Are synthetic fuels the biggest con on the planet?
Discussion
You have to hand it to the e fuel lobby for persistence.
Disappointing though that journalists are so easily duped though
Car magazine this month
“THE FIRST GALLON
Every drop of fuel CAR has ever burnt liberated the carbon of long-dead plants. Until now. This is our first tank of renewably brewed eFuel, and it might just save the combustion engine”
“carbon dioxide scrubbed from the atmosphere (that’s the plan but the technology’s in its infancy; for now Haru Oni is using carbon dioxide from the fermentation of corn)”
Disappointing though that journalists are so easily duped though
Car magazine this month
“THE FIRST GALLON
Every drop of fuel CAR has ever burnt liberated the carbon of long-dead plants. Until now. This is our first tank of renewably brewed eFuel, and it might just save the combustion engine”
“carbon dioxide scrubbed from the atmosphere (that’s the plan but the technology’s in its infancy; for now Haru Oni is using carbon dioxide from the fermentation of corn)”
Whatever the reason for the perpetuation of this BS, and some people's misplaced belief in it... It doesn't ultimately matter. Anyone who is prepared to look at the facts, and has the capacity to understand what they're looking at, can plainly see that start to finish e-fuels, or hydrogen fuel cells, are not as efficient, environmentally friendly, simple or as easily adopted for personal transport as BEV is.
E-fuels absolutely will not save the combustion engine, nothing will save it. The car manufacturers aren't going to maintain a range of ICE cars even if some people did want to choose to use e-fuels and even if some governments allowed e-fuel ICE cars as an exception to the ban. Car companies want to mass produce cars that anyone can use, anywhere in the world.
E-fuels absolutely will not save the combustion engine, nothing will save it. The car manufacturers aren't going to maintain a range of ICE cars even if some people did want to choose to use e-fuels and even if some governments allowed e-fuel ICE cars as an exception to the ban. Car companies want to mass produce cars that anyone can use, anywhere in the world.
They’re a good idea, but only suitable for niche use cases where battery power won’t work, and cost is a tertiary factor. Motor racing and classic cars, for example are an obvious one.
Mass adoption and commercialization though, the numbers are no where close to making any sort of sense, and you’re dreaming if you think they ever will. I don’t think it’ll realistically ever be commercially viable for shipping, haulage and aviation either, simply due to the cost. Unless they can make them way more efficient than today so that they don’t need anywhere near as much fuel in the first place.
Mass adoption and commercialization though, the numbers are no where close to making any sort of sense, and you’re dreaming if you think they ever will. I don’t think it’ll realistically ever be commercially viable for shipping, haulage and aviation either, simply due to the cost. Unless they can make them way more efficient than today so that they don’t need anywhere near as much fuel in the first place.
Edited by dvs_dave on Saturday 24th June 16:01
dvs_dave said:
They’re a good idea, but only suitable for niche use cases where battery power won’t work, and cost is a tertiary factor. Motor racing and classic cars, for example are an obvious one.
Mass adoption and commercialization though, the numbers are no where close to making any sort of sense, and you’re dreaming if you think they ever will. I don’t think it’ll realistically ever be commercially viable for shipping, haulage and aviation either, simply due to the cost. Unless they can make them way more efficient than today so that they don’t need anywhere near as much fuel in the first place.
The most I think is likely is that the big manufacturers will have a couple of very vanilla, practical cars that can take e-fuels for the niche usage cases - which are valid. But that will only happen if legislation allows, and it will be nothing to celebrate anyway as the cars will be white goods, designed out of necessity for the minority whom BEV really can't work for.Mass adoption and commercialization though, the numbers are no where close to making any sort of sense, and you’re dreaming if you think they ever will. I don’t think it’ll realistically ever be commercially viable for shipping, haulage and aviation either, simply due to the cost. Unless they can make them way more efficient than today so that they don’t need anywhere near as much fuel in the first place.
Edited by dvs_dave on Saturday 24th June 16:01
The above might happen. But either way, ICE is still dead, a s
tty 3 cylinder turbo family wagon isn't 'salvation' but it the most anyone looking to e-fuel should expect..TheDeuce said:
Stuff....... Car companies want to mass produce cars that anyone can use, anywhere in the world.
So that would be petrol and diesel then.Or by anywhere in the world do you actually mean developed countries where the population live mainly in cities ?
Those developing synthetic fuels must believe there's going to be a market for their product
V8covin said:
So that would be petrol and diesel then.
Or by anywhere in the world do you actually mean developed countries where the population live mainly in cities ?
Those developing synthetic fuels must believe there's going to be a market for their product
developing countries adopting technologies have a tendency to skip an established iteration (ICE) for the emerging one (BEV). take communications as an example. copper skipped in most of africa for cellular.Or by anywhere in the world do you actually mean developed countries where the population live mainly in cities ?
Those developing synthetic fuels must believe there's going to be a market for their product
It's a bit like those cold fusion breakthroughs where they promise limitless free energy, with in the small print at the bottom of the page a disclaimer explaining that currently you have to put in more energy than you get out. How gullible are journalists? They's written an article about running a Porsche on a rather complicated bio-fuel essentially, not a true synthetic fuel.
Until someone can demonstrate large volume direct carbon capture from the atmosphere using entirely renewable energy it's all smoke and mirrors.
Until someone can demonstrate large volume direct carbon capture from the atmosphere using entirely renewable energy it's all smoke and mirrors.
V8covin said:
Those developing synthetic fuels must believe there's going to be a market for their product
If it turns out that the only way that the e-fuel you bought could be made in sufficient quantity was to deconstruct and then reconstruct natural gas into a liquid hydrocarbon so as to get it through the back door of a political barrier, would you shrug your shoulders and buy it anyway because that's the only way you get to drive a new ICE?If the answer is yes, there's your target market.
tamore said:
V8covin said:
So that would be petrol and diesel then.
Or by anywhere in the world do you actually mean developed countries where the population live mainly in cities ?
Those developing synthetic fuels must believe there's going to be a market for their product
developing countries adopting technologies have a tendency to skip an established iteration (ICE) for the emerging one (BEV). take communications as an example. copper skipped in most of africa for cellular.Or by anywhere in the world do you actually mean developed countries where the population live mainly in cities ?
Those developing synthetic fuels must believe there's going to be a market for their product
Developing counties have a much more secure supply of fossil fuels than they do for electricity (regardless of how it’s generated) In reality, those with the means to do so use fossil fuels to secure their electricity supply.
Digital communications are the polar opposite of the EV vs ICE argument. For various reasons, developing counties struggle with huge infrastructure investment - the reason that people in Africa don’t have a wire (for electricity, communications etc) in every home.
Conversely, it’s pretty easy to get hold of fuel - because you can bung it into a massive tanker drive it anywhere.
survivalist said:
Good point. All those nations who don’t have ICE based transportation will no doubt skip straight to EV
Developing counties have a much more secure supply of fossil fuels than they do for electricity (regardless of how it’s generated) In reality, those with the means to do so use fossil fuels to secure their electricity supply.
Digital communications are the polar opposite of the EV vs ICE argument. For various reasons, developing counties struggle with huge infrastructure investment - the reason that people in Africa don’t have a wire (for electricity, communications etc) in every home.
Conversely, it’s pretty easy to get hold of fuel - because you can bung it into a massive tanker drive it anywhere.
Roads and Rail fall into the large infrastructure category. Refineries also fall into the same category. Localised Solar energy is much more simple to implement. Developing counties have a much more secure supply of fossil fuels than they do for electricity (regardless of how it’s generated) In reality, those with the means to do so use fossil fuels to secure their electricity supply.
Digital communications are the polar opposite of the EV vs ICE argument. For various reasons, developing counties struggle with huge infrastructure investment - the reason that people in Africa don’t have a wire (for electricity, communications etc) in every home.
Conversely, it’s pretty easy to get hold of fuel - because you can bung it into a massive tanker drive it anywhere.
However this will be nation dependent as many will have some sort of transportation already.
What you are missing is international aid and investment which will be predicated on certain behaviours. If you follow the COP gatherings you will see that developing nations are demanding aid and the developed nations are making the aid dependent on certain actions.
Nomme de Plum said:
survivalist said:
Good point. All those nations who don’t have ICE based transportation will no doubt skip straight to EV
Developing counties have a much more secure supply of fossil fuels than they do for electricity (regardless of how it’s generated) In reality, those with the means to do so use fossil fuels to secure their electricity supply.
Digital communications are the polar opposite of the EV vs ICE argument. For various reasons, developing counties struggle with huge infrastructure investment - the reason that people in Africa don’t have a wire (for electricity, communications etc) in every home.
Conversely, it’s pretty easy to get hold of fuel - because you can bung it into a massive tanker drive it anywhere.
Roads and Rail fall into the large infrastructure category. Refineries also fall into the same category. Localised Solar energy is much more simple to implement. Developing counties have a much more secure supply of fossil fuels than they do for electricity (regardless of how it’s generated) In reality, those with the means to do so use fossil fuels to secure their electricity supply.
Digital communications are the polar opposite of the EV vs ICE argument. For various reasons, developing counties struggle with huge infrastructure investment - the reason that people in Africa don’t have a wire (for electricity, communications etc) in every home.
Conversely, it’s pretty easy to get hold of fuel - because you can bung it into a massive tanker drive it anywhere.
However this will be nation dependent as many will have some sort of transportation already.
What you are missing is international aid and investment which will be predicated on certain behaviours. If you follow the COP gatherings you will see that developing nations are demanding aid and the developed nations are making the aid dependent on certain actions.
No doubt many of these businesses will be great at demonstrating their sustainable credentials, but the reality will be whatever is the most profitable option in the next 3/6 months.
Completely agree in terms of infrastructure investment though, am inundated with people suggesting I take a trip on the South African rail network , apparently it makes the Swiss rail network look like 3rd world transport
survivalist said:
Seems you still believe in Santa.
No doubt many of these businesses will be great at demonstrating their sustainable credentials, but the reality will be whatever is the most profitable option in the next 3/6 months.
Completely agree in terms of infrastructure investment though, am inundated with people suggesting I take a trip on the South African rail network , apparently it makes the Swiss rail network look like 3rd world transport
You do not seem to understand who has the purse strings.No doubt many of these businesses will be great at demonstrating their sustainable credentials, but the reality will be whatever is the most profitable option in the next 3/6 months.
Completely agree in terms of infrastructure investment though, am inundated with people suggesting I take a trip on the South African rail network , apparently it makes the Swiss rail network look like 3rd world transport
OutInTheShed said:
When we go completely Mad Max dystopia, we'll be synthesising fuels from anything we can ferment.
Or plant oils, animal fat etc.
Well quite. But the human greenhouse gas emissions problem would by such a time have solved itself as there’d be hardly any of us left, and survival was the prime directive. So you’d fall back to the most conveniently available energy source which would be wood and steam. Which is completely sustainable as it happens, but very poor on the particulates front. But would you care?Or plant oils, animal fat etc.
survivalist said:
Seems you still believe in Santa.
No doubt many of these businesses will be great at demonstrating their sustainable credentials, but the reality will be whatever is the most profitable option in the next 3/6 months.
Completely agree in terms of infrastructure investment though, am inundated with people suggesting I take a trip on the South African rail network , apparently it makes the Swiss rail network look like 3rd world transport
and there it is…… now, or the next 3-6 months. thank christ there are people with foresight and strategic planning unlike yourself. No doubt many of these businesses will be great at demonstrating their sustainable credentials, but the reality will be whatever is the most profitable option in the next 3/6 months.
Completely agree in terms of infrastructure investment though, am inundated with people suggesting I take a trip on the South African rail network , apparently it makes the Swiss rail network look like 3rd world transport
Nomme de Plum said:
survivalist said:
Seems you still believe in Santa.
No doubt many of these businesses will be great at demonstrating their sustainable credentials, but the reality will be whatever is the most profitable option in the next 3/6 months.
Completely agree in terms of infrastructure investment though, am inundated with people suggesting I take a trip on the South African rail network , apparently it makes the Swiss rail network look like 3rd world transport
You do not seem to understand who has the purse strings.No doubt many of these businesses will be great at demonstrating their sustainable credentials, but the reality will be whatever is the most profitable option in the next 3/6 months.
Completely agree in terms of infrastructure investment though, am inundated with people suggesting I take a trip on the South African rail network , apparently it makes the Swiss rail network look like 3rd world transport
We are now entering an era where we try and reduce our emissions by outsourcing the most polluting industries to other parts of the world.
The parts of the world with little concern for the long term ecological impact are the ones that thrive. No doubt they’ll pay lip service to our ‘demands’.
Just have a look at how quickly we are destroying the rainforest or how quickly the US are depleting their water table.
The level of delusion is pretty staggering.
Logistix said:
You have to hand it to the e fuel lobby for persistence.
Disappointing though that journalists are so easily duped though
Car magazine this month
“THE FIRST GALLON
Every drop of fuel CAR has ever burnt liberated the carbon of long-dead plants. Until now. This is our first tank of renewably brewed eFuel, and it might just save the combustion engine”
“carbon dioxide scrubbed from the atmosphere (that’s the plan but the technology’s in its infancy; for now Haru Oni is using carbon dioxide from the fermentation of corn)”
Tesla wDisappointing though that journalists are so easily duped though
Car magazine this month
“THE FIRST GALLON
Every drop of fuel CAR has ever burnt liberated the carbon of long-dead plants. Until now. This is our first tank of renewably brewed eFuel, and it might just save the combustion engine”
“carbon dioxide scrubbed from the atmosphere (that’s the plan but the technology’s in its infancy; for now Haru Oni is using carbon dioxide from the fermentation of corn)”
ker has buyer’s remorse 
tamore said:
and there it is…… now, or the next 3-6 months. thank christ there are people with foresight and strategic planning unlike yourself.
Please feel free to point these people out.There are probably some local examples, but a huge amount of global business thrives because there are relatively few consequences associated with the use of fossil fuels and wider environmental pollution.
Poor parts of the world don’t worry about tomorrow, never mind the next generation and the amount we give them is a drop in the ocean.
survivalist said:
It’s certainly not western Europe . We try and our agenda in other countries but it’s generally pretty toothless. We’ve spent 2 decades outsourcing jobs and entire industries to the far east - look how ‘sustainable’ they’ve become.
We are now entering an era where we try and reduce our emissions by outsourcing the most polluting industries to other parts of the world.
The parts of the world with little concern for the long term ecological impact are the ones that thrive. No doubt they’ll pay lip service to our ‘demands’.
Just have a look at how quickly we are destroying the rainforest or how quickly the US are depleting their water table.
The level of delusion is pretty staggering.
How ever you wrap it up the developed world for the time being control finance. We are now entering an era where we try and reduce our emissions by outsourcing the most polluting industries to other parts of the world.
The parts of the world with little concern for the long term ecological impact are the ones that thrive. No doubt they’ll pay lip service to our ‘demands’.
Just have a look at how quickly we are destroying the rainforest or how quickly the US are depleting their water table.
The level of delusion is pretty staggering.
I do not disagree that we offshored our manufacturing emissions but those chickens, to mix my metaphors have now been exposed. China, once a competitive partner is now seen as a threat.
We have created a climate problem globally, Whether it can be halted is yet to be seen. I actually doubt it but the planet will outlive us so in the big picture it does not matter.
This thread is about the production of synthetic fuels, At the moment this is pure snake oil.
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff