3 ms·
The trouble is that high pressure means more embodied energy, and when we start talking about embodied energy, "CO2 equivalent of 250 gallons of gas" isn't that
by samatman 4y ago
The trouble is that high pressure means more embodied energy, and when we start talking about embodied energy, "CO2 equivalent of 250 gallons of gas" isn't that much. Just releasing the gasses into the atmosphere once or twice might pencil out.
Regardless they are very widely deployed in existing equipment which can't be upgraded, so a program to collect and burn these gasses is a very good thing.
- Tarrosion 4y agoorder of magnitude nit: the article mentions 250 gallons of gas, not gas for 250 miles - so roughly 25x worse
- samatman 4y agoThank you, updated. This seems like a better place to point out (rather than editing the original to say something different) that this actually undermines the argument: stainless steel is only about 6kg CO2 per kg, and a gallon of gas burned is around 8. That number for steel is a lot lower than I expected, but here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embodied_energy#In_common_materials https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embodied_energy#In_common_mate...