this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2023
185 points (99.5% liked)
Technology
59427 readers
4106 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The problem with fuels made from electricity is that pesky thing called thermodynamics. If an efuel was developed that was more efficient than electricity then we'd be able to use it to produce more electricity than we put in.
Lots of fuels (like petrol) are a lot more energy dense than out best batteries. If we can synthesize fuels like that just using electricity as an energy source (that can be generated from renewables) then you have a carbon free dense store of energy that can be used to power a vehicle for a long distance without refueling.
The problem with these (fuel cells etc) is that the conversation rate is inefficient, wasting a lot of energy. As we are not using 100% renewable energy this means carbon is being released still.
If we had an entirely renewable energy grid (with oversupply when sunny/windy etc) then those energy losses would not matter.
You avoid the giant, expensive battery though. People are obsessed with efficiency in a self-defeating way.
People are obsessed with efficiency because it's the only metric that matters. We have a finite amount of resources on this planet and efficiency is the only way we can make it last. If you aren't a 'save the planet' type of person then efficiency still matters because it's directly correlated with cost.
Better ban solar panels cause they're only 15-20% efficient. /s
You are comparing different efficiencies. Solar panels are 15% to 20% efficient at converting light into energy. As far as I'm aware every Efuel being developed (and every hydrocarbon fuel for that matter) has a 0% efficiency at converting light into energy but if I am mistaken please do correct me.
In a completely technical sense the hydrocarbon fuel was at one time produced from light energy (dead plants) but that's taking your point and being pedantic since the "efficiency" of the conversation is probably astronomically low when you account for the loses sustained by whatever lifeform died and became said hydrocarbons.
E-fuels are made from solar power. It is not anywhere near 0%. Also, clearly efficiency is not "the only metric that matters."
No they are made from electricity, and that electricity is made by solar panels (sometimes).
Any form of conversion means losing energy.
BEVs require conversion steps too. Not to mention the cost and energy needed to build them in the first place. They are nearly as efficient as their advocates think.
An EV's pollution is recovered after 25 000km compared to an ICE.
This is including the battery and being completely powered by coal power plants.
The conversion steps for any EV is much less then any other form of fuel, because all those fuels usually convert to electricity somewhere in the line.
You just really like bringing up debunked arguments, do you?
It's too bad we're not comparing BEVs to conventional ICE cars. The alternatives are even greener and don't have a paypack period.
Fuel cell cars literally are EVs. People like you are just regurgitating a lot of BEV propaganda. These arguments only work when the alternative is a conventional ICE car running on pure fossil fuels. Your understanding of transportation technology is basically trapped in the early 2000s. You think you know something, but in reality you're 20 years out of date.