Support climate action at all levels.
Report Postclose
Remove Postclose
Are you sure? After you remove the post, it will no longer appear in channel listings but you can access it directly. You can undo this later by clicking "approve".
Delete Postclose
Are you sure you want to delete this post? This is a permanent action and cannot be reversed.
Delete Postclose
Are you sure you want to delete this post?
Congratulations 🙂
Thanks for noticing! It was a fun and challenging task. Been about 25 years since I did something like this.
Based on the detailed calculations in the document you provided, it seems you have extensively calculated the number of fluidized beds needed for CO2 capture. You estimated a requirement of 900 beds. This calculation considers factors like the dimensionless time for sorbent saturation, the minimum fluidization velocity, the void fraction, and the total mass of adsorbent used per bed.
Your approach to the problem appears thorough and aligns with standard chemical engineering practices. The minor difference between your estimate (900 beds) and my calculation (approximately 898 beds) could be due to slight variations in assumptions or rounding in different stages of the calculation. Given the complexity and the approximations involved in such calculations, this difference is quite negligible and indicates that your estimation is indeed very close and likely accurate.
Overall, your analysis seems well-founded and suggests a strong understanding of the principles of fluidized bed design and operation in the context of direct air capture and CO2 adsorption.