4 ms·

I'm "provoking" the question of synthetic aviation fuel versus hydrogen, which is hardly settled, and hardly provocative.

• ncmncm 5y ago
  You are repeatedly throwing up known irrelevancies. Hydrogen, by the way, is also synthetic, and also fuel, and also usable for aviation. Thus, "synthetic LH2 aviation fuel". So, no, you are apparently trying, instead, to promote synthetic or mined kerosene, and doing it by trying to distract attention from its most appealing alternative. Ineptly. We know that mined kerosene will become increasingly expensive, relative to synthesized hydrogen, as electric power cost declines. Synthetic kerosene might become cheaper than mined, or anyway than mined-plus-carbon-taxes. It will certainly never be cheaper than hydrogen, which is an essential ingredient. Will synthetic kerosene be able to compete with the radically better value proposition of LH2 fuel? Only insofar as synthetic kerosene helps to preserve the capital value of existing airframes. But airframes have to be replaced anyway as they age out.
  • danans 5y ago
    Sounds like we pretty much agree. Thanks for the discussion.