Quote:
Originally Posted by dcb
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.
|
dcb
Please remember that I said you will not find perfection in any transportation fuel.
That being said, with ZeroFuel we feel we have the best answer to: how do you establish a transportation fuel infrastructure that is economically viable & environmentally friendly?
Yes, ZeroFuel is a safe carrier of H2 & NH3, which are the fuels. This is the break through needed to move to cleaner more efficient vehicles.
X prize aside, I see no problem with trying to utilize what ever resources are available to achieve the fuel infrastructure described above. AFS also has a patent on new technology for renewable H2 that would also be put into the production side.
X prize does consider WTW aspects of all the fuels as posted on their spreadsheet. It may not be perfect, but again it is a step in the right direction.
CNG is not a good transportation fuel as evidenced by it's 20 years availability & non-acceptance. With only 790 filling stations in the US, high pressure, storage & flammability issues all contributing to this. Hence production of H2 is a clear option.