Alt text:

An idling gas engine may be annoyingly loud, but that’s the price you pay for having WAY less torque available at a standstill.

  • @Everythingispenguins
    link
    English
    31
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I think people forget that petroleum is condensed and distilled solar energy. One gallon of gasoline is the results of years of solar energy.

    Spelling

    • aname
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1065 months ago

      Non renewable solar energy unfortunately.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        105 months ago

        Renewable fuels exist and are used today, but the efficiency and pollution aspects still apply.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          15 months ago

          If you’re making your diesel from CO2 pulled from the air, pollution aspects don’t really apply (at least, CO2 emission issues don’t, there’s still NOx, but that’s what cat piss is for).

          Problem is, converting atmospheric CO2 back into fuel makes the efficiency issue drastically worse. Maybe with enough solar panels and windmills, and use the Fischer–Tropsch process with the excess energy that the grid isn’t consuming.

          Of course, that would be for mobile fuel, if solar plants were going to do anything like that for later use generating electricity during peaks, making diesel is dumb; you’d want to use hydrogen or ammonia for in-place energy storage.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              25 months ago

              Ah. I’m generally skeptical of any plant-based ‘green fuel’ because they generally take up agricultural capacity that would otherwise be producing food

          • aname
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -85 months ago

            It is iv we use it sustainably.

        • @Delta_V
          link
          English
          455 months ago

          Not really. Its trees from a time before micro organisms evolved the ability to eat dead trees. These days, the solar energy collected by trees will get used to power the metabolisms of fungi before those trees can get buried and eventually become new coal & petroleum.

          I suppose an impact from a sufficiently large asteroid could turn the entire crust of the planet into magma, sterilizing it and therefore opening the possibility that new oil might be created some day.

          • @AEsheron
            link
            English
            31
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            IIRC it is actually mostly from algea. A small amount from some fern-like plants. By the time trees existed, they were being broken down by bacteria.

        • aname
          link
          fedilink
          English
          85 months ago

          I think I read somewhere that oil will not be produced anymore because now bacteria can break down that biomass that it previously didn’t. Hence, non-renewable even on long timescales.

        • @AeonFelis
          link
          English
          -1
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Only if we bring back the dinosaurs. There are six movies (and counting!) explaining why this is not a good idea.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        25 months ago

        Energy density is a huge advantage which most people find hard to give up especially when the biggest problem that we face is invisible to most people. We can’t fix a problem if we ignore the cause.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          85 months ago

          A lot of people have been having their cake days recently. Guess it’s the first anniversary of the Reddit exodus.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      245 months ago

      oops you posted irrelevant pedantics that verge on misinformation 😧

      sure it’s distilled solar energy that cannot be renewed. relevant language highligted. no one “forgets,” this. literally no one. it’s just not relevant to a timespan less than millions of years. cheers! ☀️

      • @grue
        link
        English
        -15 months ago

        Petroleum can’t be renewed, but biofuels can be.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          45 months ago

          v true but i also dislike how biofuels get smorked into yet more CO2 which is kind of a problem rn

          • @grue
            link
            English
            -15 months ago

            Biofuels are carbon-neutral. They release CO2 when burned, but it doesn’t matter because that same CO2 had recently been sucked out of the atmosphere by the plant they came from.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              85 months ago

              In theory true. In reality not true.

              While U.S. biofuel use rose from 0.37 to 1.34 EJ/yr over this period, additional carbon uptake on cropland was enough to offset only 37 % of the biofuel-related biogenic CO2emissions. This result falsifies the assumption of a full offset made by LCA and other GHG accounting methods that assume biofuel carbon neutrality. Once estimates from the literature for process emissions and displacement effects including land-use change are considered, the conclusion is that U.S. biofuel use to date is associated with a net increase rather than a net decrease in CO2emissions. study

              Not passing judgement on anything, just putting the facts out there that I happen to know :) Biofuel may or may not be a good tool to move toward more sustainability, and it’s certainly better than petrol.

              • @grue
                link
                English
                1
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                My biofuel of choice is biodiesel produced from byproducts of chicken rendering that would otherwise become waste/pollution anyway. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

                The way I see it, we should electrify all the things that can be (urban driving, both freight and passenger trains, etc.), maximize the use of those things (e.g. by shifting long-haul freight away from trucking and back towards rail, and shifting airline travel to high-speed rail), and then use biofuels for the relatively-niche stuff that’s left instead of spending excessive effort trying to get electric to cover 100% of cases.

      • @Everythingispenguins
        link
        English
        -265 months ago

        Um piss off. It is not irrelevant or misinformation. That is exactly what petroleum is.

        You clearly can’t understand a factual statement from an opinion I never said it was good I never said it was bad I just said it was. If you’d bother to take a moment to think about it. You would realize that I was referring to the fact that petroleum is extremely energy dense. For the very reason I stated. That is fundamentally why petroleum has become a successful energy source and why it’s been so difficult to replace.

        You’re welcome to point out where I said it was renewable. I think you’re going to have a difficult time finding that statement.

        As for being a pedantic ass that’s clearly your territory. A pedantic ass that it likes to put words in other people’s mouths.

        • @ThunderWhiskers
          link
          English
          85 months ago

          Your post was bordering on irrelevant to the original comment. In light of that the information you provided can really only be interpreted is as pro-fossil fuel.

          • @Everythingispenguins
            link
            English
            -85 months ago

            Just because you can only interpret it that way doesn’t mean it is true.