2. Why use CO2 from Air? At 400ppm, there is 500 times less CO2 in air than in any powerplant exhaust, so using the same state of the art separation, for the same throughput, your equipment should be ~500 larger? That seems like a capex waste.
2. Why use CO2 from Air? At 400ppm, there is 500 times less CO2 in air than in any powerplant exhaust, so using the same state of the art separation, for the same throughput, your equipment should be ~500 larger? That seems like a capex waste.
The reason to use direct air capture rather that going for higher concentration point sources is one of scale. We want to produce fuel at scales much larger than can be accommodated by any other means that capture from the air.
Higher CO2 concentration seems like it ought to make your initial testing easier.
Likewise, if you are really more cost effective than distillation all the existing ethanol plants would love to replace their boilers with your system. It seems like a simple way to get a small cash infusion selling to them. They can convert their ethanol to gasoline as well, and have infrastructure in place.
What I'm saying is don't bite off more than you can chew. If any piece works now push it while getting the others working.
Maybe they could setup their devices around plants anyways tho.