False, hybrids reduce fuel consumption and therefore emissions substantially, Toyota Sienna went from 22 mpg combined to 35 mpg combined when they switched it from gas to hybrid. Several wild claims from you today.
I stand by my statement. We have passed the point where burning fossil fuels more efficiently helps. If you think that is wild, you should see the wild_fires_ going on.
Going to 100 mpg is still strictly worse than a battery powered by renewables.
The issue with ICEs is the fossil fuel part, not the engine part. Synthetic hydrocarbons and alcohols don't contribute to climate change at all. And alcohol fuels are both easy to make and about as good as hydrocarbons.
If we're talking synthetic fuels, you'd probably run cars on methanol rather than a hydrocarbon. Planes absolutely need kerosene, but cars can claw back most of the performance of petrol with alcohol fuels, and methanol is the simplest and cheapest to make. Certainly shipping seems to be going this way.
> Synthetic hydrocarbons and alcohols don't contribute to climate change at all.
If you are able to manufacture them in a completely emissionless way. That requires huge energy input though. Certainly has its uses, but too expensive for personal cars I'd think.
What I think would make sense is to use methanol as a seasonal energy store in temperate climates. Manufacture from PV in summer, burn in winter.
Methanol is the obvious choice, because there are so many ways to make it. Shipping certainly looks to be moving in that direction, though ammonia is also being trialled. Ethanol via fermentation is also doable at scale, but most effective pathways rely on using arable land.
False, hybrids reduce fuel consumption and therefore emissions substantially, Toyota Sienna went from 22 mpg combined to 35 mpg combined when they switched it from gas to hybrid. Several wild claims from you today.
I stand by my statement. We have passed the point where burning fossil fuels more efficiently helps. If you think that is wild, you should see the wild_fires_ going on.
Going to 100 mpg is still strictly worse than a battery powered by renewables.
The issue with ICEs is the fossil fuel part, not the engine part. Synthetic hydrocarbons and alcohols don't contribute to climate change at all. And alcohol fuels are both easy to make and about as good as hydrocarbons.
True. But we don’t have enough synthetic hydrocarbons for the current most important usage: jet fuel.
Might as well drive a quiet, renewable powered electric vehicle and let the jets use the synth.
Or take the train.
If we're talking synthetic fuels, you'd probably run cars on methanol rather than a hydrocarbon. Planes absolutely need kerosene, but cars can claw back most of the performance of petrol with alcohol fuels, and methanol is the simplest and cheapest to make. Certainly shipping seems to be going this way.
> Synthetic hydrocarbons and alcohols don't contribute to climate change at all.
If you are able to manufacture them in a completely emissionless way. That requires huge energy input though. Certainly has its uses, but too expensive for personal cars I'd think.
What I think would make sense is to use methanol as a seasonal energy store in temperate climates. Manufacture from PV in summer, burn in winter.
Methanol is the obvious choice, because there are so many ways to make it. Shipping certainly looks to be moving in that direction, though ammonia is also being trialled. Ethanol via fermentation is also doable at scale, but most effective pathways rely on using arable land.