Difference between revisions of "Team:Aachen/Design"
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Team:Aachen/Header}} | {{Team:Aachen/Header}} | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
Products from the bioeconomy play an important role in a sustainable future, but are dependent on cheap and available biomass as a carbon source. The availability of sustainable biomass, though, is limited by the arable area of our planet. Even by deforestation and setting up new agricultural area, we cannot provide enough arable land for both biomass for the bioindustry and food crops to solve the problem of world hunger. So if we hardly manage to feed the population, how can we guarantee the supply of biomass for other biotechnological products? | Products from the bioeconomy play an important role in a sustainable future, but are dependent on cheap and available biomass as a carbon source. The availability of sustainable biomass, though, is limited by the arable area of our planet. Even by deforestation and setting up new agricultural area, we cannot provide enough arable land for both biomass for the bioindustry and food crops to solve the problem of world hunger. So if we hardly manage to feed the population, how can we guarantee the supply of biomass for other biotechnological products? | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
Line 25: | Line 13: | ||
− | The main advantage of our product is that it addresses the problem in various ways | + | The main advantage of our product is that it addresses the problem in various ways. Not only can the potential of methanol as a carbon source be exploited but also the surplus CO{{sub|2}} in the atmosphere is utilized. It has to be considered as well that by fixing the CO{{sub|2}} technically, non-arable areas like deserts can be used. |
+ | |||
− | + | Furthermore the problem is approached by mounting large areas of energy crops. | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | Another potential solution to this global problem are farming of algae, where simple carbon compounds using CO{{sub|2}} and sunlight are produced. However, the technical process of fixing CO{{sub|2}} that precedes our process, for example through the company sunfire, is far more efficient also compared to plants. The efficency of energy that is converted into chemical energy is about 80 times higher than the conversion of CO{{sub|2}} to biomass through plants and even 18 times higher than the maximal efficieny natural photosynthesis can theoretically have.<ref>Die natürliche Photosynthese: Ihre Effizienz und die Konsequenzen - Hartmut Michel</ref> | |
==References== | ==References== |
Revision as of 15:09, 18 September 2015