Difference between revisions of "Team:Hong Kong-CUHK/Description"
Kpsleung1990 (Talk | contribs) |
Kpsleung1990 (Talk | contribs) |
||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
<h5>Why CH<sub>4</sub>?</h5> | <h5>Why CH<sub>4</sub>?</h5> | ||
− | <p>CH<sub>4</sub> produced can serve as a fuel, and any CO<sub>2</sub> produced during the process can be returned to the system to CH<sub>4</sub> generation. Comparing to hydrogen (H<sub>2</sub>), a popular alternative energy source because of its "cleanliness" after combustion, storage of CH<sub>4</sub> is cheaper than that of H<sub>2</sub> due to a lower boiling point from the perspective of fuel storage. Thus it requires less energy to liquefy. Our engineered bacteria would also be able to convert the greenhouse gas CO<sub>2</sub> into CH<sub>4</sub> in closed systems, which eliminates the disadvantage of using CH<sub>4</sub> as a fuel. Additionally, no change needed to be made on current car engines, which are designed to use of hydrocarbon fuels. </p> | + | <p>CH<sub>4</sub> produced can serve as a fuel, and any CO<sub>2</sub> produced during the process can be returned to the system to CH<sub>4</sub> generation. Comparing to hydrogen (H<sub>2</sub>), a popular alternative energy source because of its "cleanliness" after combustion, storage of CH<sub>4</sub> is cheaper than that of H<sub>2</sub> due to a lower boiling point from the perspective of fuel storage. Thus it requires less energy to liquefy. Our engineered bacteria would also be able to convert the greenhouse gas CO<sub>2</sub> into CH<sub>4</sub> in closed systems, which eliminates the disadvantage of using CH<sub>4</sub> as a fuel, and being a potent greenhouse gas. Additionally, no change needed to be made on current car engines, which are designed to use of hydrocarbon fuels. </p> |
Revision as of 15:24, 15 July 2015