Good idea to prevent exhaust gas from polution

Ho, ho ... Just a minute please ... I need some explanation ....
You say : "19 pounds of CO2 for every gallon of gas" ... A rough estimate tells me that one gallon of gas weighs about 7 pounds, right ?

Now, please explain me how 7 pounds of gas can produce 19 pounds of CO2 ...

This sounds like MAGIC to me ... Using 7 pounds of a certain product, burn it, and get 19 pounds of "ashes" ? Woooow ! Now THAT is an invention ! Let's build cars that run on CO2! One "conventional" car would produce enough "fuel" to drive 3 "CO2-cars" ....
Or .... did I miss something ?

Fuel burns in air. So the weight of gas is equal air + fuel used in combustion. So weight of gas is more than fuel.

CO2 is not ash it is a gas.

Person who developes a car which runs on waste CO2 deserves a Nobel prize.

before you are exultant, have you ever read exactly the words....?

how 7 pounds of gas can produce 19 pounds of CO2 ...

and you said : So the weight of gas is equal air + fuel

are you confusing concept? what is what? gas, air, fuel ...

what is a car runs on waste co2? means a car neednt fuel can be drived on the way?

fresh idea.

haha, chemic knowledge in middle school still remain with me. not brag, to teach middle school this subject is still no problem. include organic chemistry

Its a good idea to sell carbonic acid to Cocacola company to reduce the cost of beverage. but the acid is unstable. its very easy to recover to co2 and water. so have to deal carefully with it.

another question is when peple held up the drinking bottle, a flash into his mind is its made of the car waste gas, wow, can he drink any more?

that coca company will soon break.

any good idea? is the waste gas all co2?

however, plants require co2 to implement photosynthesis to grow, to produce oxygen.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.........

That is the single most stupid question I have ever seen on the internet....you should be on the stage at Carnegie Hall, sweeping it!!

Papa, you made my day.........a real big thanx big Buddy.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.........

Your comment is inappropriate.

In fact, your comment is the single most stupid one made on the internet today. Especially in these forums.

I think if car exhaust was a feasible byproduct for profit it would already be monopolized on.

I don't want to be given to propaganda about China, but during one of my college courses I read that China has some of the worst polution problems in the world regarding automobile exhaust.

I read that the reason for this is because the Chinese government is slow in instituting smog controls on automobiles.

Controlling exhaust pollution has been most effectively controlled by burning higher octane fuel and using ion exchange methods by way of a catylitic converter.

I would have to agree that installing a system that captures the car exhaust would only add weight to the vehicle and as a result you would be burning more fuel per mile or kilometer.

So in essence you would just be making a trade off.

Sorry, guys, but I'm still puzzled ...
I agree ... the CO2 is MIXED with the air... but even then ... 19 pounds of air mixed with CO2 ... that's a whole lot of air... Wondering ... how many cubic feet of "mixed air" is needed to make a weight of 19 pounds ?
I guess this is a question for our chemists to answer ...

I think the 19lbs referred to with the CO2 is in regards to pressure.

We're dealing with the physical weight of a gallon of fuel and the result is producing 19 psi of CO2 gas.

I'm not a chemist nor a physisist nor a scientist of any kind but that's the first impression that crossed my mind when I saw his statement.

If you look at the chemical reaction of burning gasoline, you are combining oxygen from air with a carbon-hydrogen bond in the gasoline, yielding waste gases CO2 and water:

C(n)H(2n+2) + [(3n+1)/2] O2 -------> (n) CO2 + (n+1) H2O

The value of "n" is not fixed since there is more than one type of C-H bond in gasoline.

But you can see that for each mole of C-H bond, you get n moles of CO2 - a multiplier effect.

So let's look at a common gasoline ingredient, benzene (in some countries, what we in the USA call gasoline is called benzene, so it is a major constituent).

You have six carbon atoms per benzene molecule, so when you combine with oxygen, you will get six C02 atoms. Or, one mole of benzene yields six moles of carbon dioxide.

Benzene weighs 78 grams per mole, and gasoline weighs 6 pounds per gallon (sorry for the bastardized units, 44mEurope - this would be much simpler using MKS units). So one gallon of gas, six pounds, contains 35 moles of benzene:

1 gallon of gas * 6 lbs/ gallon * 1 mole/78 grams * 454 grams/lb = 35 moles

In turn, burning 35 moles of benzene yields six times that many moles of carbon dioxide. A mole of carbon dioxide weighs 44 grams, so burning 35 moles of benzene - one gallon of gas - yields 210 moles of CO2 which weighs

210 moles * 44 gm/mole * 1 kg/1000 gm * 1 pound/0.454 kg = 20.35 pounds of CO2

So there you have it. When you burn gas, you combine carbon with oxygen, and you get one carbon dioxide molecule for every carbon atom in a gasoline molecule. You get a multiplier effect from that, plus more mass by replacing a hydrogen bond with an oxygen bond.

Hope that suffices to explain the relationship. I worked this out when I started hearing about how much CO2 was generated from driving a car around it, and it sounded high to me, too. But it works. What you have to keep in mind, however, is the tiny fraction this amounts to for all the world's cars, compared to the total mass of the atmosphere.

But that's another calculation, for another day.

Thank you for your information.

I completely understand. Well Done.

It's the same principle as igniting hydrogen. You are actually starting a chemical reaction that produces a compound. In this case the result is creating H2O.

not bad,

However, I think the formula of cnH2n+2 , CH4, C2H6... c8h18 etc is not benzene. although they are all belong to hydrocarbon class, as well as CnH2n. CnH2n-2.. (where n=2,3,...)

most of us familar with benzene loop, beautiful structure. but they are really different substances.

I can still draw their structure form with bond. I can calculate in the way of mole.

CO2 is molecule, not atoms. I think it must be your wrong writen. I believe you know what is molecule, what is atom.

besides, the exhaust gas is not only co2, but much other wste substances like sulfur compounds, lead etc. (my knowledge is old, I canonly know that lead can invrease number of gasline.) this can be polution of atmosphere.

however, I still vote for your thread.

and look forward to seeing next calculation.

Do you all guys know where it is? beatiful place,

here is the picture again.

this another day is so long ... you may prepare many materials for that another calculation. haha.

Materials for absorbing CO2 = amines, selexol, rectisol, potassium carbonate, zeolites, etc. there are many. Used every day in a number of chemical processes, very similar to sulfur removal processes.

Major problems include:

1. Added weight to the car increases your power requirements.
2. Increased pressure drop in your exhaust circuit makes the car run less efficiently.
3. Regenerating your CO2 absorbent is very energy-intensive. Pumping it up to dense fluid for injection or sales to someone else is very energy-intensive.
4. A number of the items above are oxygen intolerant and you will have excess O2 in the exhaust gas.
5. How this would save money is beyond me considering it will add capital and operating cost to the vehicle not to mention the added cost of dealing with and treating the absorbent.

Other comments:

1. Coke's CO2 probably comes from ammonia plants (the few that are left in the US) or other CO2 producers who consider the CO2 a waste gas. It must be made into food-grade product prior to selling to Coke.
2. Other exhaust products just may include a truckload of nitrogen.
3. "only our chinese talent have such smart, wise thinking to save all the vihcle industry and protect enviroment." People that live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, I hope that was just a poorly-thought out joke.

the idea may only be feasible for stationary and big installations of hydro-carbon-burning power generating equipment. it *might* be feasible for mobile heavy equipment that won't spit blood at an added 1-ton payload. it's definitely a bad idea for a 4-door sedan or 2-door coupe.

a better idea would be to mandatorily install these in all buildings, using green-technology-power, creating, in effect, "breathing buildings" just as plants are inhaling CO2 and exhaling O2.

How will that sealed container that collects the exhaust gas be any different than a clogged exhaust system? Please explain what is going to happen when the exhaust pressure in your collection container exceeds 200 PSI? Will the 200 PSI remaining have any effect on the flow of clean air that should be sucked into that cylinder?

the inlet and outlet are different parts of a generator, neednt worry polute clean air.

the mec c gave the solution of the waste gas, see above . send to factory to make H2CO3 then sale to cola company to mix into beverage.

When the pressure in your containment box becomes too high, no clean air is going to flow into your engine. You are going to have to pressurize the exhaust gas to contain any quantity of it.

no, there will be no so much higher pressure in the collection box. it keeps pressure as same as aire, either by absorbe stuff or by equipment such as something like voccume sets. I have said before. its easy to do and after some time or distance drive, the box will be changed, jujst like to have to add oil after some distance driving.

the exhaust gas include not only co2 but other poisonous masses which might be exhaused into air.

how about presenting a schematic diagram of your proposal so everyone will have something to chew on, rather than chewing on each other?

I misposted this one. this question is addressed to the original proponent.

Dear All,

I am not contributing anything new to this discussion except some observations. Barring few answers/contributions which in my opinion were really good as they contrbuted positively to the suggession, most others were either in negative mode or pulling legs of China, Chinese and Coca Cola etc. which was in bad taste for a forum like this. I feel you need a small idea for a new invention.

Regards all,

KARAN

Put a fork in me. I'm done.

haha, what does it meaning?

why?