that's for another day.) 

Thank you, exchemist.  Pure research, yes, as were the benefits that I brought up.  Something to keep informed about. 

[exchemist]

Thank you, exchemist.  Pure research, yes, as were the benefits that I brought up.  Something to keep informed about. 

I was thinking: if one has access to hydrogen, one can mix this with CO to produce syngas (synthesis gas  - very similar to the old town gas we had in our homes as children). From this all sorts of interesting organic chemicals can be made. But like CO, hydrogen is made either from fossil fuel or by reduction of water, i.e. requires energy input.

 

That's the big thing with all reductive carbon capture. You need to put energy in to accomplish the reduction, i.e put back the energy you originally got out when it was burnt!  Whereas with passive carbon capture, such as pumping CO2 down old oil wells,  all you need is energy to do the separation and gas compression. I still don't know how useful this idea of reduction is likely to be. 

[hazelm]

This playing around with chemicals - as well as with atoms, medical experiments, trips to Mars, etc., - reminds me of what a friend says every time CERN tries something new:  "I hope they know what they are doing."   I'd respond:  without experiment there is noprogress except that is it progress?

 

Just keep your CO alert gadget up to snuff.

 

 

P. S.  Exchemist, do you have the power to change the o's in the title to O's?  Surely would look better.  Thank you. 

Edited November 30, 2018 by hazelm