Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Is this the answer?

  1. #1
    Nosevi's Avatar
    Nosevi is offline There's an outside too? Where? Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Lincolnshire
    Name
    Pete
    Posts
    10,949

    Default Is this the answer?

    I've often thought if it looks too good to be true then maybe it is but this does look interesting.

    Sure, it's not as 'exciting' as ditching the ICE and going electric (exciting for some people that is) but if they are now on the cusp of this being scaleable what's not to like - renewable energy powered, localised carbon capture that produces carbon neutral petrol (or AVGAS) with the ability to put some additional carbon back underground making the whole thing including the 'petrol' produced carbon negative. You produce a fuel requiring no modification of vehicles, no requirement to scrap millions of current vehicles, no massive new infrastructure required like charging points everywhere and you clean up the atmosphere. Will mean that members of XR will find themselves with very little to shout about but I guess that's a small price to pay.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mb_8DJF6Hp0&autoplay=0

  2. #2
    F355GTS's Avatar
    F355GTS is offline Shocking waste of good kevlar - The Ferrari Enzo Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Hants
    Name
    Mark Collins
    Posts
    6,647

    Default

    Sounds too good to be true.......................

  3. #3
    Nosevi's Avatar
    Nosevi is offline There's an outside too? Where? Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Lincolnshire
    Name
    Pete
    Posts
    10,949

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by F355GTS View Post
    Sounds too good to be true.......................
    Does, doesn't it. The science stacks up it's just a question of whether the cost does and who will pay to scale it.

    I guess there will be plenty of people out there who will fight against this though. Many would prefer to see us all in electric buses with little or no private transport at all. Add to that the companies who are already invested heavily in alternatives like electric cars - the auto industry must be rubbing its hands at us all having to buy new cars in the pretty near future. But if this gives us an alternative, go electric OR stay ICE but carbon neutral (or even negative) ICE, then perhaps its a piece of the puzzle.

    One climate scientist I saw when looking at this said the problem is people are arguing that we should go 100% this way or 100% that way, say carbon capture fuel vs electric, whereas in reality we can and should do both. And if by buying carbon capture fuel you subsidise some carbon capture and storage, I'd certainly be willing to pay a bit more for my petrol (within sensible limits obviously).

    As I say, if this is how we get fuel in the future it does rather flaw the arguments of some of those in the environmental lobby who argue for no cars, limited flights, etc. Imagine their annoyance as you drive past their boat parked in central London, sports exhaust on full song, knowing by driving your Ferrari fuelled by carbon negative fuel, you're doing more to clean up the atmosphere than they are.

  4. #4
    A348W's Avatar
    A348W is offline Rear lights like a farm gate - The Ferrari 348 Club Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    North Wiltshire
    Name
    Adrian
    Posts
    763

    Default

    Interesting.

    Fully agree that there is no ONE solution, it will take a number of solutions, including EV (Hippies can drive those ) I'll use this fuel in the Ferrari!

    That said some interesting points in this, in that they talk about a) making their plants = carbon, b) maintain their plants = carbon, c) decommission their plant = carbon. They also want to go global...same thing. And the main point though is that, they assume that the energy they are consuming to power their plant is carbon neutral from renewable sources. No mention of how much power is required and how many "carbon neutral" wind turbines/solar panels etc they will need!! And how robust is the assumption that the energy consumed will always be from renewable sources?

    I'm also always suspicions when the "owner" is being asked question by the "co founder"

    I do get frustrated that people coming out with all this "zero emissions" , "carbon neutral", "THE solution"...sorry I don't buy it. But I do think governments should be supporting these types of technology and helping to develop them.

    On the face of it, it is a good addition to what else is ongoing.

  5. #5
    Nosevi's Avatar
    Nosevi is offline There's an outside too? Where? Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Lincolnshire
    Name
    Pete
    Posts
    10,949

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by A348W View Post
    Interesting.

    Fully agree that there is no ONE solution, it will take a number of solutions, including EV (Hippies can drive those ) I'll use this fuel in the Ferrari!

    That said some interesting points in this, in that they talk about a) making their plants = carbon, b) maintain their plants = carbon, c) decommission their plant = carbon. They also want to go global...same thing. And the main point though is that, they assume that the energy they are consuming to power their plant is carbon neutral from renewable sources. No mention of how much power is required and how many "carbon neutral" wind turbines/solar panels etc they will need!! And how robust is the assumption that the energy consumed will always be from renewable sources?

    I'm also always suspicions when the "owner" is being asked question by the "co founder"

    I do get frustrated that people coming out with all this "zero emissions" , "carbon neutral", "THE solution"...sorry I don't buy it. But I do think governments should be supporting these types of technology and helping to develop them.

    On the face of it, it is a good addition to what else is ongoing.
    +1 to all of the above.

    I guess the answer to your a), b) c) is that this is no different if you're talking about building (and having to decommission) hundreds of thousands of wind turbines etc. to provide electricity for power instead of carbon capture fuel as well as millions of electric cars. Both have a carbon footprint in terms of building and decommissioning but as far as I know a wind turbine can't actually take carbon out of the atmosphere.

    I think both are needed and people will have a choice which suits their needs better. Of course 'choice' doesn't sit well with many who prefer to lecture and dictate what everyone else should do. But if they could make petrol and so ICE essentially carbon neutral that's definitely what I'd be looking at using given my situation.

Similar Threads

  1. Anyone know the answer to Certificate of conformity
    By 355OXO in forum Technical Q & A
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 15-11-2013, 12:16 PM
  2. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 27-05-2007, 12:32 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •