That's literally how we got oil.
-
-
-
Can you elaborate?
-
this is a crude description of photosyntesis. Only it keeps the chemical energy in simpler carbohydrates, plants and bacteria use later to build more complexe molecules.
-
So this technology is a good thing :-)? Or is it just a minor step with little impact?
-
It is a proof of concept, a experiment made to show it is possible. Dependind on the economical viability and scalability, (points not discussed here) anything between a curiosity and World-breakingly amazing.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Each of these steps uses far more energy then you get out.
-
You have a source for that assertion or is that just your opinion?
-
Thermodynamics
-
That's not an argument
-
Yes it is. You can at best recover 100% of the energy you put into a chemical reaction, but due to entropy you almost always lose energy in the process. Tranforming it into liquid fuel loses much or the original solar energy.
-
Plus you also lose a lot when you go to use it. That's been the problem with creating liquid fuel from solar is that you lose a crap ton of energy from it.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Reality check. Maximum theoretical efficiency of solar to biomass is 4.5% for C3 plants and algae, for agriculture it’s 1% with little variation by species or location. Authors claim 3.8% under lab conditions, and 0.7% for isopropanol output. Not a very practical fuel source.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@kellandickens worth watching. If it can be done at scale or at reasonable cost, it’d be scary for my business -
Very cool. Scale & cost are the right questions
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Steve, in your current book you uncritically cite the work of a notorious right-wing critic of solar suggesting that solar is impractical as a source of energy. Like you, I support nuclear, reject antinuk, however you have fallen victim to anti-solar, which is equally pernicious.
-
Dude, you're responding to a post hyping a new (and huge) development in solar. What.
-
It's not huge.
-
Gigantic, then.
-
Got any idea of the range of a hydrogen-fuelled car? Go look it up then say it's not huge again.
-
Shame they're an utter pile of crap.
@PenPrecise has a great pinned thread on this. -
I'm not partisan. If you prefer electrics, yay.
-
An HFCV is an electric vehicle.
- 8 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.