Particles and SRM

 

The post covers some of the issues around various materials that could be
used for SRM, handling and equipment challenges, and issues around creating
fine particles of the different materials. I am excluding discussion about
how each of the materials might react with other chemical species in the
environment of the upper atmosphere. Other previous discussions of this
forum have covered this.

Sulphuric acid

This is probably the most widely discussed material for SRM. I have seen
little regarding the handling hazards and the quite serious issues of
storage and equipment selection. I have worked on production plant design
that has had to incorporate concentrated sulphuric acid. Every aspect of
storing, handling, pumping, and dosing this product is problematic and
expensive. SRM will by definition need to use reasonable amounts of this
material and this will trigger all kinds of health and safety issues for
aspects of the operation. The problems get exponentially worse and more
expensive if you try to go the route of sulphur dioxide or trioxide.
Shifting to diluted sulphuric (50% for example) does not always make things
easier. I can guarantee that the costs of using sulphuric acid at any scale
will be harder and a lot more expensive than people will initially expect.
This will mean higher CAPEX and OPEX costs. I can see real issues of pumping
sulphuric acid and spraying at high altitude once you undertake a risk
failure analysis for if something goes wrong. The problems are not
unsolvable but they will limit where you can do this and they will raise
costs.

 

Titanium Dioxide

Titanium dioxide has the significant advantage that when it is made, it
forms small submicron particles that are well suited for SRM. Regretfully
there are other confounding issues with titanium dioxide:

*       It is quite costly and a limited resource. If a new market emerged
to start using more of it the price would become even greater.
*       It takes a lot of refining and will increase the waste production
that is associated with its production. Again I have some experience in this
area. It is a non-trivial matter.
*       Powdered titanium dioxide carries a cancer risk if mishandled. I
think if you started seriously talking about spraying particles of this
material in the upper atmosphere, there would be public pushback for this
reason.

 

Calcium Carbonate

Previous, I was a one of the people who early on argued for considering this
material.  Calcium carbonate could have a lot of advantages (easy to handle,
plentiful, etc) but I now realise there is a serious issue that I feel needs
to be brought to the fore. Creating submicron calcium carbonate is going to
be costly in terms of Capex, OPEX, and energy. Again I have experience here
because my team was looking at capturing CO2 by reacting gypsum with CO2 and
ammonium sulphate to make pigment quality calcium carbonate (white filler).
We solved the purification problem which had defeated all who had attempted
this before. We could make 10 micron precipitated calcium carbonate fairly
easy and the grinding costs to make 3 micron product (this was our target
market) are not bad BUT if you want to make a lot of small fine submicron
calcium carbonate, there are issues. When you grind calcium carbonate below
10 micron, the grinding energy exponentially climbs the finer you get. This
means if you want to make product with an average diameter below 0.1 micron,
the energy costs is going to be very substantial. The production plant will
need to be quite large. So you will incur high CAPEX and OPEX costs.
Potentially, I think this could be enough to prevent calcium carbonate being
a material to use for SRM.

 

Salt (NaCl)

There has been a lot of discussion about spraying salt water to make fine
particles through different ways.  I have done work on spraying reactants.
Coalescence is a non-trivial issue that tends to rob you of the fine
particles that you were initially seeking. There are solutions but all
require more energy and equipment complication. I found nozzle clogging
issues became more of an issue the finer that we tried to spray and when we
tried to increase the volumes. Again, not an unsolvable problem but if your
spray nozzle is tens of miles up, it will likely be an issue to give real
thought to. It will definitely be a lot harder to deliver salt particles
that are fine submicron rather than above 1 micron salt particles.

There may be a more direct solution for salt that I have not previously
seen. It would be relatively straightforward to create sub-micron salt
particles using a spray drier. This is well established technology that
equipment exists for small and large applications. I believe it is likely
that you could create bulk salt particles below 10 nm.  It would be
relatively easy to blow a mixture of dry air and fine salt particles up a
tube to high altitude where they would be released. 

An ideal arrangement would be to have a small spray drier creating fine
particle salt from a salt solution that is then directly taken and mixed
with dry air and blown up a fine tube to the high atmosphere where it is
released. The delivery tube is supported by an aluminised nitrogen filled
balloon. I have previous written about using nitrogen filled balloons as
stable platforms for lifting and how you would do this. Potentially, a
nitrogen filled aluminised balloon would be a very stable lifting platform
as the nitrogen would take decades to diffuse out of the balloon envelope.

 

 

David Sevier

 

Carbon Cycle Limited

248 Sutton Common Road

Sutton, Surrey SM3 9PW

England

 

 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/019901d926b5%24e0e01c20%24a2a05460%24%40carbon-cycle.co.uk.

Reply via email to