My Photo

February 2016

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29          

Categories

Categories

Thought Leaders

Blog powered by Typepad
Bookmark and Share

« New MA program in Strategic Foresight in Canada | Main | CFP: 3rd European Conference on Smart Sensing and Context (EuroSSC) »

April 07, 2008

Comments

Andrew Opala

The essence of replacing gasoline with synthetic fuels is meant to minimize the shock to the entire delivery and usage chain. Keeping the auto industry, the gasoline companies and everything that lives off this from lots of distruption.

However, creating long carbon-chain molecules that are "like" gas may be a waste of energy. We are just making carbon bonds when we make the fuel (like storing them in a battery) and then break them in the combustion process (discharging the battery) when the fuel is burned. Using a smaller and easier to produce molecule (Methane for example) would be a better choice than Gasoline for this "battery" analogy.

I think after reviewing cost of production, time-to-market, and availability of raw materials, there will be a push for cars to be "tri-brid" - methane/gas/electric.

Methane and electric are the most sustainable and the easiest to get from a plug in the wall (from the natural gas company or from the electric company).

This is the distruptive model that will create a sustainable economy rather than to maintain one with a limited future (in recreating Gasoline).

The comments to this entry are closed.

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

TypePad Help