• keepthepace@tarte.nuage-libre.fr
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          That’s a whole different debate. I tend to agree that they are less ideal, that their proponents say, but they are actually renewable. They don’t add durably CO2 in the atmosphere from fossil sources. It is a very different thing. The CO2 they emit is part of a cycle. Ideally, that’s also a type of emission that we cut, but it is possible to include them in a sustainable society.

          • Jake Farm@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            CO2 is not the only emission and pollution in the high atmosphere is even more damaging than on the ground.

              • Jake Farm@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 days ago

                Well incomplete combustion, which is unavoidable, produces carbon monoxide, VOCs, soot, and unburned fuel. All which would be dumped into the high atmosphere.

                  • Jake Farm@sopuli.xyz
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    Unburned fuel is an order of magnitude worse for the atmosphere than CO2. Plus you think only humans are poisoned by these things?

          • skibidi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            Biofuel is a dead-end technology. Synthetic fuels from direct air capture of CO2 are about 3X as efficient in terms of energy in -> energy in fuel, while also avoiding wasting all the extra nutrients (phosphorus, potassium, nitrogen - some of which are scarce) needed for the plant to grow that give nothing in terms of energy storage and must be recaptured.

            A bunch of solar panels and some direct air -> methanol plants uses far less land than corn fields for bioethanol, while also providing easy avenues to switch energy from feeding the grid to filling the tanks depending on conditions.

            • keepthepace@tarte.nuage-libre.fr
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              Synthetic fuels from direct air capture of CO2 are about 3X as efficient in terms of energy in -> energy in fuel

              I have a very hard time believing it to be true, but I am always opened to an unexpected good news. Do you have a specific tech/source in mind for that claim?