Submitted by Aelmay t3_126ym7w in technology
Comments
DeadBear2000 t1_jecvh16 wrote
Depending on how exactly it is done anywhere from 5 to 10 times as much.
Or in other words: Synthetic fuels are bullshit. They are incredibly wasteful in terms of energy and thus they are super expensive. They are a greenwashing solution to the problem that cars have become.
The actual solution to climate friendly mobility are less cars. We can't just electrify all cars on the planet. We need viable alternatives to cars like public transport, bicycle infrastructure and cities build for walkability.
[deleted] t1_jecv9k1 wrote
This kind of tech will probably only be used in applications where more power is needed than electric could ever deliver.
There is no equivalent to a jet engine for electric planes, so you're forever limited to slow, long flights. To say nothing of military use. Fighter jets being the obvious case, but also tanks and such. There's no way you could ever power an Abrams with electricity.
Vladius28 t1_jed43qq wrote
>There's no way you could ever power an Abrams with electricity.
Not for a few decades anyway
eugene20 t1_jedj8eh wrote
NASA rockets cargo to space on hydrogen.
BronyFrenZony t1_jefcyb6 wrote
Electric motors are the superior traction technology, the energy density of batteries is the issue. Finding motors that put out 10kw/kg is not hard, those are gas turbine numbers.
[deleted] t1_jegpwqi wrote
I don't think we'll ever get batteries THAT good. And for aviation you're still limited to propellers.
zorbathegrate t1_jecv7u0 wrote
Did they make it electric?
Darnocpdx t1_jecnn3d wrote
How many BEVs can you power off that turbine? I'm betting a lot more than you can power with the gas it creates.