4 ms·

There's no way this is a net energy producer right? So it only makes sense if it's powered by carbon-free sources? Basically this has two uses then: - As a st

by js2 8y ago

There's no way this is a net energy producer right? So it only makes sense if it's powered by carbon-free sources? Basically this has two uses then: - As a stop gap till batteries and electric vehicles take over from ICE. Although if it generates carbon-neutral jet fuel that would be very useful. - Maybe as a carbon capture device, except that gasoline doesn't seem like a great way to store excess carbon. Although the article indicates the carbon could be converted into other materials. That part isn't very clear.

kortex 8y ago
Correct, it collects carbon in the form of CO2 and "un-cracks" it back to hydrocarbons. Likely Fischer–Tropsch process.
toast0 8y ago
Gasoline is a reasonably dense and easy to transport energy transfer material, given that we already have a vast network of devices that can use it, and a refining and distribution network. There's no information from the article to indicate if this is actually commercially feasible though, other than nanotubes will solve everything.
tathougies 8y ago
Batteries have the disadvantage that they require heavy resource extraction and wear out. The advantage of hydrocarbon fuel is that it is basically instantly fillable (no charging), doesn't decrease in capacity (or minimally I suppose), and energy density. The use here is that we could use a renewable energy source, like solar, and then use the hydrocarbon generated as an energy transfer medium rather than fuel itself. Actually, this is what we do today, since the hydrocarbon in the earth is actually just naturally captured solar energy.
- jessriedel 8y ago
  > The advantage of hydrocarbon fuel is that it is basically instantly fillable (no charging), doesn't decrease in capacity (or minimally I suppose), and energy density. That first property can be mimicked by batteries without too much trouble. Just standardize them and make them swappable at the fill-up station, like propane tanks. There are financing complications with this (who owns the batteries, etc.), but it's do-able and it's already been tested by at least one now-failed start-up.
  - rad_gruchalski 8y ago
    NIO does battery swapping in China.
InclinedPlane 8y ago
The idea that electric vehicles will completely replace ICE vehicles is a hopeful one but faces a lot of roadblocks to get to 100% (or even 80%) and may ultimately be unrealistic. As such, it is dangerous to bank utterly on that goal in efforts to curb net CO2 emissions. So this is not just a stop gap but a backup plan, and more. Additionally, as a replacement for "drilling oil out of the ground" as the first step in everything that makes use of gasoline and similar products (so jet fuel, heating oil, diesel, gasoline, lubricants, plastics, etc.) this is a good thing, not just from an emissions standpoint but also from a pollution and environmental impact (drilling, crude oil transport, etc.) aspect. Even more importantly, this is a way to bridge the "energy storage" gap for green energy sources like wind and solar. Base electric power generation is a very second by second thing, hydrocarbon production can easily be an "average output over a week or a month" sort of thing, which is where wind and solar do well.

by js2 8y ago

kortex 8y ago

Correct, it collects carbon in the form of CO2 and "un-cracks" it back to hydrocarbons. Likely Fischer–Tropsch process.

toast0 8y ago

Gasoline is a reasonably dense and easy to transport energy transfer material, given that we already have a vast network of devices that can use it, and a refining and distribution network. There's no information from the article to indicate if this is actually commercially feasible though, other than nanotubes will solve everything.

tathougies 8y ago

Batteries have the disadvantage that they require heavy resource extraction and wear out. The advantage of hydrocarbon fuel is that it is basically instantly fillable (no charging), doesn't decrease in capacity (or minimally I suppose), and energy density. The use here is that we could use a renewable energy source, like solar, and then use the hydrocarbon generated as an energy transfer medium rather than fuel itself. Actually, this is what we do today, since the hydrocarbon in the earth is actually just naturally captured solar energy.

jessriedel 8y ago
> The advantage of hydrocarbon fuel is that it is basically instantly fillable (no charging), doesn't decrease in capacity (or minimally I suppose), and energy density. That first property can be mimicked by batteries without too much trouble. Just standardize them and make them swappable at the fill-up station, like propane tanks. There are financing complications with this (who owns the batteries, etc.), but it's do-able and it's already been tested by at least one now-failed start-up.
- rad_gruchalski 8y ago
  NIO does battery swapping in China.

InclinedPlane 8y ago

The idea that electric vehicles will completely replace ICE vehicles is a hopeful one but faces a lot of roadblocks to get to 100% (or even 80%) and may ultimately be unrealistic. As such, it is dangerous to bank utterly on that goal in efforts to curb net CO2 emissions. So this is not just a stop gap but a backup plan, and more. Additionally, as a replacement for "drilling oil out of the ground" as the first step in everything that makes use of gasoline and similar products (so jet fuel, heating oil, diesel, gasoline, lubricants, plastics, etc.) this is a good thing, not just from an emissions standpoint but also from a pollution and environmental impact (drilling, crude oil transport, etc.) aspect. Even more importantly, this is a way to bridge the "energy storage" gap for green energy sources like wind and solar. Base electric power generation is a very second by second thing, hydrocarbon production can easily be an "average output over a week or a month" sort of thing, which is where wind and solar do well.