121
A New US Plant Will Use Captured CO2 to Make Millions of Gallons of Jet Fuel (singularityhub.com)
submitted 3 years ago by [M, B] to c/technology@lemmy.world
30 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A New US Plant Will Use Captured CO2 to Make Millions of Gallons of Jet Fuel::Replacing half of a plane’s regular fuel with CO2-derived fuel can result in 90 percent fewer lifecycle emissions.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 3 years ago (2 children)

It is an important difference though. Theoretically this could make aviation carbon neutral. We could also find a deep hole in the ground to pump it so it is stored, though presumably we could turn it into something more inert than jet fuel.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago

    Right, I think this is the point others are missing. Yes, carbon capture does not seem like a feasible way to reduce climate change. We all agree.

    However, what do we do about aviation? We need to reduce carbon emissions across the board and that definitely includes aviation. However we really don’t have the technology, nor does one appear in the foreseeable future. While there have been some promising experiments with batteries, that’s not going to be useful without some huge improvements in battery tech. impractically huge. It may never happen. We’ve had much better luck with bio-fuel of various sorts but everyone here probably understands those downsides. So what can we do? Harvesting carbon from the atmosphere to create synfuel, at least helps aviation get closer to carbon neutral. I have no idea whether it can actually work or is just another boondoggle, but certainly like to see the attempt.

    Yes, we know carbon capture is not a reasonable way to fight climate change, but is it a helpful way to reduce carbon emissions from aviation?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (2 children)

    Theoretically, it could make aviation almost carbon neutral due to inherent inefficiencies, but what good will that do? We need to be heavily carbon negative in order to even have a the tiniest, faintest glimmer of hope to avert our own extinction if we continue to do nothing about this problem.

    Reducing consumption is the only way to achieve this but that requires either a monumental shift in human behavior, or simply less humans. And, since we seemingly aren't making the choice, I wonder which one nature will choose for us...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    I don't disagree, but the modern world relies on Air Travel and nobody is going to be willing to stop that. We don't yet have energy storage density to a spot where electric flight is "economical". It exists and works well from what I understand but we can't build a passenger jet with it for instance.

    You are right though. If we don't make huge shifts then earth is just gonna shed us and recover over a few million years.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    It's definitely better than nothing, I'll agree, but also underwhelming from where we need to be because it makes such little difference. Most greenhouse gasses come from factory farming and the activities of corporations. We should still make these baby steps in green technology even if it's too late to change our fate, because the science of it is or could be valuable for an easier, more comfortable, or slower extinction process - as morbid as that sounds.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    We can’t afford to just change farming and corporations: we really need to cut carbon emissions everywhere we can. Let’s go for aviation, AND figure out the other industries

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    We can't afford it? Then we go extinct. What is the higher price? Anyway, it's probably out of our hands by now. Like I mentioned, nature will probably choose for us, and she always takes the path of least resistance.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    You can’t just say we need to stop flying: no one will do that, but it’s also not the only choice. If this is a practical way to reduce carbon from aviation, let’s do it. I don’t see anything else likely nor do I see giving up flying.

    We need to cut carbon emissions across the board quite seriously, but some industries/technologies will work better than others. Maybe this is all we can do for aviation, but it does help. We’ll just need to make it up elsewhere

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent