Not to mention that basically all the collected data and goals are centered on flue gas with high CO2 concentrations.
It's contradictory, if you have isolated fossil power and for some reason have excess renewable power co-located to convert the waste back to chemicals, then just turn off the fossil power... unless this is a load balancing play, which it is not ever going to be good for.
And the original oil and coal is better for converting to chemicals anyway!
Yep, saying your going to gassify crude oil and then recycle the co2 is basically like saying your going to unspill milk. The only point in the thing's favor is that there's tons floating around already.
Exactly. The maximum efficiency of conversion to electricity in a thermal plant is maybe 30-40% even ignoring losses in converting back to hydrocarbons. But even 99% would be a loss relative to simply using the original hydrocarbons.
This is a rube goldberg machine, taking high value hydrocarbons that could be converted to commodity and fine chemicals and instead burning them and taking the released carbon and... putting it back together? It's not even a very efficient perpetual motion machine.
It's contradictory, if you have isolated fossil power and for some reason have excess renewable power co-located to convert the waste back to chemicals, then just turn off the fossil power... unless this is a load balancing play, which it is not ever going to be good for.
And the original oil and coal is better for converting to chemicals anyway!