Turns out someone is already using CO2 as a 3D printer material. But economical ever?https://twitter.com/didaclopez/status/1074015273068490752 …
-
-
The problem is always net energy. Can we develop a process that uses less than it captures and does it better than photosynthesis. If we had a low/no carbon energy source the math starts to work. The energy source seems to be key to any process more so than the the process.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Photosynthesis is not that efficient. Less than 11%. Less than 1/2% wood building. Back in 2003 I helped Boeing make photocells that 45% efficient. photocells that power chemical capture process is 55% efficient. Swarms are best.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Area volume rule. 1 mm cube has 6 mm2 area. 1 meter cube has 6 m2 area. 1 billion 1 mm cubes have the same volume and 1000 times the area of the single cube. Its why trees have leaves. A large robot swarm organised not to shade one another works better than trees.
-
Sounds interesting, but where are they? That was 15 years ago. I'd love to be wrong. If you can solve the energy problem I think you can solve the carbon problem. If we can reduce the cost of energy in economic and carbon terms we can capture atmospheric carbon in a viable way.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.