Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Ondřej Kupka's avatar

I am not sure what is so revolutionary about this except painting the situation in bright colours. This tech already exists, but it is not widely used, because we don't have enough clean energy and we still have relatively cheap fossil hydrocarbons.

I get the carbon neutrality hype, but it all includes a lot of machinery and upfront costs. What happens when you need to create enough e-fuel for everybody on the whole planet? Give me numbers!

There is nothing inherently special about this process as carbon just circulates in nature. And this basically only becomes available after we manage to solve green growth and green transformation, which is still a huge question mark, especially regarding materials, not energy. And even after that, a lot of energy is lost in the process, so you actually need abundance of clean energy to sacrifice it when clearing hydrogen, then methane of whatever. Always better to just use electricity, which then does not capture any carbon.

See e.g. https://www.thegreatsimplification.com/episode/19-simon-michaux

Expand full comment
Todd Faurot's avatar

Tomas, I think you may be approaching the analysis of the feasibility of this idea incorrectly. Even if I accept all concepts, numbers, and tech at face value, in order for market forces to make this idea a reality, the utility of the energy input must exceed most other uses. I can imagine at the point where this might be cost neutral, there will be many other options to use that excess energy that will make this one look wasteful.

Expand full comment
89 more comments...

No posts