We're not doing enough to find alternative fuels.

I'd like to say that there are plenty of altenatives to fossil fuels that look promising, but really, many oil and gas companies these days aren't really doing anything to find new fuels. The only one that's really seeing any use today is ethanol, and if I recall correctly, there's an energy LOSS in its production.

What's going to happen to international trade once oil becomes too scarce to use? We'll have to resort to using like, sailboats or something.

Sure, there are plenty of basic goods that are available locally, such as food and water, but when it comes to more exotic goods, such as electronics, we'll pretty much have to give up all of our popular forms of entertainment due to the lack of ability to transport goods fast.

Long story short, we're going to end up living in the 18th century again if we don't find some sort of new fuel.

Why I am afraid of fences.

Oil and gas companies are maximising their profits in the short term.

SEA AHOY! I think I saw another Doomsday Prophet lurking around.
Basically the theory you are looking for is named "peak oil".

A guy called dvorak is tired. Tired of humanity not wanting to change to improve itself. Quite the sad tale.

Yep.

To continue from my above point, alternative fuels are not, to my knowledge, very lucrative business prospects at present *

. Oil/gas make more money and thus are used instead.

The fact that this is dangerously short-sighted of them is evident.

So am I going to have to give up video games in the future do to transportation difficulties or not?

Why I am afraid of fences.

The alternative fuel fields are, to my knowledge, growing.

Furthermore, one can expect them to be sharply on the rise once fossil fuels begin to reach critical levels. Nothing encourages technological growth more then desperation.

There's energy loss in petroleum-based fuels too, since you still have to burn gas to get and refine oil. The only reason why ethanol is getting use is because it's fairly easy to convert a petroleum fueled vehicle into burning ethanol.

As a fuel source for vehicles, I think that hydrogen is a good way to go, but that has it's problems too, since it's generally considered unsafe, and it takes quite a bit of energy to isolate the hydrogen from the environment.

The other thing that's not really taken into account is that most electricity plants burn fossil fuels as well. We'd need to switch to solar/wind/hydro/geothermal/nuclear/etc power plants too.

edited 27th Mar '11 3:59:42 PM by DrunkGirlfriend

"I don't know how I do it. I'm like the Mr. Bean of sex." -Drunkscriblerian

Nevermind

edited 27th Mar '11 4:25:15 PM by GuyInWhite

Why I am afraid of fences.

The major downside of ethanol other then energy loss is the loss of corn for food and feed for meat animals.

There are several technologies out there but like has been noted they are all expensive and their is no guarantee on their being profitable. I have high doubts we can do it with just one thing. A healthy mix of alternatives will likely be the solution.

Who watches the watchmen?

^^The key phrase you're after isn't renewable, it's sustainable. Relying on the big boys to drop the short term crack pipe and start selling good technology is pointless, as the California ZEV measure debacle proved. My bet is on Tesla Motors, the only modern car company doing electrics right.

^^^ I'm glad I'm not the only one who knows that biofuels and petroleum alike are just inefficient ways of storing the power from coal and natural gas. Hydrogen is, too, as you noted, but (figures not on hand right this moment) it's a much more efficient one, and when various other factors are included, competes very well with other types of electric battery (as that's really all a fuel cell is) too. It's also the only way you'll ever be able to run a jet engine off electricity.

You're right about the thorny issue of electrical supply being the final problem, but burning fossil fuels in power plants to charge electric vehicles is much more efficient than burning fossil fuels in each vehicle, plus it'll centralize the problem in larger pieces where it's easier to attack.

edit: Bleh, ninja'd.

Eric,

edited 27th Mar '11 4:41:07 PM by EricDVH

Well, there are plenty of alternative fuels out there. For example, some scientists discovered a method of making hydrogen using algae.

But nobody wants to spend money developing technology to allow us to use that.

Be not afraid...

Has there been any progress on VB₂ electric cells? Last I heard it held a greater energy density than fossil fuels, so depending on the weight you might get even better mileage out of it than gas.

edited 27th Mar '11 8:45:52 PM by Pykrete

Ethanol and other biofuels, no matter what, are not the answer. Subsiding corn has already made this country obese. Not to mention how horribly inefficient corn is as a fuel, you'd literally burn more fuel then you'd make.

And on a personal note. I find it disgusting to destroy perfectly good food just to burn it in cars while millions of Americans are going hungry.

My other signature is a Gundam.

I honestly think spending such a large percentage of money on researching new fuels is a waste of money. You're not going to find a magical fuel that does everything, you'll eventually have to pick one and start building infrastructure, which I think it's time to do. My personal favorite is algae based fuels.

Do keep in mind that there's more than one type of biofuel, and more than one way to define it depending.

Fight smart, not fair.

We've already got all the infrastructure we'll ever need, it's called the grid.

Eric,

Shoo, the big kids are talking.

The electric car isn't going to do that well me thinks. Combined with the fact that algae fuel has backwards compatibility on a large scale, I think it would work best.

Fight smart, not fair.

I agree with using algae, because it is the only methods that eats back its carbon footprints without being dependant on arable lands that should be used for making food for the human.

Edit
Sorry Eric DVH, didn't read your whole post.

edited 28th Mar '11 12:23:25 AM by Blurring

If a chicken crosses the road and nobody else is around to see it, does the road move beneath the chicken instead?

Hydrogen is also backward compatible, it can be retrofitted onto any gasoline vehicle in about the same way as a cheapo liquified natural gas kit and powered by a simple home electrolyzer for less than gasoline.quote from last time this came up

Fuel aside, direct drive electric is more efficient (plus just a plain better and simpler design in functional terms) than burning stuff in an engine. No matter what kind of electric cell you choose, and even if alga is a great idea (I imagine wind and thermal solar are better bets, but whatever) then burning it in centralized plants to charge electric vehicles would still probably be cheaper anyways.

Eric,

edited 28th Mar '11 1:14:42 AM by EricDVH

However, hydrogen makes metal brittle, especially for engines originally designed for petrol. Also, their energy per weight ratio is smaller than either petrol or ethanol. In addition, by using electric from the grid, it still uses fossil fuel. In fact, adding another step in energy conversion will add to more wastage.

edited 28th Mar '11 1:08:46 AM by Blurring

If a chicken crosses the road and nobody else is around to see it, does the road move beneath the chicken instead?

The same is true of natural gas, which is why stainless steel is used on NG engine parts, the layer of chromium on the surface of stainless steel protects it. Also, I think you've got it backward, hydrogen has the highest efficiency by weight (since hydrogen is the active ingredient in all fuels) but a generally low one by volume. Even so, liquid hydrogen is a reasonable compromise IMHO, since it's only 65% bulkier than gasoline.

As I noted above, powering a vehicle off grid electricity (stored as hydrogen or otherwise) is already cheaper, and thus obviously more efficient.

Eric,

I read recently that the Japanese have plans to have an orbital (Geosynch) solar power station beaming (laser or maser) power down to Earth up and running by 2030.

So many proposed alternatives to fossil fuels don't seem to be properly thought through:

"Biofuels" - because we really need to have land that could be used to feed people devoted to growing inedible plants solely to keep people driving internal combustion vehicles.

Tide generators - because it's not like affecting the way the water hits the shore is going to affect anything like marine life, right?

Orbital solar has its good points but having frickin' laser beams passing down through our air space is going to make for some interesting aerial hazards. (OK, it's more likely to be frickin' MASER beams but there's no trope page for that... Yet.)

I personally think electricity's the way forward. There are great developments in battery-electric vehicles, trains and trams have been doing very well with wired electric for quite some time and I'm sure that more developments in battery and fuel-cell technologies will only serve to improve the electric vehicles.

Am I putting my money where my mouth is? Well, I ride an electric moped to work every day - and have plans to build or buy something more like the ZERO motorcycle so I can get better speed and power.

I've been interested in E Vs for years, patiently watching the developments and they're starting to "come of age". Right now, vast numbers of people all around the world could be commuting to work by electric car or bike, saving the petrol car/bike for when they want to go somewhere further.

Ranges up to 100km (~60mi), speeds up to 120 km/h (~75mph) for "average" vehicles (ignoring those built as purpose-made speedsters) - would suit most commuters who currently use fossil-fuelled vehicles. Enough to put fossil-fuel vehicles into the minority within town.

We'll ignore the FAWOMFT about "having to use fossil fuels to generate electricity so EV's aren't so green" - 'cause I'm bloody sure that a properly maintained power station can be set up to be less polluting than a shit-load of cars and vans.

The big minus: all those electric vehicles would mean that more electricity will be demanded which means that more means of generation will be required - and even more so once the technology gets to the point where E Vs can totally replace infernal combustion vehicles.

I stand corrected, its the volume. However, I don't think the process in converting water to hydrogen is very efficient right now. Vehicles powered straight from the grid will always be more efficient.

If a chicken crosses the road and nobody else is around to see it, does the road move beneath the chicken instead?

True, but it's efficient enough to outperform gasoline already, as the statistics in my quote above show. Also, remember that “hydrogen vehicle” can mean one of three things, all of which are more efficient than gasoline:

1. A reversible fuel cell that generates electricity from hydrogen, and generates hydrogen from electricity. In other words, a normal battery that stores its electrolytic fluids outside the cell.
2. A nonreversible fuel cell that generates electricity from premade hydrogen.
3. A common engine converted to burn premade hydrogen.

Not only this, most electrical generating capacity was constructed in the 50s & 60s, so it's way past its intended lifespan, meaning that even at present capacity the industry's financiers are ACHING to build a ton of generation, held up only by N.I.M.B.Y. permits.

With all this money and demand in the wings, it would be a tragedy of historic proportions if it were wasted for more dead-end electrical technology like it is in (for instance) China and India, and a tremendous victory if it were locked into a lasting deployment of sustainable electricity.

Eric,

Electric cars are only as zero emission as their power source. While they have the advantage of cutting out the last part of the fossil fuels —> energy —> gasoline system, you still need a source of electricity. The best sustainable high level energy production methods are, to my knowledge, pretty much just nuclear fusion and solar, neither of which is viable with current technology.

This is a signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.