4 ms·

At this feeble level of efficiency we’re probably better off using the energy to split water into hydrogen or producing ammonia. It’s a trade-off ultimately, e

At this feeble level of efficiency we’re probably better off using the energy to split water into hydrogen or producing ammonia. It’s a trade-off ultimately, either we get to use currently deployed ICE systems and feed them with this solar fuel, or deploy new engines to leverage hydrogen or ammonia based vehicles. Most probably better to bet on electricity storage tech catching up and just switch everything to full electric.

jfengel 2y ago
There are some things that will be tricky to convert, notably airplanes. And it would be convenient to have synthetic gas for driving peaker plants on the occasions where they're needed. But yeah, ground transport needs to be electrified yesterday, and the grid upgraded to support it. That can be done incrementally, using existing technology.
- omneity 2y ago
  In this case isn’t biogas a much better option efficiency-wise?
  - cduzz 2y ago
    I think all of these approaches are not "or" but are instead "and" ... We need both PV solar and "let's get some heat" solar; we need LiFePO4 and nmc batteries; we probably even need to keep fossil fuels and biodiesel and other biogas. Every little incremental bit helps... It's a race between turning into venus and turning into mad max's thunderdome.
    - mdale 2y ago
      I like how mad Max thunderdome is a given at this point and the env work is just to prevent Venus #2
      - gwright 2y ago
        > the env work is just to prevent Venus #2 There is no science-based predictions that climate change as we understand it today, will lead to Venus #2. That idea is just fodder for climate hysteria and sci-fi fantasy films.
        cduzz 2y ago
        We've got only a very limited understanding of exactly how the current climate works. We have (and have had for a very long time) crude understanding that more CO2 == more energy from the sun retained == more hotter overall. We've got a Chesterton's fence here with our existing climate as it was between a long time ago and 1940. Sure, sometimes it gets too cold and sometimes it gets too hot, but it's mostly something we've gotten used to. Once we get into a situation where all sorts of enormous systems with enormous inertia get out of whatever balance they've been in until now change, we're off into radically uncharted territory. It's not something we should gleefully jump into just to see what happens. We're dancing on a cliff in the fog, we may even be wile e coyote dancing on a cloud. "mad max" is "turn off all fossil fuels" "venus" is an example of what can happen with too much CO2 in the air One of those is actually a fictional thought experiment, the other's actually quite real. The magnitude of how bad the real one is is pretty terrible.. I guess I should just trust you that we can't possibly become venus; is 1/100th of venus tolerable? "Between madmax and venus" is the path we (civilized, happy people) need to follow over the next 100 years. Hopefully it's a pretty broad path.
        gwright 2y ago
        The Earth, without humans, has had much higher CO2 levels in the past and yet it isn't like Venus.
    - gwright 2y ago
      > It's a race between turning into venus and turning into mad max's thunderdome. It is hard to tell how serious you are in that comment, but just in case, worrying about runaway greenhouse gas effect turning Earth into another Venus is climate hysteria. Poorly thought out energy policies due to climate hysteria have a good chance at creating considerable political unrest though (not sure about "thunderdome" level of unrest). Turns out when you restrict access to energy (e.g., by increasing its cost), people get upset.
narrator 2y ago
Ammonia will likely not be used for cars and only be used for large industrial applications where there aren't any good alternatives like container ships because it's so toxic. For the same reason we don't have a make semiconductors at home with hydrogen fluoride kit, we won't have ammonia fuel in consumer oriented applications.

jfengel 2y ago

There are some things that will be tricky to convert, notably airplanes. And it would be convenient to have synthetic gas for driving peaker plants on the occasions where they're needed. But yeah, ground transport needs to be electrified yesterday, and the grid upgraded to support it. That can be done incrementally, using existing technology.

omneity 2y ago
In this case isn’t biogas a much better option efficiency-wise?
- cduzz 2y ago
  I think all of these approaches are not "or" but are instead "and" ... We need both PV solar and "let's get some heat" solar; we need LiFePO4 and nmc batteries; we probably even need to keep fossil fuels and biodiesel and other biogas. Every little incremental bit helps... It's a race between turning into venus and turning into mad max's thunderdome.
  - mdale 2y ago
    I like how mad Max thunderdome is a given at this point and the env work is just to prevent Venus #2
    - gwright 2y ago
      > the env work is just to prevent Venus #2 There is no science-based predictions that climate change as we understand it today, will lead to Venus #2. That idea is just fodder for climate hysteria and sci-fi fantasy films.
      - cduzz 2y ago
        We've got only a very limited understanding of exactly how the current climate works. We have (and have had for a very long time) crude understanding that more CO2 == more energy from the sun retained == more hotter overall. We've got a Chesterton's fence here with our existing climate as it was between a long time ago and 1940. Sure, sometimes it gets too cold and sometimes it gets too hot, but it's mostly something we've gotten used to. Once we get into a situation where all sorts of enormous systems with enormous inertia get out of whatever balance they've been in until now change, we're off into radically uncharted territory. It's not something we should gleefully jump into just to see what happens. We're dancing on a cliff in the fog, we may even be wile e coyote dancing on a cloud. "mad max" is "turn off all fossil fuels" "venus" is an example of what can happen with too much CO2 in the air One of those is actually a fictional thought experiment, the other's actually quite real. The magnitude of how bad the real one is is pretty terrible.. I guess I should just trust you that we can't possibly become venus; is 1/100th of venus tolerable? "Between madmax and venus" is the path we (civilized, happy people) need to follow over the next 100 years. Hopefully it's a pretty broad path.
        gwright 2y ago
        The Earth, without humans, has had much higher CO2 levels in the past and yet it isn't like Venus.
  - gwright 2y ago
    > It's a race between turning into venus and turning into mad max's thunderdome. It is hard to tell how serious you are in that comment, but just in case, worrying about runaway greenhouse gas effect turning Earth into another Venus is climate hysteria. Poorly thought out energy policies due to climate hysteria have a good chance at creating considerable political unrest though (not sure about "thunderdome" level of unrest). Turns out when you restrict access to energy (e.g., by increasing its cost), people get upset.

narrator 2y ago

Ammonia will likely not be used for cars and only be used for large industrial applications where there aren't any good alternatives like container ships because it's so toxic. For the same reason we don't have a make semiconductors at home with hydrogen fluoride kit, we won't have ammonia fuel in consumer oriented applications.