4 ms·

I think the take-away here is that we can manufacture the same product (kerosene aka aviation gas) without the traditional inputs (oil/petroleum). This seems l

by d4mi3n 4y ago

I think the take-away here is that we can manufacture the same product (kerosene aka aviation gas) without the traditional inputs (oil/petroleum). This seems like a good capability in and of itself. Not sure what the economics look like, but there could be a market if this enables other trade offs in the production or avgas—maybe producing some nominal amount with much lower electrical grid requirements?

mynegation 4y ago
“kerosene aka aviation gas” - I thought these were different fuels. Aviation gas is a gasoline with TEL (that is now forbidden in regular motor gas) and is used in the internal combustion plane engines. Kerosene is used as a fuel for jet engines.
- p_l 4y ago
  If you're not into aviation then it's hard to complain about not knowing fuel names ;-) But generally, you have kerosene and gasoline based fuels gmost popular of them are JET-A1 (kerosene with additives) and AVGAS100LL (gasoline based, low lead). There are others, including jet fuels that are heavily cut with paraffin (or infamously with lighter fluid) iirc and AVGAS variants that don't contain any lead. Fully synthetic fuels have been used in the past, mostly for high efficiency (USSR had an R-7 aka Soyuz variant for extra hard orbits that used syntin in place of RP-1 aka kerosene) though lost people remember "coal to fuel" attempts of axis forces in WW2