Of course more grant money will be needed.
You read my mind.
The government loves to put up money for anything they can label "green". The study I’d like to see is the study that calculates how much the taxpayer has to spend to save money on something he never intended to buy in the first place.
Sounds like alchemy to me.
Not to mention the CO2 produced by the fuel needed to power the Hoover. Not to mention the inefficiencies of using one power source to generate the power.
In other words, stop F*ng with nature before you really f* things up.
Here’s the way this process works:
CO2 Extraction from Air:
Air + MWh Energy + $Billions from suckers -> CO2 + Air
Hydrogen Production via Electrolysis:
2 H2O + MWh Energy + $Billions from suckers -> 2 H2 + O2
Methane from CO2 and Hydrogen:
CO2 + 4 H2 + MBtu Energy + $Billions from suckers -> CH4 + 2 H2O
Steam Methane Reforming:
CH4 + H2O + MBtu Energy + $Billions from suckers -> CO + 3 H2
Fischer-Tropsch Gas-to-Liquids:
(2n + 1) H2 + n CO + MBtu Energy + $Billions from suckers -> CnH(2n+2) + n H2O
Suckers include taxpayers, investors, and customers if this process were ever commercialized (it won’t).
Every step requires energy and billions of dollars from suckers. The laws of thermodynamics are such that it is impossible that energy inputs would be less than or equal to the energy contained in the product fuel. Absolutely impossible. The absurdity of the process is such that energy inputs would be several times the energy contained in product fuel. The energy balance is so bad that it makes corn ethanol look good as an alternative fuel.
You can do this chemical rebuilding for just about anything. The problem is the efficiency - far more net energy being used to make it happen than what is generated.
Fossil fuels burned elsewhere - out of sight and out of brain of people who dont care what the whole picture is - as long as it makes them think they feel good.