3 ms·

If batteries do not make progress fast enough, synthetic fuels might be a temporary(?) solution. With these we can have the advantage of the high energy-density

If batteries do not make progress fast enough, synthetic fuels might be a temporary(?) solution. With these we can have the advantage of the high energy-density of hydrocarbon fuels for use cases like airplanes without having the climate effect of fossil fuels. Remember that the problem with fossil fuels is that they increase the amount of carbon in (short term) circulation which is what leads to further accumulation in the atmosphere or oceans. Producing synthetic fuels would remove carbon from the environment before releasing it on use again, leading to a net-zero effect.

ganafagol 5y ago
Synthetic fuels scale up even worse than battery density.
mgoetzke 5y ago
I doubt there is enough electricity available to also power the generation of synthetic fuels in high mass. Maybe for limited use cases (percentage wise)
- pjc50 5y ago
  Well, what energy where and at what cost? It's possible that there will be renewable overbuild to the extent that there are enough times of cheap or negative energy prices, especially in sunny locations, that can be used for fuel creation. (The downside I must mention is that high capital cost low utilization low running cost => still high cost) The USN have a solution in their back pocket: https://www.zmescience.com/research/us-navy-synthetic-jet-fuel-seawater-0423432/ https://www.zmescience.com/research/us-navy-synthetic-jet-fu... , presumably for at-sea refuelling using surplus energy from the reactors of carriers.
127 5y ago
About biofuels... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpEB6hCpIGM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpEB6hCpIGM
- mxschumacher 5y ago
  The environmental impact and cost are of course important to consider, but for energy, there's also always the geopolitical aspect to comsider. Having the capacity to make fuels from plants means some independence from Saudi Arabia and Russia for the western world. The shock of 1973 has left its mark. Having a huge supply chain for corn also drives innovation and scale in that industry, should corn become rare because of a drought, it would be relatively straightforward to redirect the corn supply into food. When watching the video, what struck me as absurd is more the energy waste from meat production.
pdpi 5y ago
> Producing synthetic fuels would remove carbon from the environment before releasing it on use again, leading to a net-zero effect. Unfortunately, that assumes producing those synthetic fuels has no carbon output other than the fuel itself.
- _Microft 5y ago
  The process may have as much carbon emissions as it needs and even more as long as none of them can eventually be traced back to fossil sources. „Fossil“ is the actually bad property of these fuels.
  - Forbo 5y ago
    Methane and carbon being released from permafrost soil is an example of non-fossil sources, but yeah, the general sentiment of not releasing any more GHG into the environment is the objective for now. The more we can leave "captured" the better.
- Tagbert 5y ago
  If you could use wind/solar for the energy source that would be a net improvement and not just net-zero.

ganafagol 5y ago

Synthetic fuels scale up even worse than battery density.

mgoetzke 5y ago

I doubt there is enough electricity available to also power the generation of synthetic fuels in high mass. Maybe for limited use cases (percentage wise)

pjc50 5y ago
Well, what energy where and at what cost? It's possible that there will be renewable overbuild to the extent that there are enough times of cheap or negative energy prices, especially in sunny locations, that can be used for fuel creation. (The downside I must mention is that high capital cost low utilization low running cost => still high cost) The USN have a solution in their back pocket: https://www.zmescience.com/research/us-navy-synthetic-jet-fuel-seawater-0423432/ https://www.zmescience.com/research/us-navy-synthetic-jet-fu... , presumably for at-sea refuelling using surplus energy from the reactors of carriers.

127 5y ago

About biofuels... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpEB6hCpIGM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpEB6hCpIGM

mxschumacher 5y ago
The environmental impact and cost are of course important to consider, but for energy, there's also always the geopolitical aspect to comsider. Having the capacity to make fuels from plants means some independence from Saudi Arabia and Russia for the western world. The shock of 1973 has left its mark. Having a huge supply chain for corn also drives innovation and scale in that industry, should corn become rare because of a drought, it would be relatively straightforward to redirect the corn supply into food. When watching the video, what struck me as absurd is more the energy waste from meat production.

pdpi 5y ago

> Producing synthetic fuels would remove carbon from the environment before releasing it on use again, leading to a net-zero effect. Unfortunately, that assumes producing those synthetic fuels has no carbon output other than the fuel itself.

_Microft 5y ago
The process may have as much carbon emissions as it needs and even more as long as none of them can eventually be traced back to fossil sources. „Fossil“ is the actually bad property of these fuels.
- Forbo 5y ago
  Methane and carbon being released from permafrost soil is an example of non-fossil sources, but yeah, the general sentiment of not releasing any more GHG into the environment is the objective for now. The more we can leave "captured" the better.
Tagbert 5y ago
If you could use wind/solar for the energy source that would be a net improvement and not just net-zero.