Panasonic says it has created an artificial photosynthesis system that can convert carbon dioxide into organic fuels, and can do so as efficiently as plants. The system creates energy by passing sunlight or concentrated light through a nitride semiconductor photoelectrode, and then uses this energy to convert carbon dioxide and water into formic acid. The system may seem inefficient with a rate of just 0.2 percent, but it's the most efficient system of its kind so far, according to Panasonic. Previous attempts to create a similar mechanism had a limited efficiency due to their complex structures.
Although formic acid is corrosive and generally toxic to humans, it has many uses. The company says that the formic acid produced could be used for dyes and perfumes, and it can also be used in cleaning products, pesticides, and as a preservative in food for livestock. Panasonic hopes to use this technology to create a "simple and compact system" to capture and convert carbon dioxide emissions from industrial plants. Many small systems placed at centers of industry worldwide could make a huge impact on current carbon dioxide emissions and the resulting problem of global warming.
Comments
Good thing i don’t use perfumes.
Hope it doesn’t deplete the water sources too much.
By Kaggy on 07.30.12 1:12pm
Yes the wonderful smell of smashed ants.
By dougmany on 07.30.12 2:48pm
lol, thus begins a new problem we will create
Global cooling….
By jontech on 07.30.12 1:31pm
Well at least we know how to warm it up again!
By Matthew Walton on 07.30.12 1:51pm
V8s and SUVs! YEEHAW!
By protonchain on 07.30.12 4:21pm
It’s always been “climate change”. People just like to call it “global warming” because that’s the name that took hold. “Global warming” actually predicts longer, colder winters and shorter, hotter, more intense and hurricane-ridden summers.
By Humpledink on 07.30.12 2:39pm
Not sure how old you are, but in the ’70s “climate change” was pretty much unheard of. Scientists were constantly in the press talking about “global warming” as a result of the “greenhouse effect.” That was when the ozone hole was a big concern.
Our current use of “global warming” is a result of a generation of news reporters (and others) coming of age in the ’70s.
By MySleep on 07.30.12 3:17pm
There must be a climate scientist somewhere that knows how much Co2 is ideal, but how amazing would it be if us Earthlings can reach the point where we effectively have people monitoring this particular vital stat of our planet and either scrubbing Co2 or adding it – essentially teraforming our own planet.
More Co2 will rarely be a problem, less is the big problem :/
By aaricus16 on 07.30.12 3:36pm
Checkout 350.org, bunch of scientists come together to say 350 carbon parts per million is right to maintain the right balance.
By LordInsidious on 07.30.12 4:15pm
you should check out “state of fear” by michael crichton! it’s a great read! crichton is one of my favorite authors and even in his fiction books, many of the facts are based on science! (in the back of his books are often 20+ page bibliographies to reference all the papers and studies he used in his book research)
state of fear takes on the topic of global warming among others.. he writes about how before global warming was the buzz word it is today, scientists and governments were warning of global cooling and the next ice age coming.. also, about the natural fluctuations of temperatures worldwide through the centuries (can be determined through analysis of layers of ice for example)
this became a much longer comment than intended.. :P you can get the book here for example:
http://www.amazon.com/State-of-Fear-ebook/dp/B000FC2NQW/
By SunnyDee on 07.31.12 3:21am
I thought plants did it at near 100% efficiency…
By Humpledink on 07.30.12 2:40pm
Plants have 3-6% maximum efficiency (it varies depending on the plant). Wikipedia has a surprisingly good description of this.
Nature is rarely 100% (or even 50%) efficient because it’s rarely a requirement for reproductive success. Even humans are extremely inefficient nutritionally. Feces is full of nutrients — that’s why so many animals (including apes) eat it.
By MySleep on 07.30.12 3:21pm
Ah, so the primary reactions have 100% “quantum efficiency” but the efficiency of the whole system is, as you’ve said, 3-6%. Still, 3-6% is quite a bit more than .2 percent.
By Humpledink on 07.30.12 3:37pm
It varies depending on the plant. This source says that it ranges from 0.2-2%: http://www.narcis.nl/research/RecordID/OND1310000/Language/en/;jsessionid=v4vj9ohnzom and other sources place it at just 0.1%. So while in some cases it may be higher, Panasonic’s claims that its system is just as efficient as plants aren’t entirely off-base.
By kimber.streams on 07.30.12 5:52pm
if the implementation of this would be as wide spread as panasonic would like, and with as much co2 as is released everywhere every year, i wonder what we would do with all the formic acid produced.. i can’t imagine we could possibly use it all.. i mean, we already seem to have enough of it (in respect to what we currently use it for) now, right?
well.. according to wikipedia, formic acid might be used as fuel in fuel cells (miniature ones, like for phones or laptops)! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formic_acid_fuel_cell
so this could have a lot of potential after all! :)
By SunnyDee on 07.31.12 3:40am
This has truly massive potential.
This is also the first time in my adult life that I can recall being excited by a Panasonic product (I’m guessing that’s the proper referral term here?).
By anydeltaco on 07.31.12 4:35pm