this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2024
1105 points (96.3% liked)

xkcd

8991 readers
311 users here now

A community for a webcomic of romance, sarcasm, math, and language.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Alt text:

An idling gas engine may be annoyingly loud, but that's the price you pay for having WAY less torque available at a standstill.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lauha@lemmy.one 106 points 6 months ago (4 children)

Non renewable solar energy unfortunately.

[–] cron@feddit.de 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Renewable fuels exist and are used today, but the efficiency and pollution aspects still apply.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If you're making your diesel from CO2 pulled from the air, pollution aspects don't really apply (at least, CO2 emission issues don't, there's still NOx, but that's what cat piss is for).

Problem is, converting atmospheric CO2 back into fuel makes the efficiency issue drastically worse. Maybe with enough solar panels and windmills, and use the Fischer–Tropsch process with the excess energy that the grid isn't consuming.

Of course, that would be for mobile fuel, if solar plants were going to do anything like that for later use generating electricity during peaks, making diesel is dumb; you'd want to use hydrogen or ammonia for in-place energy storage.

[–] cron@feddit.de 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I was thinking about fuels like HVO. They work well, but have their own ecological implications.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 months ago

Ah. I'm generally skeptical of any plant-based 'green fuel' because they generally take up agricultural capacity that would otherwise be producing food

[–] rmuk@feddit.uk 5 points 6 months ago (4 children)

No, it's renewable. But... not in any practical timeframe.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 51 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That's not the definition of renewable.

[–] Delta_V@lemmy.world 45 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Not really. Its trees from a time before micro organisms evolved the ability to eat dead trees. These days, the solar energy collected by trees will get used to power the metabolisms of fungi before those trees can get buried and eventually become new coal & petroleum.

I suppose an impact from a sufficiently large asteroid could turn the entire crust of the planet into magma, sterilizing it and therefore opening the possibility that new oil might be created some day.

[–] AEsheron@lemmy.world 31 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

IIRC it is actually mostly from algea. A small amount from some fern-like plants. By the time trees existed, they were being broken down by bacteria.

[–] lauha@lemmy.one 8 points 6 months ago

I think I read somewhere that oil will not be produced anymore because now bacteria can break down that biomass that it previously didn't. Hence, non-renewable even on long timescales.

[–] AeonFelis@lemmy.world -1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Only if we bring back the dinosaurs. There are six movies (and counting!) explaining why this is not a good idea.

[–] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 8 points 6 months ago

Technically no. Only if we erase bacteria capable of breaking down trees.

[–] RogueBanana@lemmy.zip 2 points 6 months ago

Energy density is a huge advantage which most people find hard to give up especially when the biggest problem that we face is invisible to most people. We can't fix a problem if we ignore the cause.

[–] lnxtx@feddit.nl 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 8 points 6 months ago

A lot of people have been having their cake days recently. Guess it's the first anniversary of the Reddit exodus.