Petrol from Air: A Complete Feasibility Report

Version: 2.0 (Redesigned)

Date: 17 June 2025

Executive Summary

The Scientific Possibility vs. The Practical Reality

This document provides a comprehensive scientific, engineering, and financial feasibility analysis of synthesizing liquid petrol from atmospheric carbon dioxide, water, and renewable electricity—a process known as Power-to-Liquid (PtL). While each core stage of the process is scientifically sound, this report concludes that for an individual or small-scale operation, the project is practically unfeasible due to prohibitive costs and extreme, unmanageable safety risks.

Financial Barrier

The capital expenditure for the required specialized equipment is exceptionally high, estimated to be in the millions of Rands. The final fuel production cost is orders of magnitude higher than conventional petrol.

Safety Barrier

The process is fraught with severe hazards, including the generation and use of high-pressure, explosive hydrogen gas, the operation of high-temperature reactors, and the handling of corrosive chemicals. Managing these risks in a non-industrial setting is a potentially lethal undertaking.

Part I: The Foundational Science

Introduction to Electro-Fuels (e-Fuels)

The technology at the heart of this inquiry belongs to a class of synthetic hydrocarbons known as "e-fuels." These are advanced, carbon-neutral fuels produced by combining hydrogen (H₂) derived from renewable electricity with a source of captured carbon dioxide (CO₂). They are considered "drop-in" fuels, fully compatible with existing engines and infrastructure.

The Three-Pillar Process Architecture

  1. Carbon Source Acquisition: Capturing CO₂ directly from the air (Direct Air Capture or DAC).
  2. Hydrogen Source Generation: Producing "green hydrogen" via the electrolysis of water using renewable electricity.
  3. Fuel Synthesis and Upgrading: A two-step process converting CO₂ and H₂ into methanol, and then converting that methanol into petrol (Methanol-to-Gasoline or MTG).

A Thermodynamic and Energy-Centric Perspective

At its core, the PtL process is a method of energy storage. It is a net consumer of energy, with its viability predicated on abundant, low-cost renewable electricity. The overall "well-to-pump" efficiency is low; for every unit of electrical energy supplied, less than half is successfully stored as chemical energy in the final fuel product. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Part II: Module I - Direct Air Capture (DAC) Unit

Process Logic

The capture process relies on a chemical reaction where CO₂ reacts with an alkaline solution of potassium hydroxide (KOH). The primary reaction is: [1, 5, 6]

2KOH(aq) + CO₂(g) → K₂CO₃(aq) + H₂O(l)

This reaction effectively scrubs the low concentration of CO₂ from the air and binds it in the liquid sorbent.

Required Subsystems

Key Difficulties & Risks

Part III: Module II - Hydrogen Generation Unit

This module is an electrochemical system dedicated to producing green hydrogen feedstock via the electrolysis of water. For an application relying on intermittent solar power, a Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) electrolyzer is technically superior due to its fast response time, though more expensive than alternatives. [9, 12, 13, 14]

Required Components

Inputs and Demands

Part IV: Module III - Fuel Synthesis Reactor Cascade

Sub-Module A: The Methanol Synthesis Loop

Process Logic

The first step is the catalytic conversion of CO₂ and hydrogen into methanol.

CO₂(g) + 3H₂(g) ⇌ CH₃OH(g) + H₂O(g)

This requires a high-pressure, fixed-bed catalytic reactor. Unreacted gases must be separated and recycled back to the reactor inlet to achieve high efficiency, adding significant complexity.

Operating Conditions

Sub-Module B: The Methanol-to-Petrol (MTP) Loop

Process Logic

The produced methanol is then converted into petrol-range hydrocarbons using a special zeolite catalyst called ZSM-5. A complex "hydrocarbon pool" mechanism occurs within the catalyst's pores, converting methanol to olefins, which then combine to form petrol components. The raw product requires fractional distillation to isolate the final, usable petrol fraction.

Operating Conditions

Part V: A Pragmatic Look at a 'DIY' Build

This section provides a realistic analysis of what a 'DIY' or small-scale build would entail, based on your specific questions. It is a thought experiment grounded in the research, intended to provide a clear-eyed view of the project's scope, not as an encouragement to proceed against the primary safety and economic recommendations.

Power System: Solar Array Analysis

Solar Array Potential

Your proposal of covering a 300m² warehouse roof with solar panels is a solid starting point for generating the required power.

The Hidden Power Costs

The panels are only one part of the equation. A 68.75 kW system requires a significant investment in inverters, mounting hardware, wiring, and most critically, a very large Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) to provide stable, 24/7 power to the reactors, which cannot be shut down intermittently. The BESS alone can easily cost as much or more than the panels.

Sourcing Components: A Scrappy, Second-Hand Approach

Sourcing Strategy

The Workshop: In-House Fabrication with a Mini Lathe & CNC

What You CAN Make

A mini lathe and CNC machine are excellent for creating custom, non-pressurized components. This includes brackets for mounting sensors, custom enclosures for electronics, fittings for low-pressure tubing, and parts for the DAC unit's air contactor.

What You CANNOT Make (Critical Safety Warning)

It is of critical, life-or-death importance that you do not attempt to fabricate any part of the high-pressure system yourself. This includes the main reactor vessels, high-pressure fittings, or any component that will contain hydrogen or CO₂ above a few bars of pressure. These parts must be professionally manufactured and certified from appropriate materials (like SS-316 or Hastelloy) to withstand the immense pressures and prevent catastrophic failure. A microscopic flaw created by a home machine could lead to an explosive rupture.

Part VI: Financial Analysis

Cost Summary for 'Cheapest' DIY Pathway

This summary outlines the most cost-effective, yet still formidable, pathway to building a system capable of producing approximately 3.8 litres of petrol per day. All costs are estimates in South African Rand (ZAR).

Minimum Capital Costs (CAPEX)

Component Cheapest Pathway Option Estimated Minimum Cost (ZAR)
CO₂ Capture DIY Open-Source DAC Unit R65,000 - R85,000
Water Purification Reverse Osmosis + Deionization System R20,000 - R50,000
Hydrogen Generation Alkaline Water Electrolyzer (AWE) R40,000 - R60,000
Gas Compression Used/Surplus High-Pressure Compressors R200,000 - R500,000+
Methanol Synthesis Used/Surplus High-Pressure Reactor R300,000 - R900,000+
Petrol Synthesis Custom/Used Tubular Reactor R100,000 - R300,000+
Control System PLC, Sensors, Professional Installation R300,000 - R900,000+
DIY Fabrication Tools Mini Lathe & CNC Mill R50,000 - R75,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED MINIMUM ~R1,075,000 - R2,870,000

Note: This total excludes the solar panels (~R150,000), battery system (~R200,000+), installation fees, and warehouse rental.

Estimated Production Cost Per Litre

Cost Component Basis of Cost (per Litre) Estimated Cost (ZAR)
Green Hydrogen Feedstock ~0.71 kg H₂ per litre ~R66.00
DAC CO₂ Feedstock ~2.64 kg CO₂ per litre ~R20.00
Electricity (Process) ~6.6 kWh per litre ~R24.00
CAPEX Amortization R2M CAPEX over 10 years ~R145.00
Maintenance & Consumables 5% of CAPEX annually ~R72.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST PER LITRE ~R327.00

Part VII: Critical Safety Assessment

Primary Hazard: High-Pressure Hydrogen Gas

Hydrogen is the primary safety concern. It is a colorless, odorless gas with an extremely wide flammability range in air (4% to 74%) and can be ignited by a tiny spark, including static electricity. Its flame is nearly invisible in daylight.

The process requires hydrogen to be compressed to pressures up to 80 bar (1160 PSI). A failure of a reactor, vessel, or fitting at this pressure would be catastrophic, resulting in an explosive release of flammable gas. [28, 1, 29, 30, 31]

Why This is Unmanageable Outside an Industrial Setting

Even with professionals hired for initial installation, the day-to-day operational risk remains extreme. The convergence of hazards—explosive gas, high pressure, high temperatures, corrosive chemicals—makes such a system fundamentally unsuitable for a non-industrial setting. Industrial facilities manage these risks through multiple, redundant layers of safety engineering, strict administrative controls, and highly trained personnel—resources that are unavailable to a private individual. Analyses by energy and safety institutions have concluded that hydrogen gas, particularly for combustion, does not belong in residential or lightly-controlled commercial settings due to the inherent risks of leakage and explosion.

Final Conclusion and Recommendations

Summary of Findings

  1. Extreme System Complexity: The process is not a single machine but a highly integrated, miniature chemical pilot plant requiring at least five distinct and complex subsystems.
  2. Prohibitive Economics: The venture is economically unviable. Even the "cheapest" pathway requires a minimum capital investment likely exceeding R1.3 million, with a final fuel cost estimated at over R327 per litre.
  3. Unmanageable Safety Risks: The process involves the generation and use of high-pressure, highly explosive hydrogen gas. The risk to life and property is extreme and cannot be safely managed in a non-industrial setting.

Final Recommendation

Based on the overwhelming evidence of extreme complexity, prohibitive cost, and unmanageable safety hazards, it is the unequivocal expert opinion of this report that you should not, under any circumstances, attempt to build or operate this system.

Safer, More Viable Alternatives