3 ms·
I'm personally a huge fan of carbon capture -> synthetic hydrocarbons + fossil fuel plants, in theory. Maybe a mix of storage systems will ultimately be the be
by buu700 5y ago
I'm personally a huge fan of carbon capture -> synthetic hydrocarbons + fossil fuel plants, in theory.
Maybe a mix of storage systems will ultimately be the best solution for whatever reasons, but this idea makes so much sense to me because of how it takes advantage of all of our existing infrastructure. Just stand up renewables at existing plants, use spare capacity to power capturing CO2 from the output and/or the air, formulate the captured CO2 into a usable fuel on site, and then swap out the dirty fuel supply for the synthetic one. Now you have the functional equivalent of renewables + batteries — with the advantages that the plants are already built and wired into the grid, battery supply is no longer a bottleneck to rollout, and a lot of jobs are saved. So as a whole, as I see it, this would be faster, easier to plan, less wasteful, and more politically viable, as compared to replacing existing plants with brand new renewable ones that use battery storage.
The same concept applies to vehicles. Our entire infrastructure around gasoline is already sitting and waiting to be used as a massive energy storage system. If carbon could be captured from the air using renewables and centrally processed into a backwards-compatible fuel, it would no longer be necessary to push so heavily for a transition to BEVs. Instead, consumers could choose solely based on the costs and benefits to themselves; maybe gas cars would be less efficient than BEVs (like the equivalent of running an app in Wine or Rosetta), but that would be reflected in the price of the fuel if so, with consumers eating the full cost rather than passing part of it along to society as a negative externality.
Ditto for existing gas-powered stoves, heating, etc.
Additionally, once it's running at scale, this system would naturally lend itself to the next step: transitioning from net-zero emissions to net-negative emissions. Governments could allocate funds toward buying carbon capture fuel and simply sequestering it away for emergencies, at least until atmospheric CO2 drops to pre-industrial levels. Maybe the same method would prove useful for terraforming other planets with inhospitable atmospheres as well.
I'm very interested in seeing how United's experiments with synthetic fuel go for these reasons. Last time I brought this topic up on HN, someone shared Prometheus Fuels with me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prometheus_Fuels https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prometheus_Fuels.
Does anyone know how far along this kind of technology is? What factors have prevented the idea from already being implemented in traditional power plants at scale?
- aaronblohowiak 5y agoImagine a lossless conversion from electricity to making hydrocarbons from atmospheric co2. Car engines are very very inefficient (about 35% of chemical energy converted to mechanical, out of a theoretical max of 46% or so iiuc.) comparatively, electric motors are like 80% efficient. Now it’s true that bev have transmission and battery losses, but synthetic gasoline is going to have inefficiencies and cost to transport, too. The case wher e it makes sense is where the weight of batteries matter, ie: jet packs and airplanes.
- buu700 5y agoIf internal combustion cars powered by renewable synthetic fuel could be anywhere near half as efficient as BEVs, wouldn't that be a great problem to have? "Imagine a lossless conversion" is obviously doing a lot of work here, but even if they're only 1% as efficient end-to-end as BEVs, that would still be fine in a world where we had more renewable power than we needed without the capacity to store it all. BEVs would eventually be pushed to dominance by market forces, while in the meantime we would accelerate our transition to net-zero emissions.
- hebrox 5y agoWhat is your expected timeline to produce relevant amounts of synthetic fuel?
- buu700 5y agoI mean, if it were up to me then right now. Whenever the technology is sufficiently mature that it's only a matter of giving companies like Prometheus the capital they need to scale up production (if it isn't already), I would do that.