Follow this blog:
RSS

‘Dry water’ could curb greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say

By | August 26, 2010, 8:06 AM PDT

A substance scientists call “dry water” could help curb global greenhouse gas emissions by absorbing carbon dioxide.

The curious substance, which resembles powdered sugar, could also be used to spark the chemical reactions necessary to make consumer products such as pharmaceutical drugs and food ingredients, scientists said.

It could also be a safer way to transport potentially harmful industrial materials.

University of Liverpool professor Andrew Cooper has been working with the substance since 2006, which consists of 95 percent water and was first discovered in 1968 by British researchers at the University of Hull.

How is it dry, you ask? Because each water droplet is surrounded by modified silica — the material that makes up beach sand — which prevents the water droplets from combining and turning back into a liquid.

It’s the best of both worlds: a fine powder that can absorb gases like liquid water.

In a presentation at the 240th meeting of the American Chemical Society, Cooper explained how his research team found in lab experiments that dry water absorbed more than three times as much carbon dioxide as ordinary, uncombined water and silica. The gases combine with water molecules to form what is called a hydrate.

Previously, Cooper and company demonstrated that dry water could store the methane found in natural gas. (Frozen, it’s a strange phenomenon called “combustible ice” — ice that burns. SmartPlanet energy editor Melissa Mahony wrote about it in March 2010.)

But plenty more must be accomplished before dry water can be used commercially for the purpose.

Cooper also said that dry water could be used to speed up the catalyzed reactions between hydrogen gas and maleic acid that produces succinic acid, widely used to make drugs, food ingredients and other consumer products. Currently, manufacturers must stir the components to kickstart the reaction; with dry water, that step is no longer necessary.

Finally, Cooper said dry water could be used to store liquids — particularly emulsions, mixtures of two or more unblendable liquids (the oil and water in your salad dressing, for example). Cooper’s team demonstrated that they could transform a simple emulsion into a dry powder.

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

Andrew Nusca

About Andrew Nusca

Andrew Nusca is the editor of SmartPlanet.

Andrew Nusca

Andrew Nusca

Editor

Andrew Nusca is editor of SmartPlanet and an associate editor for ZDNet. Previously, he worked at Money, Men's Vogue and Popular Mechanics magazines. He holds degrees from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism and New York University. He based in New York but resides in Philadelphia.

Follow him on Twitter.

Andrew Nusca

Andrew Nusca
Andrew Nusca does not hold any investments in the companies he covers.
If you liked this, don't miss...
16
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Dry water' could curb greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say
OK, since scientists say that we need to somehow offset 200 billion tons of CO2 to reverse global warming, it's pretty clear that this won't be able to sequester much carbon unless it's, well, as cheap as sand.

The trick for carbon sequestration is not only sequestering it, it's keeping it sequestered for 1000 years or more, right? Not sure how you're going to produce millions of tons of this stuff and where you're going to put it to keep it from releasing it later, since geologic formations seem to have trouble doing that, but hey, go for it! Sounds very expensive and cumbersome, but what do I know?
Posted by klassman6
26th Aug 2010
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Dry water' could curb greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say
Interesting, but Klassman6s point is well taken.

Would it not be possible to combine CO2 with some reactive salt of Ca on a fiber lattice to produce a useful product similar to drywall?

Kill two birds with one stone.

The more we can find ways to turn wastes into feedstocks, the better off we'll be. As for economic viability of some of these potential technologies, we need to stop ignoring externalalities. What, say, is the real cost of strip mining gypsum?
Posted by Le Spaz dArgent
26th Aug 2010
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Dry water' could curb greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say
This sounds nice and "green", but it's completely wrong-headed and shows how "science" has sold out to the myth of global warming and that carbon dioxide is somehow harmful to the planet. Find the answer to these questions and it'll change your perspective... 1. What percentage of carbon dioxide makes up the atmosphere? 2. What do plants use in photo-synthesis and what do they produce in that process? 3. What does every animal on the planet expel with every breath? 4. What is the #1 greenhouse gas in our atmosphere? 5. What grows in a greenhouse and why is that a bad thing? 6. Do we REALLY think that we are so powerful that we can effect global weather? (hint: look up the definition of the word "hubris")
Posted by arh_z
26th Aug 2010
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Dry water' could curb greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say
How fast does it work? How would it be deployed? Could it be incorporated into exhaust systems to capture gases at the source (then sequestered or emitted?) or would we have to disburse it into the atmosphere? In either case, what would the new mixture do to us? Would the cure really be better than the illness?

Is there a feasible way to "unbond" carbon from oxygen? Wouldn't that be a longer-term solution? It seems to me the only realisitc solution is to not emit those nasty gasses in the first place.
Posted by ThinkMore
26th Aug 2010
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Dry water' could curb greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say
arh_z: yes, we can and do affect global weather. Look it up. Also for you to look up: 1) the plants that are taking advantage of the excessive CO2 are opportunistic, often with caustic pollen, causing massive increases in resperatory ailments. 2) Plants can only grow so fast, so they only absorb some of the excess gasses. 3) Most plants also die or go dormant is annual cycles or less, so the CO2 they are using is then re-released for a net effect that only a portion of the excess is used at all. 4) Our planet evolved to process only so much of anything. What we all "expel with every breath" is a baseline that came about over a VERY long time. What our industrialization expels is more than the planet can process in the same amount of time.
Posted by ThinkMore
26th Aug 2010
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Dry water' could curb greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say
Arh_z: It's not that Co2 isn't normally produced and utilized in the normal biological processes - it's the fact that we are producing an EXCESS of Co2 that biological processes can't quickly handle. For a lot of our existance Co2 levels have been relatively stable, it's during the last 250 years that levels have been rising. It's this excess that is causing the problems.
Posted by Byterat
26th Aug 2010
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Dry water' could curb greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say
"The trick for carbon sequestration is not only sequestering it, it's
keeping it sequestered for 1000 years or more, right? "

Yep. Fortunately, there's a good way.

Charcoal. Plant fast-growing trees on fallow land, where it's either too
wet to farm or too dry to bother.

Black Locust and Willow, for example.

Both of these species can be mown down as 1" saplings, recover and
grow suckers, and be mown down again.

Over and over. It's just a matter of letting them recover between
mowings.

Say, every two years to be safe. The practice is called coppice, and it
can be done commercially on a long term basis for years.

Eventually, just as with any fruit tree, the production will decline. You
then pull out the root and plant a new sapling.

Now, meanwhile you take the uniformly sized saplings and throw them
in a hammer mill.

You now have many tons of wood chips.

After the pieces dry in the sun, you burn them in a modified coal
furnace to make electricity.

The furnace has to be designed to let the charcoal bits fall through a
grating, so they can be extinguished in water to stop combustion.

Sell the electricity, it's from solar energy after all.

You now have tons of charcoal bits. Sell them to farmers as fertilizer
at $10 per ton.

Not only does charcoal in soil work as fertilizer, but it doesn't break
down in the soil like raw wood does.

There's no food value left for the ecosystem to gnaw on, you see.

And the charcoal will absorb excess nitrogen fertilizer applied to the
field, as well as excess herbicides.

Soil bacteria can't feed on the charcoal, but they CAN move in and
colonize it.

And they will happily feed on the herbicide runoff and break it down
before it ends up in the groundwater.

This practice is called Terra Preta. And it goes back thousands of
years, with the original Terra Preta plots still kicking, and still really
fertile.
Posted by Jkirk3279
26th Aug 2010
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Dry water' could curb greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say
Sounds like it would make a good filter system for spacestations and the like.

But why would I want to curb "greenhouse gas" emissions?

We haven't yet (re)attained the carboniferous period. Besides, I like plants, plants are my friend, and they need CO2...

So this is another solution in search of a problem that doesn't exist.

http://www.xtimports.com/greenstupid/greenstupid.jpg
Posted by hiraghm@...
26th Aug 2010
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Dry water' could curb greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say
Thinkmore (or less):

global weather doesn't exist, and is NOT climate.

Repeat after me: weather is not climate.

Are you willing to assert that Man created the carboniferous period? All those prehistoric SUVs, no doubt.

Are you willing to assert that the carboniferous period, rather than resulting in an explosion of new life forms, particularly plants, actually destroyed all life on the planet?

And, are you willing to compromise? If we give in and let you idiots impose ridiculous measures to cut down on carbon emissions, are you willing to fund a crash program to Terraform Mars, Venus and possibly the moon? Are you willing to fund a crash program to design, build and deploy tanker spacecraft to retrieve hydrocarbon compounds from Titan, which would include the necessary "coaling stations"?

Yes, this would be extremely expensive, but not only would the payoff be A) a way of experimenting with climate w/o screwing up our own, B) two new worlds to colonize and infest with shopping malls and C) a virtually endless supply of "fossil" fuels.

If all you can come up with is "ooh, we gotta stop breathing to save mommy Earth!", you lack imagination and a belief in the resourcefulness of Mankind. There is nothing "nasty" about CO2.

http://www.xtimports.com/greenstupid/greenstupid.jpg
Posted by hiraghm@...
26th Aug 2010
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Dry water' could curb greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say
JKirk,
I've read up on Terra Preta before, and like it even better than this dry water stuff. But once again, you have to think of scale. If you're looking to extract 200 billion tons of CO2, or even a fraction of that, then you're talking a lot of acreage. This is on TOP of all of the current vegetation, wild AND cultivated that exists on our planet. I think Terra Preta could be a piece of the solution, especially if the economics were favorable for widespread adopting, but once again, there are going to have to be lots of other pieces to this puzzle. So work hard toward planting 40 acres of locust trees and start working out the kinks on how this would really work on the back 40 and see what happens.

And hiraghm, nobody ever said that we should stop breathing, so all you're doing is removinging yourself from any chance of a real discussion. Come back when you're ready to stop running around in circles. Or don't, for that matter--your choice.
Posted by klassman6
26th Aug 2010
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Dry water' could curb greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say
We haven't yet (re)attained the carboniferous period. Besides, I like plants, plants are my friend, and they need CO2...
...
...

to "reattain the carboniferous" we would have to burn all the coal that exists. We would be long dead of asphyxiation, with no oxygen, and high CO2 before that would happen. Also, there just isn't enough free oxygen to do that, after it became a major component of the atmosphere, it began to be combined with things like iron in rocks.

The carboniferous was a time when the only land animals were insects and amphibians, some of which due to the high oxygen content that had not yet been locked up in rock formations grew to extraordinary sizes.

To say global warming is not a concern because we haven't yet reached the level of 300 million years ago, before mammals, birds, lizards, even dinosaurs had evolved, when amphibians first learned to lay eggs, is stupid.
Posted by kevinrs1
26th Aug 2010
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Dry water' could curb greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say
Why is it that those who don't understand the scientific measurements of climate change, become so irrational and sarchastic? I have not seen them put forth any data, measurements or statictics than in any way convince me that the scientific measurements that explain climate chage are in error. We absolutely need a certain amount of CO2 in the atmoshphere - but more like 280-300 ppm keeps things in better balance than the current 385-400 ppm of CO2.

I'm glad people are thinking about ways to shift our energy sources away from burning fosil fuels, and glad that others are thinking of ways to reduce the excess volume of CO2 and other GHGs in the atmosphere. It's a very creative exciting time. Can we meet the challenge? I believe in the end, many different solutions will be used and will be helpful. There doesn't have to be just one way.
JMO
Posted by Jostrom@...
26th Aug 2010
+1 Vote
+ -
dry water? I'm waiting for dry Ethanol...
With dry Ethanol, you simply add some grape juice and presto! You have wine. (Does this sound biblical?)

You could pour a packet of it (with a small cup of water to act as catalyst) into your gas tank, to power your car in case the gas tank runs dry.

You could furtively drop a (big) package of it into the non-acholic punch at the xmas office party. Simply say the punch is too sour- it needs more "sugar". Watch as office merriment increases exponentially.

Finally, you could perhaps use it to melt some of that disgusting industrial sludge! which is now poisoning our farmlands!

-The Elgin Quebec sludge fighter
Posted by PercySludge
26th Aug 2010
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Dry water' could curb greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say
C02 is plantfood and not responsible for global warming but that was all that was available because education of the world is literally blind to temperature. Blind temperature = blind policy and boy did we miss data.

Urban heat islands aren't just slightly warmer areas, each building is being radiated by UV instead of reflecting UV as per building code. UV is actually causing building exteriors to generate heat close to boiling temperature. We are reacting to the symptoms with more ghg emissions. http://www.thermoguy.com/blog/index.php?itemid=42

Paint or shade will stop the heat and emissions but we shouldn't just be talking about heat trapping gases while we generate heat on the surface of the planet.
Posted by Thermoguy
26th Aug 2010
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Dry water' could curb greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say
Agriculture allowed our cultural accent and Agriculture will now prevent our descent.

Wise Land management; Organic farming and afforestation can build back our soil carbon,

Biochar allows the soil food web to build much more recalcitrant organic carbon, ( living biomass & Glomalins) in addition to the carbon in the biochar.

Every 1 ton of Biomass yields 1/3 ton Charcoal for soil Sequestration (= to 1 Ton CO2e) + Bio-Gas & Bio-oil fuels = to 1MWh exported electricity, so is a totally virtuous, carbon negative energy cycle.

Biochar viewed as soil Infrastructure; The old saw;
"Feed the Soil Not the Plants" becomes;
"Feed, Cloth and House the Soil, utilities included !".
Free Carbon Condominiums with carboxyl group fats in the pantry and hydroxyl alcohol in the mini bar.
Build it and the Wee-Beasties will come.
Microbes like to sit down when they eat.
By setting this table we expand husbandry to whole new orders & Kingdoms of life.
( These oxidised surface charges; carbonyl. hydroxyl, carboxylic acids, and lactones or quinones, have as well a role as signaling substances towards bacteria, fungi and plants.)

This is what I try to get across to Farmers, as to how I feel about the act of returning carbon to the soil. An act of penitence and thankfulness for the civilization we have created. Farmers are the Soil Sink Bankers, once carbon has a price, they will be laughing all the way to it.
Unlike CCS which only reduces emissions, biochar systems draw down CO2 every energy cycle, closing a circle back to support the soil food web. The photosynthetic "capture" collectors are up and running, the "storage" sink is in operation just under our feet. Pyrolysis conversion plants are the only infrastructure we need to build out.

WorldStoves in Haiti ; http://www.charcoalproject.org/2010/05/a-man-a-stove-a-mission/ and
The Biochar Fund http://biocharfund.org/ deserves your attention and support.
Exceptional results from biochar experiment in Cameroon

For those looking for an overview of biochar and its benefits, These authors have done a very nice job of distilling a great deal of information about biochar and applying it to the US context:

US Focused Biochar report: Assessment of Biochar's Benefits for the USA

http://www.biochar-us.org/pdf%20files/biochar_report_lowres.pdf
Posted by erich_z
27th Aug 2010
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Dry water' could curb greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say
arh_z,

The Earth's atmosphere is just under 0.04% CO2 but the real question to ask is what is the effect on the Earth. That 0.04% of CO2 is responsible for 10-15 degrees Fahrenheit of greenhouse warming and even such luminaries at Richard Lindzen and Roy Spencer wouldn't argue with that. So the absolute percentage is not that meaningful in the absence of context. Do you want to have a drink of this 0.04% solution of cyanide that I have?

The #1 greenhouse gas is water vapor which is responsible for 25-35 degrees F of the total greenhouse warming. But the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere is not something humans can affect in any meaningful way since it is totally dependent on air temperature how much water vapor can be held in the atmosphere.

Animal and plant respiration are beside the point since they are a natural part of the carbon cycle that have been in relative balance for a long time. Oh, and a greenhouse and the greenhouse effect in the atmosphere are two separate things. The way they work is entirely different from each other.

Thermoguy,

The Urban Heat Island effect has essentially zero effect on global warming. The waste heat that human activities produce is about 1% of the total greenhouse warming from increased greenhouse gases.
Posted by riverat1
30th Aug 2010
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!