[dzvero]

Not sure it is all true but seems promising :

[GuidoK]

It all depends on the nominal efficiency of that plant because that process uses energy of course.
I think they dont say that.

Basically its a giant tree but a tree is solar powered by itself.

[Maynard]

Isn't this kind of reinventing photosynthesis?

[dzvero]

kind of

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by johnmathew

A novel experiment is taking area in the Princeton University lab of chemist Andrew Bocarsly. Like a battery, the experimental device has poles of charged materials resting in a bath of chemical-laced water. A small tube bubbles carbon dioxide into the device, called a cellular. The CO2 interacts with the charged metallic coating one of the poles and, with the help of a special catalyst, starts to form larger molecules that combine carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen atoms.

https://usawriters.org/how_we_work

Your link has no content relating to your story.

[chetrickerman]

This looks very promising

https://www.facebook.com/VICEAustral...3022985727922/

[GuidoK]

Still their 'physical' explanation makes no sense.
They start that video with 'Why dont we recycle energy'....'You're hitting the nail on the head'
But he's absolutely not hitting the nail on the head, because this process has nothing to do with 'recycling energy'. This is a process that makes hydrocarbon fuel from co2 in the air (and water), and costs more energy than the hydrocarbon fuel that is created contains.
They present it as a way of free energy, or recycled energy but its just converting one form of power into another at a certain efficiency rate (below 100%). So this process costs energy. So these product presentations are very misleading to people who have no chemical knowledge.