Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Prediction: Coal has fallen. Nuclear is next then Oil.

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
  • Funny
Reactions: fhteagle and mspohr

He's both right and wrong, because waste edible oils are far from the only feed stock for biofuels. And, we're spending way too much biofuel feedstock on ground transport that should be electrified anyway, freeing up that feedstock to be shifted to SAF for aircraft. Michael Barnard did a decent analysis on CleanTechnica about a combination approach of electrifying very short haul flights, and shifting ground transport biofuel to SAF for the short through ultra long haul stuff. The initial numbers looked pretty encouraging, but not fully a silver bullet.

But we haven't even explored some of the options like (iso)butanol that would be a drop in replacement for (av)gasoline without the problems of ethanol. However, Jet A is both harder and easier to make biofuel out of, for reasons that would make this post way too long to list.

But someone for the love all that is holy finish the research and commercialization on algae biofuels please..............
 
Last edited:

Firefly's team worked with Cranfield University to examine the fuel's life cycle carbon impact. It concluded that Firefly's fuel has a 90% lower carbon footprint than standard jet fuel. Mr Hygate, who has been developing low-carbon fuels in Gloucestershire for 20 years, said although the new fuel was chemically just like fossil-based kerosene, it "has no fossil carbon, it's a fossil-free fuel".
 

Firefly's team worked with Cranfield University to examine the fuel's life cycle carbon impact. It concluded that Firefly's fuel has a 90% lower carbon footprint than standard jet fuel. Mr Hygate, who has been developing low-carbon fuels in Gloucestershire for 20 years, said although the new fuel was chemically just like fossil-based kerosene, it "has no fossil carbon, it's a fossil-free fuel".

I hope they did not have any lab accidents. LOL

 

Firefly's team worked with Cranfield University to examine the fuel's life cycle carbon impact. It concluded that Firefly's fuel has a 90% lower carbon footprint than standard jet fuel. Mr Hygate, who has been developing low-carbon fuels in Gloucestershire for 20 years, said although the new fuel was chemically just like fossil-based kerosene, it "has no fossil carbon, it's a fossil-free fuel".
That's a SAF we can all get behind.

I wonder where in the the sewage treatment process they'd get their *sugar* together. There's other waste and pathogens that generally need to be removed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mspohr

A growing number of climate analysts believe that 2023 may be recorded as the year in which annual emissions reached a pinnacle before the global fossil fuel economy begins a terminal decline.

“We can take a small pause to celebrate this tipping point,” said Dave Jones, a director at the climate thinktank Ember. “But in a way it’s worrying that we are still talking about when emissions might peak. The reality of the situation is that we need deep and fast reductions in emissions if we hope to stay within the vanishingly small budget for carbon which remains.”
 

As per a report first broken by Reuters, the Government of Spain reached an agreement this week to officially begin sun-setting the nation's commercial nuclear energy grid in favor of more conventional forms of renewable energy. Per the agreed-upon terms, Spain's current fleet of seven active commercial fission reactors will soon begin a gradual process of prepping each facility for decommissioning before a comprehensive waste cleanup process ensures harmful fissile fuel doesn't enter surrounding ecosystems.
 
In don't know and the article didn't say, but is the Spanish reactor fleet reaching end of design life? Any chance of retrofit or extension? If it is possible to extend their life legally and practically, shuttering perfectly good working reactors is not a great move, as evidenced by Germany's recent troubles and emissions spike....

Screenshot_20231231-113220_Vivaldi Browser.png
 

Firefly's team worked with Cranfield University to examine the fuel's life cycle carbon impact. It concluded that Firefly's fuel has a 90% lower carbon footprint than standard jet fuel. Mr Hygate, who has been developing low-carbon fuels in Gloucestershire for 20 years, said although the new fuel was chemically just like fossil-based kerosene, it "has no fossil carbon, it's a fossil-free fuel".

Would be more impressive if they could make a toilet that makes biodiesel.

 

According to this FERC forecast, 21 gigawatts (GW) of coal power capacity are expected to be retired in the next 3 years in the USA, while no coal power is expected to be added.

In contrast, 211 GW of solar power capacity is expected to be added in that same period of time, and more conservatively, 88 GW are “high probability additions.” That’s a bit insane, but it’s also not surprising
 

According to this FERC forecast, 21 gigawatts (GW) of coal power capacity are expected to be retired in the next 3 years in the USA, while no coal power is expected to be added.

In contrast, 211 GW of solar power capacity is expected to be added in that same period of time, and more conservatively, 88 GW are “high probability additions.” That’s a bit insane, but it’s also not surprising
That would be about what I'd expect, given that the capacity factor of utility scale solar is usually around 25%, so a 4-1 ratio between solar/coal makes sense.

Next add batteries!
 
  • Like
Reactions: mspohr
bought a very nice Whirlpool fridge a few years ago from a chain dept store. At the time it was the lowest energy use device in the class I wanted at ~ 400 kWh a year. Fast forward to today and a couple casual checks show no model below ~ 600 kWh a year. It is possible that the testing changed but it seems more likely that manufacturers are still prioritizing features and size over energy consumption. Until that changes our ability to reduce CO2 emissions is a game of two steps forward and one step back.

That's interesting observation. Just checked my LG Door in door fridge. 30.2 cu ft that shows 598 kWh while a similar LG 30.7 cu ft on Costco.com shows 755 kWh!

Wow, my fridge uses almost as much energy as my Model 3. LOL