• WallEx@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, quit using the efficient stuff, we need something similarly inefficient as gas powered cars.

    • Hypx@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Batteries are unsustainable and have massive resource requirements. It’s basically an obsession with “efficiency” while actually being extremely wasteful.

      • WallEx@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You say that while promoting the idea of more inefficient energy transfer systems. Electric motors operate above 90%, traditional motors around 25-30%. Trying to mitigate that with wasting more energy by creating an artificial fuel is even more wasteful.

        Burning stuff is unsustainable, using batteries, that are recyclable is not.

        • Hypx@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          1 year ago

          Solar panels are only 15-20% efficient. No one is going around saying we need to ban solar panels.

          Fuels made from solar power are the opposite of unsustainable. They are the most sustainable ideas possible. It is basically artificial photosynthesis.

          • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            We don’t make fuels from solar power.

            Unless you mean hydrogen, which by itself is already 30-40% less efficient then just using the electricity directly in a battery.

            And that is without counting all the hydrogen that just escapes through any form of containment we try to keep it in.

            • Hypx@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              Hydrogen is a fuel. E-fuels are hydrogen plus CO₂ and converted into synthetic hydrocarbons.

              You are blatantly ignoring the part where solar power is incredibly inefficient to begin with, and we don’t care. It’s still cheap energy.

              • PlatinumSf
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                1 year ago

                You’re confusing the efficency of solar panels with the efficiency of burning hydrocarbon based fuel (perhaps intentionally?). Yes, solar panels convert about 20-30% (they’re getting better with time) of the energy provided by mankind’s closest and most beloved fission reactor into energy we can use, the rest being reflected or turned into heat, but the source (that giant ball of fission) is infinite and non-detremental to the environment to keep running. Hydrocarbon production not only requires this original source but once calculated would provided you end delivery efficency levels that are dramatically lower (likely less than 1%), Natural hydrocarbons are limited in supply, and the whole chain is significantly more toxic for the planet when you calculate in byproducts produced during production or consumption. It’s legitimately not even close and if you truly believe hydrocarbons are even remotely viable you’ve misinterpreted one of the data points somewhere in your calculation.

                • Hypx@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Except you’ve just proved my point: Solar is basically infinite energy. So why obsess over efficiency? If you have something made from solar power, it is not a big deal.

                  • PlatinumSf
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I’m not obsessed with efficency, but it is a useful metric to consider when thinking about the overall picture. Additionally I’ve not made your point. Solar still requires implementation, land use, and is finite in access to humanity despite the source being infinite. Producing hydrogen fuel with this consideration would automatically increase the required solar capacity by 20-40% based on current hydrogen production processes. In addition there are byproducts and downsides from creating traditional hydrocarbon based fuels in a renewable manner.

          • WallEx@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Where is the comparison to the solar panel? I’m comparing methods of propelling, you are comparing solar panels and?

            If you can use the energy more efficiently and choose not to it’s not sustainable (or at least not very smart)

            • Hypx@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Because it is solar power ultimately powering it all. If you don’t care about the efficiency of that step, you don’t really care about all of the later steps. It is still green energy and still cheap.

              The problem with BEVs is that while it is efficient in one respect, it is insanely wasteful in others. As a result, it is an unsustainable idea and functionally just greenwashing.

              • WallEx@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                So it’s the same if you have to build 5 times as many solar panels to do the same thing? It’s just not.

                • Hypx@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Now we’re in the “pro-BEV bullshit” zone. Batteries won’t magically solve all transportation needs, nor solve the energy storage requirements of the grid. Alternatives still have to exist anyways, and the total lifecycle efficiency of BEVs isn’t that special. In a lot of cases, avoiding excessive use of batteries will save you energy. So pursuing alternatives will not need radically more solar panels.