Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeroFuel
Well, if it makes you feel any better ZeroFuel is a net zero CO2 fuel as it only emits what is sequestered during production, and our X prize GHG #'s are very low. Plus, using renewable H2 brings our GHG to "0".
|
These are some issues I could see with that position.
1. you are playing both sides of the fence, the petrol source and the renewable source. If there is a way to reclaim flare gasses efficiently and effectively, then we should do that thing certainly. Should we convert natural gas to carbamide to run our cars? Maybe not, if it isn't more efficient than using the ntural gas itself. Should we use what little renewables we have to crack hydrogen, so we can make carbamide, to put in cars? I'm pretty sure the answer is absolutely not, from a "well to wheels" perspective that would likely be most inefficient.
2. You are calling it a "fuel", but it is basically just storage of energy converted. Maybe by x-prize technicalities it is a fuel, but around here I think we like to examine the whole process that put the fuel in your tank in the first place, i.e.
If that process makes emissions, then they count (even if your car runs on batteries).
If it uses renewables, then it has to try to be most efficient with those renewables, above all else.
So you will have to forgive me if I do not debate this using xprize terminology. I do not agree with their methods and purposes if it means you can convert natural gas to something else and call that thing a "fuel" with "zero" net emissions.