Why can't we split carbon dioxide?

Question

Please tell me why we can't split carbon dioxide using either a filter or some process so that we're left with carbon and oxygen? Then we could place this filter or mechanism into a chimney or other carbon dioxide producing outlet; collect the carbon and release the oxygen. Please tell me why we can't do this? We can do it easily with other gasses, such as to power hydrogen cars, so why can't we do it with carbon dioxide to reduce our carbon emissions into the atmosphere? Thanks.

Hello to everyone who has provided 7 answers so far - the information is fantastic and thank you so much for not speaking down to me, because I'm ignorant about chemistry. Most of you have raised the point about cost, so I ask you; would it be at all possible to use a renewable energy source to provide the necessary power for the 'splitting' process so that coal fuelled power stations i.e. in China could cleanse their emissions? Or would the power needed for the 'cleansing' be so great that you may as well forget the coal and just build a renewably powered station to feed the grid?? Finally, if SCRUBBERS work with engine pipes then why can't we fit big ones inside coal power stations to reduce emissions??

Sorry... one more; is a 'scrubber' a catalytic converter?

Answer 1

We can split Carbon Dioxide up; The is nothing chemically stopping us if we should so choose.
However, the process is energy intensive. In order to break the bonds between the Carbon atom and the Oxygen atoms in the CO2 molecule we are required to supply energy into the system....we cant split it for "free" you might say.

The reason we can extra energy out of burning fossil fuels is because the "potential" energy contained within these fuels is higher than the energy of the products (Carbon Dioxide and water). When we burn the fuels we are taking energy out and forming more stable chemical bonds. If we want to break apart these bonds we need to put that energy back into the system.

Where is these energy going to come from to do this? It does not make sense to burn gasoline in a car to produce CO2 and extra energy and then turn around and spend more energy to break this apart into Carbon and Oxygen gas. It is likely that this other energy source received its energy from some other polluting process (statistically speaking).

The process will also be inherently inefficient. You will have to spend more energy to break apart the CO2 than you gained by the CO2 formation. So you will actually be loosing energy in this process (neglecting the energy released due to the formation of H2O).

Energy-wise, it is not a practical solution.


EDIT:
If you wanted to use a renewable energy source to break apart the CO2 into C and O2, that is absolutely possible. If you use solar power (for instance) then this would eliminate the polluting nature of the energy you’re using to "clean" with. But solar panels and other man-made renewable energy devices are not terribly efficient. What seems to be an ideal solution, and right along the same lines as what you were thinking, is to use nature's "solar panels". Plants take in Sun Light and produce Oxygen gas as a byproduct of the reaction they use to turn Carbon Dioxide into sugar. So really plants do something along the same lines as what you are describing...and plants have been doing a pretty good job of it for quite a long time now. So instead of building/buying an inefficient, expensive, solar panel to use to power a chemical processing plant to break up CO2, plant a tree (or several trees) instead.

Answer 2

Because the cost of doing it outweighs the benefits. I suppose we could rip the carbon atoms off the oxygen molecule, but then the oxygen molecule would grab the nearest thing and you'd have yet another molecule to split. Oxygen never exists as just O. It always has to be O-two or O-something. So what's the point?

Answer 3

Actually you can.

It's called a scrubber - and it can be placed in a smokestack, or feasibly placed in the tailpipe of a car.

The only reason they aren't more common is the current administration wrote the orwellian titled 'clean air act' with the very industries that are resonsible for the pollution.

They would also cost more, and reduce efficiency and power. And since it is more important for people to have fast cars than to have a clean planet to live on, then you probably won't see them popping up anytime soon.

Answer 4

The carbon - oxygen bond requires alot of energy to break. In fact, it requires about as much energy as the original burning of the fossil fuel which created it in the first place. So we would have to expend more fuel in order for to break carbon dioxide into carbon and oxygen. This energy would have to come from somewhere, and it just isn't technologically feasible to do this from a renewable source. Otherwise, we wouldn't have used the fossil fuel in the first place.

Answer 5

I agree with the cost-benefit answers on CO2 scrubbing.

Actually, getting the hydrogen for hydrogen-powered cars isn't very energy efficient, either. (Splitting hydrogen out of water is one source, getting hydrogen from natural gas or other hydrocarbons are other possible sources.) That's one reason we don't have affordable hydrogen fuel cell powered cars yet.

Answer 6

Ofcourse we can split ,but the process to split is very expensive .Planting lots of trees would help.

Answer 7

Because if you were to split dioxide it woudn't become oxygen it would become monoxide.

Answer 8

because it's a magnetic force