Synthetic gasoline

[hliyan]

Apparently atmospheric carbon capture + Fischer-Tropsch process currently produces gasoline that costs 100x the market price. So probably a long way to go before it's commercially viable.

[metalman]

VS, drive down the right back road in arizona* and get a tank full of all natural drip gas for a lot less than the market price, with the one caviet that drip gas is hydroscopic and it has to be used promptly

* wherever there are wells with condensate that isn't too nasty

[sambeau]

The focus for these kind of alternatives should be on aviation—with the most difficult fuel to replace. Maybe we'd need this for classic cars, emergency generators and a few other smaller things, but even classic cars can get electric refits. Cars, motorbikes, trucks etc should be electric; shipping needs to embrace sail-electric hybrids; and bio-fuels/synthetic fuel should be aimed at aviation (and maybe as a stop-gap for shipping). My 10¢.

[2paz7x]

Obviously you're not a car guy if you earnestly believe classic cars should almost always be refitted with an electric engine rather than using a more environmentally friendly fuel replacement. We shouldn't just toss the old functional engine & ECU & other components into the landfill. You're seeing it from a tech perspective. No, Sam, the Porsche 964 is not comparable to the latest shiny MacBook where you can just throw it away after you've had your 2 years of fun and the non-replaceable battery looks like a pillow and Apple refuses to update your OS. My 10c is I'm all for the synthetic gasoline instead of completely gutting classics and just turning them into almost-sleeper "classic body & suspension with a Tesla motor thrown into it". That being said I don't mind the electric conversions but to imply they should be done rather than just switching fuels is silly at best. I see it in the same category of project as an engine swap, it's something that's done for fun or more power, not something that ought to happen to every classic.

[throwaway22032]

Classic cars being refit to be electric is like using strawberry flavoured candy to replace fruit, or GPU shaders to replace a Trinitron.

Modern cars already exist, you can just use those. There aren’t enough proper classics in existence to matter from a carbon perspective.

[0cf8612b2e1e]

You fight with the army you have. There are hundreds of millions of gas burning vehicles that are going to be on the road for years. Synthetic fuel allows you to transparently replace the source with a carbon neutral equivalent without any new hardware requirements. As you build out additional synthesis capacity, you can hit more markets.

[gwbas1c]

I view classic cars as a "preservation" exercise, and the kind of thing where paying extra for synthetic gasoline is "worth it" for a historical demonstration.

That being said: For hobbyists who use a classic car as a base for something custom, I have no problem with whatever method of propulsion they use.

[uticus]

> The focus for these kind of alternatives should be on aviation—with the most difficult fuel to replace.

Why is aviation fuel the most difficult to replace?

[uticus]

> It’s essentially a manufactured replica of gasoline, designed to power internal combustion engines while potentially offering a more sustainable alternative to fossil fuels.

Key word: "potentially". Because it is less accurate than the word "currently" - as in, "currently, the cost of production is a significant barrier" - I would argue the word "potentially" at the outset frames the whole description of benefits as an unsubstantiated faith.

When all processes for deriving synthetic gasoline require more input energy than available energy from the output, you're not describing processes that "potentially offering a more sustainable alternative to fossil fuels."

[cobbzilla]

If the energy source to make the fuel is renewable (hydro, solar, wind), then it is effectively carbon neutral, and that’s the best you can do. Someday I think we’ll get there, but I don’t know enough to guess how far off that is.

[Telemakhos]

I think, in comparing the energy input and output of the fuel, you might be omitting its storage density and role in off-grid energy availability. For example, consider aviation: you can't hook up a plane to a solar farm or nuke plant, but you have to take energy with you onboard. In order to fly and lift passengers or cargo, you need to minimize the mass of energy supply, which means maximizing energy density. It's really hard to beat hydrocarbons for that, and they're available at a convenient range of temperatures and pressures. So, the idea behind synthetic fuels is to make artificial hydrocarbon fuel as a means of storing green energy. The energy input-output inefficiency is just the price of storing that energy for off-grid use.

[schmidtleonard]

The unsubstantiated faith critique swings both ways: the amount of biofuel hate that came out of that one time agricultural land use adjustment is truly diabolical.

Like, "ok, you win, but if I drop this gigantic adjustment onto your math, then I win," and an honest conversation would then move to whether or not the adjustment was justified but that's not what happened, the conversation turned into yelling at anyone who didn't want to take the outcome-determinative adjustment on faith. Lol. Being a crusader doesn't make you wrong, but it does make the whole accusation of unsubstantiated faith / appeal to reason quite hypocritical.

[giva]

> When all processes for deriving synthetic gasoline require more input energy than available energy from the output, you're not describing processes that "potentially offering a more sustainable alternative to fossil fuels."

Sorry, what? Even charging a battery "require more input energy than available energy from the output". Obviously it's not a source of energy, it's a way to store energy.

[doener]

The concept is very old. Germany had synthetic Gasonline starting in 1927: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leuna-Benzin

[cormorant]

Honest question: how do you all sense when a page is AI-written? To me, the many headings, lists, and frequent use of bold stand out stylistically. Additionally: the multilevel numbered table of contents; the parenthetical acronyms (to the point of silliness, as in "Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)" stand out.

Non-stylistically, the non-answers to questions or misinterpreted questions (read the bolded final sentence under "What is the octane rating of synthetic gasoline?") are a tell.

[SoftTalker]

This style of news writing (headings in the form of a question followed by a paragraph of answer) had already started before widespread use of LLMs to write news stories. Particularly in papers targeted at mass audiences such as USA Today (also seen in their the many local papers that Gannett has assimilated).

[ZeroGravitas]

The oddly diverse (this isn't the right word but can't think of the right one) list of articles created by the vaguely named author seems to point in this direction too:

https://iere.org/author/iere-team/

[alexjplant]

Just wait until you find an AI-generated page [1] made from one of your own forum posts [2]... it's an odd sensation of flattery that evolves into disgust as you realize that an LLM has no taste so you can't even derive satisfaction from another person finding you good enough to rip off.

[1] https://bikermtb.com/kilo-bicycles-2/

[2] https://www.bikeforums.net/general-cycling-discussion/129598...

[walthamstow]

Homepage looks AI-written to me. The defined sections, use of banal emojis like globe and brain, use of bolding.

[ainiriand]

I write like that as my wife is an SEO specialist and showed me the impact of those elements in SEO.

[anon_cow1111]

ctrl+f "furthermore"

[icameron]

I heard about Aircela- a modular gasoline from thin air generator company- from a comment in here earlier this week. It was never discussed in any posts so I looked into it because it sounded fascinating. The details are it costs about $20k for a unit, and one unit can produce about 1 gallon of pure 90 octane gasoline using water and a replaceable catalyst cartridge in a day. And that requires 75 KWh of electricity! On my grid that’s like $15 of power at carbon neutral rates. So it sounds like an amazingly impressive and economical impractical technology.

[alexandrehtrb]

Chile has a synthetic gasoline plant that started operating in 2022:

https://en.clickpetroleoegas.com.br/haru-oni-plant-starts-pr...

https://www.siemens-energy.com/global/en/home/stories/haru-o...

[PaulHoule]

I think FT is passe, a lot of projects are using MTG

https://www.exxonmobilchemical.com/en/catalysts-and-technolo...

but still making methanol from syngas. Two attractive routes though are just using methanol or blending methanol into gas and turning the methanol to dimethyl ether.

I dunno if it is really practical but I like this image of this personal fuel synthesizer

https://www.carsauce.com/car-news/start-up-invents-home-petr...

which makes about a gallon a day which is about what my Honda Fit uses.

[-warren]

Dumb question, and I might not understand the difference. Don't we already have synthetic gasoline in the form of trufuel and the ilk? I can buy that at walmart; expensive, sure, but is indoor-safe and lasts forever. Smells good when it burns as a bonus!

[wffurr]

No. Trufuel is fossil fuel derived. It's just distilled and mixed to a much tighter tolerance than typical gasoline. Synthetic gasoline is derived from atmospheric CO2 and water, effectively reversing combustion via the Fischer-Tropsch process or Methanol-to-Gasoline.

[xyzzyz]

Trufuel is just normal fuel, premixed with other stuff.

[bluGill]

I can never figure out how to do this in my garrage, these overviews are too high level. Sure it would lively cost me $50 per gallon, but just once I want to mow my lawn on fuel I made myself.

[LeafItAlone]

You don’t need to. The gas retailers have already chosen the options for you. You actually need fewer options, as you have better things to do with your time.

[cestith]

Outside of working in existing vehicles without modification, what is the benefit of this over a methanol or ammonia electric fuel cell or an ammonia-burning ICE?