DailyDirt: Storing Energy In Organic Molecules

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Tue, Sep 16th 2014 5:00pm — Michael Ho

Petroleum products are a pretty convenient way to store energy. It's just unfortunate that burning the stuff releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Biofuels could be a solution, but relying on natural biological processes can be difficult to scale up -- especially if we expect biofuels to try to match up with the current energy demands. Researchers are working on ways to modify biology or circumvent it with chemical engineering to make some carbon neutral hydrocarbon fuels in large quantities. Here are a few possible examples.

A copper catalyst system can produce ethanol (and acetate) from carbon monoxide at room temperature and pressure -- without any kind of fermentation. This copper-based system relies on an electrochemical cell and could be a environmentally-friendly way to produce a non-toxic, renewable fuel. [url]
Scientists have played with Escherichia coli bacteria that can generate propane gas. The process needs a lot more work to become a practical way to produce propane as a fuel, but a bioreactor to make propane could be viable in a decade or so. (Maybe.) [url]
Some species of bacteria have been found that can consume pure electricity for food. These naturally-occurring microorganisms usually live near hydrothermal vents on the seafloor, but if they can feed on electrons directly (instead of soluble bits of iron), then they might be able to store energy in biomolecules for us and turn electricity into convenient biofuels. [url]

If you'd like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) Techdirt post via StumbleUpon.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: bacteria, biofuel, biotech, carbon dioxide, electricity, energy, ethanol, extremophiles, fuel, hydrocarbons, petroleum, propane

9 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 16 Sep 2014 @ 7:32pm

uh, why propane when bacteria already make plenty of methane?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
CK20XX (profile), 16 Sep 2014 @ 8:55pm

Re:
The difference between propane and natural gas is like the difference between gasoline and crude oil. It's just better and more useful all-around when refined from its natural state. Of particular note, methane is a harmful greenhouse gas while propane is not.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mr. Oizo, 17 Sep 2014 @ 12:05am

Re: Re:
Doesn't really matter since it is supposed to be burned anyway.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lawrence D’Oliveiro, 17 Sep 2014 @ 1:06am

Bugs Feeding Only On Electricity May Live, But They Cannot Grow And Reproduce
Just thought I’d point that out.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Sep 2014 @ 2:37am

"Petroleum products are a pretty convenient way to store energy."

How do we store energy in those products?

I left a can of regular gas plugged in overnight and it didn't even turn into high-test.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jim, 17 Sep 2014 @ 5:08am

Eh?
Some problems, CO2 is a good gas, plants use it to produce foodstuffs for animals. I like to eat animals, therefore good gas. Second problem, is if cardox is bad, why try to produce more synthetically, making it more expensive to obtain. Now I would agree to more efficient systems, less wasted heat for the amount of gas consumed. Redesigned systems to capture the waste heats and produce something usehul from that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Coyne Tibbets (profile), 17 Sep 2014 @ 11:27am

Carbon dioxide to ethanol at room temperature
Combine that copper catalyst process that converts carbon monoxide to ethanol, with this Brookhaven room temperature process for converting carbon dioxide to carbon monoxide, and you would really have something.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 17 Sep 2014 @ 11:54am

Re: Eh?
"CO2 is a good gas, plants use it to produce foodstuffs for animals. I like to eat animals, therefore good gas."

This is much too simplistic. CO2 is a gas that has both good and bad effects. As with most chemicals, whether it's good or bad depends on a combination of things -- mostly where it is and how much of it is there.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
CK20XX (profile), 17 Sep 2014 @ 12:46pm

Re: Re: Re:
The object isn't to just burn them and screw the details. The object is to get useful and efficient energy from them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]