Warns? I'd say that's good news.
Let them die and only recreate a downsized aviation industry that's compatible with limiting climate change, with the medium-term goal to switch it to alternative fuels.
Let them die and only recreate a downsized aviation industry that's compatible with limiting climate change, with the medium-term goal to switch it to alternative fuels.
Synthetic jet fuel can be out of atmospheric carbon. (Chemically, it's jet fuel. Just synthesized instead of being pumped out of the ground.) It's more expensive than the out-of-the-ground stuff. But a lot of the price premium is currently due to a lack of economies of scale.
Airlines could go carbon neutral within a few years. Replacing the power plant is overkill.
Synthetic fuel is derived from hydrocarbons assembled from atmospheric C02. It can be powered by anything. Installed solar is irrelevant.
Anywhere. Nuclear. Wind. Waves. Initially, fossil fuels, because most energy comes from fossil fuels.
As would re-tooling (a) the economy to be less reliant on travel or (b) the entire aviation fleet to be e.g. battery-electric. Change is expensive. We're comparing costs, and when I've done that, synethetic fuel is the best near-term, i.e. within 50 years, solution.
> why would you use fossil fuels to extract CO2 out of the air
Big plants (can) burn much cleaner than jet engines. (Also, it's an interim step.)
>Big plants (can) burn much cleaner than jet engines. (Also, it's an interim step.)
Please show me how you extract more CO2 out of the air by burning fossil fuels than you release.
What's your energy source?
And once you've specified your energy source why are you using that source to make jet fuel instead of directly powering things like the electric grid?
Once the world is 85%+ on alternative energy we can worry about Jet airplanes.
Because we need planes. Or, to put it more simply, countries that fly will outperform those that don't.
Hydrocarbons are a great energy store. And we have a global fleet that burns them. For cars, we can go electric. But for weight-sensitive uses, it doesn't make sense to go battery.
There will always be Luddites who advocate a permanent quarantine. But if that's the only solution, we'll stick with the status quo. And the status quo is untenable.
Only once you are no longer using natural fuel (pumped oil) for ground stations anywhere in the world, only then does it make sense to start making synthetic fuel for airplanes.
Agreed.
> cheaper yet to buy it from the Saudis
Agreed. This would need to be a cost caused by regulation.