If excess CO2 from cars is such a problem....

Why can't they just make a catalytic converter that converts the CO2 and CO into Oxygen. You see these commercials that say that the Ionic Breeze can convert smog and ozone into oxygen. Why can't they use, almost, the same technology for the exhaust of cars?

Because global warming is trendy.

The ionic breeze converts O2 to O3 which is ozone. They lie about how they work. O3 basically grabs onto stuff like dust, smog, particles, and other airborne stuff, then the partially charged O3 just falls to the ground since its heavier than air carrying the junk with it. In the case of those tall skinny ones without fans, the O3 is attracted to the positively charged plates which you wipe off later.

The problem with CO and CO2 is that its an incredibly tough bond to break. Simple treatments like electrical charges and catalysts won't do the trick.

What about NASA? Don't they use a filter that controls CO2 levels? I only saw this on the movie "Apollo 13." I'm not sure if the movie is completely true or not. I'm pretty sure the technology is possible. I'm pretty sure later on down the road, CO2 emissions from exhaust can greatly be reduced. It just boggles my mind that there may be a possibility that there might be better ways of cleaning the exhaust of our lovely, clunky, rinky-tinky, internal combustion engines.

well, they do convert to oxygen. the platinum, palladium and rhodium all help to bust up the oxides of nitrogen into oxygen and nitrogen, the hydrocarbons split giving the hydrogen to the oxygen and making water. the nitrogen remians static. the carbon monoxide isnt split but rather gains an oxygen to become the non-lethal co2. if you ever get a chance to play around with a four-gas analyzer do it. old tailpipe or "sniffer" tests used co2 to determine if the probe was actually in the exhaust or not. if co2 readings were too low because of poor running it would actually go into "sample dilution" and you couldnt test it

CO2 isn't a big problem, it doesn't pose any health risks, it's the NOx emissions, CO emissions and ozone emissions that are deadly. they are the ones that cause cancer, lung and breathing problems, and smog. CO2 is naturally produced by your body and by anything that uses hydrocarbons as fuel. as you're reading this YOU are producing CO2. besides, trees and other plants filter out CO2 and release the oxygen and put the carbon back into the ground.

CO2 does advance the effects of golbal warming, which by the way isn't as big of a problem as they make it out to be, but it poses no immediate health problems. i think we should focus more on the immediate problems than the CO2.

Anyways, back to the discussion. We have no known catalysts to break up carbon dioxide. it's a very stable molecule. carbon monoxide on the other hand, isn't very stable and gains an oxygen when it passes through your catalytic converter. NOx molecules break up into O2 and N2. i don't know if they do anything to unburnt hydrocarbons, but i know it is possible to break up hydrocarbons using a catalyst. that's how those mosquito magnets work, they use a platinum catalyst to convert propane into carbon dioxide and water, and a bit of heat.

What about NASA? Don't they use a filter that controls CO2 levels? I only saw this on the movie "Apollo 13." I'm not sure if the movie is completely true or not. I'm pretty sure the technology is possible. .

Yes, but that is a scrubber, not a catalyst. It just filters out the CO2. Humans produce a very small amount of CO2 compared to the liters per minute that cars produce. We could install CO2 scrubbers on cars, but several things prevent that:

-the intense restriction caused by the scrubber would not allow for an engine to run
-CO2 isn't the problem
-and the scrubber filter would have to be changed probably every few miles.

By the way, beef and mazda, your tech on catalysts has earned this one a spot in the FAQ sticky. SilentChamber, I know you... uh, contributed too, but it was a little light on the "tech" part. :rofl:

Well. Don't get me wrong. I believe our CO2 levels are just fine on Earth anyway. This, so called, global warming is just a cycle our Earth is going through. Even if everybody in the world stopped driving for a year or so, which will NEVER happen, the Earth would continue to heat up. I believe the global warming is caused by elevated solar activity. CO2 can contribute, but we haven't increased the concentrations as much as they want us to think we have. Along being on the conservative side, I too tend to worry a little bit of the future of the Earth. I think we're fine. We're definently polluting a LOT less than we were 25 years ago or so.

Yeah. Now if California would just enact some smog laws that actually WORKED, I could see downtown LA from my apartment 10 blocks away. We get a nice rain that clears the air for one day, then all it takes is one rush hour to make downtown disappear. And I don't buy that humidity crap. The other day it was 13% humidity and I couldn't see squat.

Why can't they just make a catalytic converter that converts the CO2 and CO into Oxygen. You see these commercials that say that the Ionic Breeze can convert smog and ozone into oxygen. Why can't they use, almost, the same technology for the exhaust of cars?

In order to convert CO2 and CO into oxygen and carbon a significant amount of energy must be added. This is the same amount of energy that is released during a complete combustion of carbon into CO2 or an incomplete combustion to CO.

That means that all energy released during the combustion of carbon must be used to convert the carbondioxide into carbon again. This leaves only the energy released by the combustion of hydrogen into water. Add the efficiency of the system and you could draw the conclusion that basically all energy released must be used for converting the CO2 and CO and this serves no function. Then you can aswell crack off the hydrogen of the hydrocarbons during production and run on pure hydrogen instead.

Converting O3 (ozone) into O2 and NOx into N2 + O2 are natural reactions, with a catalyst you can speed this up.

In order to convert CO2 and CO into oxygen and carbon a significant amount of energy must be added. This is the same amount of energy that is released during a complete combustion of carbon into CO2 or an incomplete combustion to CO.

That means that all energy released during the combustion of carbon must be used to convert the carbondioxide into carbon again.
That's only if the reaction to convert it back is 100% efficient, which it won't be, so it will cost alot more. you will be using alot of energy to convert it back. let the trees to the work.