3 ms·
Look as a geek i'm interested in and irrationally optimistic despite the odds about air-to-fuel stuff like prometheus. But as a grownup. As a responsible adul
by cagenut 7y ago
Look as a geek i'm interested in and irrationally optimistic despite the odds about air-to-fuel stuff like prometheus.
But as a grownup. As a responsible adult. As someone who passed high-school math. You have to look at the challenge we face, and the timeframe we have to address it, and say "oh, time's up."
We don't get to play the "i'm hoping for X" technology game anymore. That phase is over. It's time, now, to shift everything we can as fast as we can using the things we have and know.
Hopefully air-to-fuel r&d gets somewhere in a decade, and hopefully it can be commercialized quickly thereafter. That'd be great. It would go a very long way toward saving the airline and international tourism industries. But w/r/t cars, TIME IS UP.
- mikorym 7y agoSo yes, what I am saying is I appreciate the arguments around practicality, urgency and time frames; at the same time I see a lot of institutional inertia. A basket of technologies is to me a better determinator for progress (or shift, if you prefer). The main focus in developing countries is foremostly on the human front: basic needs, personal security, health care, etc. It's does not make sense to me to expect the switch to electric cars to make or break general progress. Air-to-fuel alternatives are very attractive as a basket of "energy goods". I can see companies here setting up their own production centres. At the same time the existing infrastructure can benefit (such as large oil pipelines, the existing car and truck fleet, power generators and peak energy production, etc.). Don't misunderstand, I think electric cars would be a better future (nitrous oxide byproducts, I am looking at you). Air-to-fuel tech is a great supporting basket item.