Comments
Arts251 t1_j10tzej wrote
Hopefully with economies of scale the production costs can come down a little, and also might be a bit of a hedge compared to as future price increases in traditional fossil fuel based petroleum products.
Speculawyer t1_j1335uu wrote
And who is going to buy $8 synthetic fuel when they can buy $3 gasoline?
Bensemus t1_j16ikov wrote
No one. This is to get ready for when gas is hard to find. They are starting early.
Phoenix5869 t1_j10fg4n wrote
Is this a good idea? We should be decreasing our emissions…
Arts251 t1_j10tj2b wrote
>the e-fuel plant will use wind power to electrolyze water into hydrogen and oxygen. The hydrogen is then combined with carbon captured from the air or industrial sources to synthesize methanol, which in turn can then be converted into longer hydrocarbons to be used as fuel. The synthetic e-fuel is a direct drop-in for pump gasoline
Seems like it will be close to carbon neutral, or perhaps even carbon negative if you factor in the offsetting amount of fossil fuel no longer needed to be extracted and combusted for the energy.
it's using the three R's.
FearlessCloud01 t1_j10i8gy wrote
I guess it's better than using more fossil fuel to power the plant...
Phoenix5869 t1_j10iky2 wrote
But wont this just add more emissions to the atmosphere?
FearlessCloud01 t1_j10jzsd wrote
It will. But using power from a wind turbine is still better than a gas/coal plant.
The gas would probably be extracted either way. And that requires power. But it'll be worse if the required power comes from more gas instead of wind or something else that's non-polluting.
This way, at least the overall emissions is reduced. So, for example, if the total emissions had 10-20% due to the gas used to create the electricity/power for the processing, at least there will a 10-20% reduction in the total emissions.
Phoenix5869 t1_j10pcad wrote
I see what ur saying
Remote-Pain t1_j0zk08j wrote
Speculawyer t1_j1331h5 wrote
This seems really stupid.
Just generate electricity and use it to charge EVs. You'll have 3 times the efficiency.
ElectricCharlie t1_j14iyow wrote
Yeah, it does seem stupid. But we have not just IC cars, but also generators, boats, diesel engines, and a whole industry that relies on petroleum distillates for plastics and other products.
We are in ‘peak oil’ - which is that petroleum is getting harder to find, and more expensive. If this technology takes off, it’s also likely that as economies of scale are developed to bring costs down.
I figure at some point they’ll meet in the middle in terms of price point.
I’m somewhat excited because airborne carbon capture on its own lacks economic incentive. But carbon capture to create resources has an economic incentive.
I hate to be all pro-capitalism, but I think that’s reassuring in terms of progress that won’t just dead-end as willpower drains away.
Good_Drive_7965 t1_j0zdnme wrote
The synthetic efuel won't be exactly cheap—Steiner thinks at current prices it works out to around $8 per gallon ($2/L), although that obviously doesn't include any taxes or duties, which make up most of the price of fuel in most regions around the world. But it's an important project, given that there are more than 1.3 billion combustion engine vehicles operating on roads globally today, and with the best well in the world, those aren't all going to be replaced by electric vehicles any time soon.