Alt text:

An idling gas engine may be annoyingly loud, but that’s the price you pay for having WAY less torque available at a standstill.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    62
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I think people forget that petroleum is condensed and distilled solar energy. One gallon of gasoline is the results of years of solar energy.

    Spelling

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      315 months ago

      oops you posted irrelevant pedantics that verge on misinformation 😧

      sure it’s distilled solar energy that cannot be renewed. relevant language highligted. no one “forgets,” this. literally no one. it’s just not relevant to a timespan less than millions of years. cheers! ☀️

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          55 months ago

          v true but i also dislike how biofuels get smorked into yet more CO2 which is kind of a problem rn

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            35 months ago

            Biofuels are carbon-neutral. They release CO2 when burned, but it doesn’t matter because that same CO2 had recently been sucked out of the atmosphere by the plant they came from.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              75 months ago

              In theory true. In reality not true.

              While U.S. biofuel use rose from 0.37 to 1.34 EJ/yr over this period, additional carbon uptake on cropland was enough to offset only 37 % of the biofuel-related biogenic CO2emissions. This result falsifies the assumption of a full offset made by LCA and other GHG accounting methods that assume biofuel carbon neutrality. Once estimates from the literature for process emissions and displacement effects including land-use change are considered, the conclusion is that U.S. biofuel use to date is associated with a net increase rather than a net decrease in CO2emissions. study

              Not passing judgement on anything, just putting the facts out there that I happen to know :) Biofuel may or may not be a good tool to move toward more sustainability, and it’s certainly better than petrol.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                2
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                My biofuel of choice is biodiesel produced from byproducts of chicken rendering that would otherwise become waste/pollution anyway. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

                The way I see it, we should electrify all the things that can be (urban driving, both freight and passenger trains, etc.), maximize the use of those things (e.g. by shifting long-haul freight away from trucking and back towards rail, and shifting airline travel to high-speed rail), and then use biofuels for the relatively-niche stuff that’s left instead of spending excessive effort trying to get electric to cover 100% of cases.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        35 months ago

        Um piss off. It is not irrelevant or misinformation. That is exactly what petroleum is.

        You clearly can’t understand a factual statement from an opinion I never said it was good I never said it was bad I just said it was. If you’d bother to take a moment to think about it. You would realize that I was referring to the fact that petroleum is extremely energy dense. For the very reason I stated. That is fundamentally why petroleum has become a successful energy source and why it’s been so difficult to replace.

        You’re welcome to point out where I said it was renewable. I think you’re going to have a difficult time finding that statement.

        As for being a pedantic ass that’s clearly your territory. A pedantic ass that it likes to put words in other people’s mouths.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          115 months ago

          Your post was bordering on irrelevant to the original comment. In light of that the information you provided can really only be interpreted is as pro-fossil fuel.