Synthetic Fuels

[Mark B]

Thought this was interesting

https://youtu.be/MNrGZC8h4Fg

[DVD3500]

There has been a lot about that here in the press as well.

You will note that he did name a price.

None of these companies will. They rightly point out that these are still more or less one offs and basically don't want to scare people away.

I did some research but before I go on I like to preface my comments:

1. We absolutely need synthetic fuels. There are use cases where using any other power source is more or less impossible or at least not feasible.

2. We absolutely have to get CO2 out of the air. There is no way, even if all cars were EVs and we halved shipping and flights that we can stop the changes we are seeing. Sucking CO2 out has to be part of the equation. 

So while these companies won't state I do know based on other companies some numbers:

1. Currently CO2 that has been captured using renewable energy costs about 600USD$ per US ton.

One ton can produce at most 100 gallons. So at best without taking anything else into consideration you are looking at at least 6 USD$ per US Gallon.

This doesn't factor any all the other things that have to be counted for producing the fuel. I look at it like the cost of flour in relation to a loaf of bread or a whole cake.

My guess is you are looking at a realistic price of at least 10 USD$ a US gallon. My thought process on that is fairly convoluted and I am no expert. It could be lower but I doubt it.

Now there are places claiming they can get that cost down to 100 USD$ per ton within 10 years or so. Some even claim 50 USD$ in 15 years.

So I really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really,  hope they crack this as there are cases that make it absolutely necessary and it has benefits over such things as E10 for sure.

But for all the other cases where there are better and cheaper ways of doing things I would not hold my breath.

 

[Mark B]

I wonder whats going to happen to all these EV batteries when they are worn out. Theres talk of recycling, but when there are millions of batteries to dispose of, I cant see it, some minerals may be extracted, but I would guess most will end up in land fill. Then theres the masive enviromental impact of mining for Lithiam, Cobalt etc. I think governments are jumping on the EV bandwagon without seriously considering helping owners of older existing vehicles to meet new cleaner emissions, by using modified exhaust systems etc. They are not thinking about the long term enviromental impact of EV's. Unfortunately I think synthetic fuel developers are going to have an up hill struggle getting any real meaningfull support from governments. 

[Clive]

Recycling won't be a problem. If you can sell a catalytic converter and small plalces can extract the valuable metals, the same will apply to batteries. It just a metter of time until enough batteries need recycling. And it will be less effort than the mining as the concentration is much higher than diggin ore from the ground. 

The problem with synthetic fuels is always teh energy required to make them. On earth, we have the solar powered carbon cycle which supports all life. 

ie water + air turns into sugar and powered by the sun (photosynthesis) producing oxygen as a handy by product.

The EXACT opposite is combustion/respiration, sugars and other carbon based molecules combining with oxygen and releases energy, CO2 and H20.

the problem is caused because nature has been tucking a small quantity of those carbon based molecules for 100s of millions of years, and we are suddenly burning it about a million times faster than it was stored away. The planet simply can't cope. 

We need a reliable and concentrated source of non carbon energy. Solar sort of works, and I do wonder if sunny deserts and so on will be utilised as solar farms and export electricity (supertankers become super-batteries?) but I still think tidal is a better idea, especially for the UK as it is 100% reliable and predictable. 

All while waiting for fusion. 

And then being all electric will be sensible.

[NonMember]

35 minutes ago, Mark B said:

the masive enviromental impact of mining

I think you mean "the massively over-hyped but not actually that big environmental impact"

And as Clive said, recycling is already well established and quite easy.

[Chris A]

1 hour ago, NonMember said:

I think you mean "the massively over-hyped but not actually that big environmental impact"

Lithium mine in Portugal

[Colin Lindsay]

2 hours ago, DVD3500 said:

We absolutely have to get CO2 out of the air. There is no way, even if all cars were EVs and we halved shipping and flights that we can stop the changes we are seeing. Sucking CO2 out has to be part of the equation. 

Trees do it. We used to have a rain forest somewhere in the world, and it used to be called the 'lungs of the world'. Large parts of the UK used to be forests, now just bare hill tops with little fluffy sheep on them, or large housing estates.

The Queen used to give demonstrations on how to plant trees, so it can't be that hard.

 

[Chris A]

7 minutes ago, Colin Lindsay said:

The Queen used to give demonstrations on how to plant trees, so it can't be that hard.

True, green bit upwards.

[Mark B]

There is still waste left over from removing precious metals from cataylictic converters not counting the energy used to extract them. The motivation and  incentive is the value platinum, palladium, and rhodium. Dont think there will be the same incentive for recycling bateries and they will only want to recycle parts that give a positive financial return, hence my fear of them ending up in land fill.  I don't think the enviromental impact of mining these minerals is over hyped, time will tell.

PS. Don't know how to correct the text size?

[Colin Lindsay]

I thought you were just getting passionate about it!! Along the top line of the box you type in you'll see the word 'size', click on that and select.

Batteries will end up like oil; lots goes into the manufacture, they'll pay lip service to the environment and disposal, but they'll plan on a limited lifespan which they'll milk for all its' worth while it's viable, then drop like a hot whatever and let others deal with the residue.

[rlubikey]

2 hours ago, Mark B said:

I wonder whats going to happen to all these EV batteries when they are worn out.

Mark, batteries which no longer give you your required range will be recycled for static applications where energy density isn't so important. They will be recycled when the capacity is so poor even that's not enough. One hopes legislation will ensure no part of them becomes landfill.

However, energy density is the key, as is charging leads trailing across pavements. I think that battery vehicles are a cul-de-sac and Hydrogen is the way to go, probably in the form of fuel cells. Loads of range and fill up in a couple of minutes. Now, if only someone had a vested interest in rolling out Hydrogen filling stations.

2 hours ago, clive said:

We need a reliable and concentrated source of non carbon energy.

Clive, like you I'm lukewarm about renewables except tidal (and geothermal where it's possible). I think the future is nuclear. However, fusion hasn't been done yet. I don't count dropping a single pellet through a lazer beam! Even repeating that is a bit like a reciprocating engine compared to a turbine (Tokamak)! Don't get me wrong - I really, Really, REALLY hope they crack fusion, but I'm not holding my breath. That leaves Uranium fission ... unless there was another fission technology which we could do. Perhaps something we'd already done but decided to go down the Uranium route ...

Professor Jim Al-Khalili, thorium to produce nuclear power - University of Huddersfield

Cheers, Richard

PS: Would someone kindly remind me how to embed videos into posts please?

[DVD3500]

Hydrogen for personal transport is a non-starter. Always has been. that is why apart from Toyota everyone is leaving it in droves:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/distilled-thoughts-hydrogen-paul-martin/

Like synthetic fuel we NEED green hydrogen, but we need it to make steel and fertilizer because last I checked people like to eat. Maybe for shipping or flight but for anything else it is a total waste of energy.

This video explains how just trees won't cut it:

And this video shows we nuclear is also only part of the solution if at all:

The video is not perfect and they admit some of numbers don't take everything into account. Nuclear is probably dealt with too "cruelly" and fossil fuels are probably given a too easy row to hoe. Local and regional aspects play a role but they admit that as well.

Batteries are not like oil. They can and will be recycled. 92-96% of the materials in fact and that without power from the grid. There are two places within 100 KM of me that do it.

The problem?

Not enough batteries yet. They are lasting longer they people expected.

That will change though once people start crashing these cars in earnest.

I have been tracking this all in earnest for over 10 years. I have noticed a trend of any technology that has been around for more than 20 years tends to be heavily subsidized leading to people making incorrect assumptions about how "easy" it is.

Things like nuclear fusion, hydrogen, synthetic fuels etc....

The fact is none of them are easy. None of them are perfect. All of them have devils in the detail and it is all about what devil do you want to live with?

Wind turbines occasionally killing a bird?

Nuclear not being as cost effective but being stable?

Solar being cost-effective but needing to be stored (in batteries)?

Shoddy charging infrastructure (which by the way is most likely in the remit of your government to provide) with lower local emissions?

I try to remain as objective as possible and I always assume I don't have all the information.

But instead of relying on "news" I look at studies, listen to experts (and by experts I vet them based on their education, experience, breadth of work and not because someone else slaps an "expert" title on them).

If you really want to see how things could be it will take hours to simply get a feel for how things "might" go.

If you don't take that time any idea you have had based on your experience with no outside input is probably wrong unless you work in the industry.

At the end of the day money rules the world.

No one wanted a phone that can do what smart phones can do back in 2008 (some still don't) but the majority want one.

Technology, whatever it will be will come whether we like it or not...

 

[Chris A]

31 minutes ago, DVD3500 said:

No one wanted a phone that can do what smart phones can do back in 2008 (some still don't) but the majority want one.

Recent survey in France shows 87% of the population have a smart phone. I, along with Madame, form part of the 13%

[PeteH]

Synthesising anything, is usually an expensive exercise anyway. I have a smart phone, Primarily because it was given to me, It`s main advantage being very cheap international phone/video calls to overseas family. Beyond that, I don`t use a fraction of it`s alleged "benefits". 

Pete

 

[DVD3500]

I remembered Top gear covering this:

 

[Paulfc]

Apologies if this has been referred to elsewhere: there’s a really interesting piece in the November issue of practical CLASSICS on the topic of synthetic fuel. Maybe all is not doom and gloom.

Paul

[Colin Lindsay]

I'm still shaking my head over this morning's Nissan Qashqai advert: "the experience of electric, fuelled by petrol".

Next we'll be getting: "The taste of alcohol-free beer, fuelled by alcohol."

 

[Chris A]

2 hours ago, Colin Lindsay said:

I'm still shaking my head over this morning's Nissan Qashqai advert: "the experience of electric, fuelled by petrol".

I'll pay attention the next time I'm watching a station with adverts for the French version - I usually kill the sound during advert breaks - I assume they'll be using the same theme.

While on the subject of car adds they never now say how much the car costs to buy just how much per month, with lots of small print at the bottom of the screen wizzing past to explain that although the advert has in big letters, say, 200€ per month the small print reads 400, usually because the car in the ad it the top of the range model not the entry level used for the figures shown.

The government here have a 'cunning plan' to make it possible to lease an electric car for 100€ per month. Neadless to say the French car manufacturers are scratching their heads over that one!

Just as the Prime Minister came up with the plan to change the law allow petrol stations to sell at a loss ( the law doesn't allow selling at a loss for anything other than during official sales periods). That soon got shot down! Supermarkets adimtted thaat they would catch up the loss by increasing prices on some other things. 60% of the price is tax here, so who has the biggest margin for a cut?

Supermarkets have agreed to do short terms offers, my local one has it on for yesterday & today' where they sell at 'prix coutant' - cost price. It looks like about 3 centimes off per litre. Worked though as there was a huge queue at mine local yesterday morning. As I had an appointment in town at the beginning of the afternoon I filled up then, still the 12-14 H lunch period and no queue. I did need to fill up as just got back from a holiday.

Rant over, lunch calls

[Colin Lindsay]

[Chris A]

So, does that mean you put petrol in the tank then the car magically transforms it into electricity to drive you along. Wonderful progress 🙄

There is still the 'fossil fuel' issue. Better still would be to put a bit of radioactive stuff in which the car turns into electricity. I seem to recall someone did something along those lines with a DeLorean . . 

[PeteH]

17 minutes ago, Chris A said:

So, does that mean you put petrol in the tank then the car magically transforms it into electricity to drive you along. Wonderful progress 🙄

There is still the 'fossil fuel' issue. Better still would be to put a bit of radioactive stuff in which the car turns into electricity. I seem to recall someone did something along those lines with a DeLorean . . 

Get it fitted with a “flux capacitor” and you could go back to the 1950’s and fill?. 
 

Pete

[Colin Lindsay]

China is putting TWO new coal fired stations onto their grid per day, so with that capacity, they should be world leaders in electric cars soon. 

[Wagger]

Yup, like the Prius, petrol engine driving a generator that then drives electric motors at the wheels. Same idea as a Diesel Electic Rail Loco. AND it has a battery so that i can travel in town producing no exhaust. (I have not confirmed this, but that is how I remeber the Prius data).

I am ditherng with how to handle choice of my next, and probably, last car. If I use it sparingly, I could charge it from solar for free with one trip out per month. OR do I go plug in hybrid so that I can avoid queues at charging stations if I want to travel the country.

B-I-L uses an electric car full time now, 250 miles between charges booking hotels with charge stations, He has monster solar setup making over £500 per annum out of a feed in tarif that is no longer available. He was very lucky. Retiring early as a former GP who planned ahead from the time of his first employment.

I tried that, but ran into obstacles on the way.

Maybe cars with a small ICE will soon be available with large batteries. After all, it only requires about 45bhp to achieve 70 mph. A 'Get you home' power plant would suffice on a  200 bhp electric car.

[Chris A]

2 hours ago, Wagger said:

can travel in town producing no exhaust. (I have not confirmed this, but that is how I remeber the Prius data).

A neighbour a couple of doors down has a Prius, had it for a good number of years, upto 50 kph it uses electric. He is about 100 inside the 50 kph limit of the village then it's 10 to 12 Kms before the next town. The town is small and if you went through you would do no more than 3 Kms in a 50 ,or less, zone. Maybe he just drives at 49 kph everywhere.

Neighbour directly opposite has a ZOE as his daily car plus an old diesel one for when they go away.

Curiously enough the news tonight had a report about the demand for second hand diesels increasing, due in the main to the cost per kilometre of fuel being in favour of diesels.

[AndyTV8]

3 hours ago, Wagger said:

 

I am ditherng with how to handle choice of my next, and probably, last car. If I use it sparingly, I could charge it from solar for free with one trip out per month. OR do I go plug in hybrid so that I can avoid queues at charging stations if I want to travel the country.

 

My wife’s recent purchase was a PHEV - all the local trips which make up the majority of her driving are battery-powered which costs roughly 16% of the traditional fuel cost. Any longer journeys require no extra planning, simply run in petrol-mode at around 38-40mpg on a decent run - we didn’t even bother looking for a charging point while on a recent 500 mile round-trip to Cornwall.

With the relatively small battery-sizes of PHEV you can easily use a 3-pin charger rather than have the expense of a dedicated charge-point being installed (we have driveway parking so can charge at home).