• Oddbin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Aviation is likely to be serviced by batteries or hydrogen for short to medium flights. Long haul and cargo is likely to remain fossil fuel based for quite a while due to the nature of the fuel caution uses. If you had said shipping you might have had a point, they can burn near enough anything but they seem to be trending towards something like ammonia.

    What do you want me to say other than Google it for recycling? It’s widely known and has been for quite a while now. Unless you’re actively looking for the opposite you should have no trouble finding independent information rather than trusting some random on social medium. But here’s a few to set you off:

    https://www.allenergysolar.com/resources/solar-waste-myth-debunked/#:~:text=The truth is%2C solar panels are already highly,developing around the recovery of materials for reuse.

    https://solarfast.co.uk/blog/solar-energy-myths-debunked/

    This one is from the energy saving trust, a non-profit government organisation and had a good round up of typical myths:

    https://energysavingtrust.org.uk/myths-about-solar/

    And here’s an excellent talk by a Dr who’s a specialist in the battery and energy storage arena:

    https://youtu.be/tcJrUrp_Ygs

    Incidentally if you actually want to learn more about this then Everything Electric is a good start.

    Sustainable agriculture for food is one thing, to make fuel is something completely different and I think you know that but are being obstuse on purpose.

    Look, I get it. You don’t like what you’re seeing, that doesn’t mean it’s wrong and it’s OK to change and adapt when presented with new information. The future is a mixture of technology that we have, are developing and haven’t even thought of. Biofuels may even have a small niche but that’s all it will be, a niche. Fully electric will be the dominant source of transport in the near future and batteries are going to make up the majority of that.

    • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Sustainable agriculture for food is one thing, to make fuel is something completely different and I think you know that but are being obstuse on purpose.

      No I am not being obtuse. You talk about agriculture as if it’s impossible to make sustainable. How much extra agriculture would it require compared to what’s needed to feed the world? It’s not something I have looked at, and I would be interested to see if you have statistics on this.

      • Oddbin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        What foods do we eat Vs make into fuel? Hint, they’re not the same. Sorry, there’s plenty of info on all of this out there you just need to actually look with an open mind. I’ve given you the resources to start but I don’t have the time nor inclination to continually fight these fights with people who make clearly outlandish claims and then just come back with “well prove it”.

        I hope you do follow the links and go and learn more but ultimately that’s up to you.

        Enjoy your day.

    • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      We already have sustainable aviation fuel that is being used in commercial air travel. It’s not certain that Hydrogen will ever be safe enough for air travel. Current battery technology isn’t good enough in terms of energy density to be used here.

      Lots of people are very dismissive about hydrogen technology anyway, based on it being difficult to store and inefficient. Do you have evidence counter to this?

      Look, I get it. You don’t like what you’re seeing, that doesn’t mean it’s wrong and it’s OK to change and adapt when presented with new information.

      That’s not it at all. Lots of people here on Lemmy like to talk the talk about climate change without actually understanding practical or engineering considerations. It’s the same as the socialists and communists who rarely have an economic plan to implement after a revolution.

      The future is a mixture of technology that we have, are developing and haven’t even thought of.

      That’s precisely why I don’t like you dismissing biofuels out of hand. There are certain applications where batteries just don’t work like aviation. I still am not convinced about lithium batteries as lithium is a fairly limited resource, sodium ion seems like the future of batteries for cars and trains, but sodium ion has lower energy density.

      I am not saying biofuels will replace electric vehicles or solutions for grid power like nuclear, wind, solar, and so on. Just that they have a place in the larger strategy. People talk about electric vehicles making sense for most situations especially for city dwellers, I am talking about the 20% or whoever remain. This includes car enthusiasts as well as people who travel large distances on a day to day basis, and of course aviation where energy density, safety and performance are critical.

      I will take a look at those sources though. If it’s easy to recycle solar panels that’s a huge boon. When it comes to batteries I think technologies like sodium ion or iron oxide batteries are likely to win out anyway, and those are materials we have in abundance, it’s just a shame about the energy density limitations.

      To be honest I didn’t even think about shipping as it only accounts for a small amount of emissions. Vegetable oil makes perfect sense here. Though I would remind you that compression ignition engines in cars can also be designed to run pretty much any fuel you like.