From Thin Air

Interesting techno babble, is it possible or have I been hornswaggled again??

Just how much electricity does it take though?
Plus there is the problem that most today's electricity comes from fossil fuels.
Though I suppose it would work out quite well for someplace like Iceland.

There's a lot of synthesis steps there, which means that it's going to take a lot of electricity. Especially so since the carbon in the gasoline comes from carbon dioxide, which isn't a major contributor to air (< .5%). So either the carbon dioxide has to be purified somehow, or (more likely) it's captured from a smokestack somewhere.

However, if the electricity comes from nuclear power, the net carbon production could be negative.

No names, no peer review??

If it uses more energy to produce than it returns it's got to be good for the climate.

1) would need to be produced with wind, geothermal or other non-carbon electrical generation. 2) overall cost would need to be brought within the range of other fuel prices. 3) If the first two are possible, then would need to be protected from being squashed/ hostily bought out/ or otherwise twarted by large engery interests.

The whole process is a reversal of entropy, that scourge of the Universe. Although the process is demonstrated to work, I wouldn't give it much credence until we're really desperate for stored energy fuels.

Even though the process sounds like it is "free" energy, it still obeys the Three Laws Of Thermodynamics, paraphrased here for laymen:

1) You cannot win
2) You cannot break even
3) You cannot leave the game

Nobody claimed it was free energy, or a reversal of entropy, or perpetual motion. Nobody even claimed it is cheap. It's a way to convert electrical energy into stored chemical energy that can power a car. We already have a way to do that (hydrogen fuel cells) but this way is claimed to produce a more easily stored liquid fuel, that apparently could be used in existing cars without major modifications.

They claim to have produced five liters of fuel in less than 3 months at a cost of £1.1m. Presumably costs will come down, but they made no claim as to how much.

-Cougar :{)

Cougar, apparently I was showing my bias. I had in mind that cliche "free as the air" when I wrote that. I also noted that the phrase "game changer" was used twice in the article. To me that usually means that the author thinks that the results will be very low cost and will replace current usage of hydrocarbon fuels obtained from established sources. I still stand by what I wrote. 😉

News stories on alternative energy research often come across as WHOOPEEE! FREE ENERGY!!!!!!! I don't think that one does, but people are so used to seeing that kind of slant you surely won't be the only one who reads it that way.

When I get a minute I want to see what 5 liters at 1,100,000 pounds comes to in dollars per gallon....

-Cougar :{)

I make it $1,335,796.37 9/10 per gallon (rounding up to the nearest 9/10 of a cent, as I expect the gas stations would do).

5ltr / 3.8 = 1.36gal
1.00 GBP = 1.60123 USD
1,100,000 * 1.60123 = $1,761,205.35

$1,761,205.35 / 1.36 = $1,295,003.93 @ GallonUS
(Slightly higher in Mexafornia)

Sigh ... no categories again Patty. I keep nagging her on that Paul. You need to send her an educational email as she doesn't know how to add more than one category when she remembers.

That's a whole lotta math right there Expat.
What, I put on a category BD. 😜

@Patty: And worth every penny.