Sustainable Fuels

[8enotto]

Then I would assume most here who buy thier new BYD would also have contracted the CFE for 240 service to the home.
I can't imagine the Chinese cars here come with a top end fast charger, without a significant extra cost.

Our 120 service is not great and somehow isn't always well regulated.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

When Formula E began, the drivers literally swapped car halfway through as the batteries only lasted half the short race. Now they last about 60 miles of racing. Next year they will introduce a mandatory 30 second pit stop for recharging at 600kw (!) which will give them something like 10% recharge. (I suspect that will not happen with the driver still strapped in the car. F1 moved away from refuelling years ago on safety grounds, but also to push fuel economy.)

So yes of course the tech has improved and will continue to do so, but it's not in the same league as a modern hybrid F1 car which can race 3 times as far on 110kg of fuel or less.

Whether the fuel used really is green or they're pulling the wool over your eyes is a different point.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

When Formula E began, the drivers literally swapped car halfway through as the batteries only lasted half the short race. Now they last about 60 miles of racing. Next year they will introduce a mandatory 30 second pit stop for recharging at 600kw (!) which will give them something like 10% recharge. (I suspect that will not happen with the driver still strapped in the car. F1 moved away from refuelling years ago on safety grounds, but also to push fuel economy.)

So yes of course the tech has improved and will continue to do so, but it's not in the same league as a modern hybrid F1 car which can race 3 times as far on 110kg of fuel or less.

Whether the fuel used really is green or they're pulling the wool over your eyes is a different point.

Given the waste and polution generated by and corruption in F1, the type and source of fuel in the cars is probably very low down on the list of things that would need to change to make it even slightly closer to being a net positive for humanity.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

You could say the same about football.

 

[Rolfe]

They have super chargers that charge a vehicle far quicker than you can at home.
At home if you use a standard 110V household outlet (Level 1 charging) it will add only a few miles of range per hour, potentially taking several days to fully charge a depleted battery.
At home using a 240V Outlet (Level 2):
This is the most common home charging method. (like those used for a dryer) It will chage much faster, typically adding 20-40 miles of range per hour. This can fully charge a Model 3 overnight (8-12 hours).
Superchargers: These are DC fast-charging stations. They are much faster than home charging. They can add 150-200 miles of range in less than 30 minutes

This isn't a problem with the cars or the car technology, it's a problem with the refuelling infrastructure. If petrol stations were few and far between people would be saying the same thing about ICE cars. I wonder if your 110v infrastructure is making things more difficult than need be? I can add seven miles an hour on an ordinary domestic plug here, with our 240v supply. But of course I have a Zappi charger which will do about three times that. That's absolutely adequate for day to day use and I can recharge the car completely from <10% to 100% overnight if necessary.

On long journeys there are DC chargers all over the place. My car doesn't charge particularly fast, but a 40-minute break when I've been driving maybe three or four hours is a good thing, not a bad thing! For those in a real hurry there are of course cars that charge three times as fast as mine will. The cars are not the issue. Getting the infrastructure in place is the issue. Around here every village that's big enough to have a pub of its own has at least a single 50 kw charger. Not super-fast, but it will get you where you need to go.

 

[zooterkin]

I'm still hung up on the "three times more expensive" issue with sustainable aviation fuel.

To me this means it costs three times more to produce an equivalent volume or mass (or whatever) of stored energy.

But remember you're comparing an product with an established infrastructure, and which is not paying the full costs of the extraction and use of the product on the environment, with a new technology still under development.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

Even with what is marketed as SAF, the aviation sector still needs to shrink and not grow.

Growing the economy is trivial compared to shrinking it.

Our leaders should be uttering slogans such as "shrink baby shrink" and "shrink, shrink, shrink". Given they are coming out with the exact opposite I think the actual plan is for a few billion in the global south to sacrifice their lives so we can put off the inevitable for a bit longer.

 

[theprestige]

But remember you're comparing an product with an established infrastructure, and which is not paying the full costs of the extraction and use of the product on the environment, with a new technology still under development.

I figured that would be part of it.

 

[acbytesla]

Even with what is marketed as SAF, the aviation sector still needs to shrink and not grow.

Growing the economy is trivial compared to shrinking it.

Our leaders should be uttering slogans such as "shrink baby shrink" and "shrink, shrink, shrink". Given they are coming out with the exact opposite I think the actual plan is for a few billion in the global south to sacrifice their lives so we can put off the inevitable for a bit longer.

No. You're talking about solving issues from sacrifice. Leaders are never going to do that. They are not going to tell people that they have enough. They will NEVER EVER accept that.

 

[theprestige]

No. You're talking about solving issues from sacrifice. Leaders are never going to do that. They are not going to tell people that they have enough. They will NEVER EVER accept that.

The best part is when they pretend they might, and sit very politely listening to impassioned, science-based pleas for sacrifice, and then still do nothing.

 

[acbytesla]

The best part is when they pretend they might, and sit very politely listening to impassioned, science-based pleas for sacrifice, and then still do nothing.

Who gets less? Does a billionaire get 3 private jets, a super yacht, a dozen homes around the world, but the average schmoe can't have a car or a washing machine and nice meals?

 

[theprestige]

Who gets less? Does a billionaire get 3 private jets, a super yacht, a dozen homes around the world, but the average schmoe can't have a car or a washing machine and nice meals?

It's not the luxury emissions from the billionaires. It's the industrial emissions of the entire developed and developing world. That's the magnitude of sacrifice that is necessary.

 

[acbytesla]

It's not the luxury emissions from the billionaires. It's the industrial emissions of the entire developed and developing world. That's the magnitude of sacrifice that is necessary.

LOL, That's what the billionaires would say.

 

[theprestige]

LOL, That's what the billionaires would say.

And they'd be right. Selfish and callous, but right.

ETA:

"Using the International Maritime Organization’s data, Malcolm Jacotine of the superyacht consultancy firm Three Sixty Marine estimates yachting emissions will hit 10 million tons by 2030 if the industry takes a “business as usual” approach."​

​

Superyachts For The Super Rich Cause A Whole Lot Of Environmental Damage - CleanTechnica

Superyachts -- the Super Rich's single-most polluting asset -- saw a 77% surge in sales in 2021. And they pollute in enormous ways.

cleantechnica.com

​

And:

"Globally, we emit around 50 billion tonnes of greenhouse gases yearly.​

​

[ . . . ]​

​

"Even within the energy sector — which accounts for almost three-quarters of emissions — there is no simple fix. Even if we could fully decarbonize our electricity supply, we would also need to electrify all of our heating and road transport. And we’d still have emissions from shipping and aviation — which do not yet have low-carbon technologies — to deal with.​

​

To achieve net-zero emissions, we need innovations across many sectors. Single solutions will not get us there."​

Sector by sector: where do global greenhouse gas emissions come from?

Globally, we emit around 50 billion tonnes of greenhouse gases yearly. Where do these emissions come from? We take a look, sector-by-sector.

ourworldindata.org

​

Billionaire superyachts don't even rate.

​

 

[acbytesla]

And they'd be right. Selfish and callous, but right.

Yes they would be. But if a guy with a carbon footprint 10,000 to 100,000 times yours says you're the one that should sacrifice you're going to tell thm to go screw themselves.

 

[theprestige]

Yes they would be. But if a guy with a carbon footprint 10,000 to 100,000 times yours says you're the one that should sacrifice you're going to tell thm to go screw themselves.

The level of sacrifice necessary for the degree of change we allegedly need would hit us all pretty hard. Shut down most industry, and the billionaire problem solves itself - because the entire human civilization problem solves itself. World leaders aren't telling us to make that kind of sacrifice because they're afraid we'll be mad about the hypocrisy, but because they're afraid we'll be mad about the sacrifice.

 

[acbytesla]

The level of sacrifice necessary for the degree of change we allegedly need would hit us all pretty hard. Shut down most industry, and the billionaire problem solves itself - because the entire human civilization problem solves itself. World leaders aren't telling us to make that kind of sacrifice because they're afraid we'll be mad about the hypocrisy, but because they're afraid we'll be mad about the sacrifice.

I don't know about need. But you're right. Shutting down industry wouldn't work.

 

[theprestige]

I don't know about need. But you're right. Shutting down industry wouldn't work.

Yeah, I don't know about need either. But let's not kid ourselves: When we talk about billionaires giving up their superyachts, we're not talking about saving the planet. We're talking about not liking their billionaire excesses.

Which is fine with me. I'm in favor of reducing emissions. I find billionaire excess ethically dubious.

 

[catsmate]

Exactly. We need to increase our capacity for generating electricity from carbon-neutral sources (solar, wind, wave, nuclear, etc),

None of those are carbon neutral if you include construction and other factors.

but some things, such as aviation, as Orphia Nay mentions in the OP, are not yet doable with electricity and need the energy density of petrochemical fuels.

Actually petrochemical, i.e. hydrocarbons aren't needed. Butanol, for example, has the energy density.
Which is one of the reasons the biotech industry is attempting to splice segments from the genome of the Weizmann organism into yeast and other organisms.

There seem to be a number of possible options for renewable fuels, but I'm not sure which ones will be viable.

There is a lot of work happening.

I used to be against aircon, in principle, since burning fossil fuel just makes things worse, but now we have the prospect of mostly renewable-generated electricity, I am less worried about it.

Renewables like PV/AV required storage systems.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

Yeah, I don't know about need either. But let's not kid ourselves:
When we talk about billionaires giving up their superyachts, we're not talking about saving the planet. We're talking about not liking their billionaire excesses.

Which is fine with me. I'm in favor of reducing emissions. I find billionaire excess ethically dubious.

Yes we are. Check out the Ultimatum Game.