This is the web, from my ignorant point of view it looks too good to be true, so I´d like to know the opinion of people with more knownledge than myself in this field (wich includes the vast mayority of people
![Mr. Green :mrgreen:](./images/smilies/icon_mrgreen.gif)
https://www.sun-to-liquid.eu/
Andres125sx wrote: ↑28 Dec 2019, 16:39I´ve just seen in tv this project, sun-to-liquid, and it looks unbelieveble
This is the web, from my ignorant point of view it looks too good to be true, so I´d like to know the opinion of people with more knownledge than myself in this field (wich includes the vast mayority of people)
https://www.sun-to-liquid.eu/
That area is if it is one 'thickness'. once (if?) it gets developed enough it will take far less than that (still a lot though)Just_a_fan wrote: ↑28 Dec 2019, 21:551 square kilometre of "factory" required to make 20,000 litres a day. So just over 6 days output from 1 square kilometre will fill a 787 Dreamliner for one maximum range flight..
An area equivalent to Switzerland required to keep all current airliners flying "CO2 free".
This is a nice idea but the scaling is going to be "fun", although I could see this being a worthwhile export scheme for African nations benefiting from lots of solar insolation. If it can move the world away from the insidious influence of the House of Saud, I'd say it's worthwhile for that alone.
They do not have to be on landJust_a_fan wrote: ↑28 Dec 2019, 23:59There is plenty of space to put the current "inefficient" system to use. There is a lot of sunny land in Africa. This would be a way for Africa to actively benefit. No doubt any plants will be in places like the US and the current oil rich Middle East.
It isn't really saving double if you just re-combust the fuel you make.Big Tea wrote: ↑28 Dec 2019, 23:28That area is if it is one 'thickness'. once (if?) it gets developed enough it will take far less than that (still a lot though)Just_a_fan wrote: ↑28 Dec 2019, 21:551 square kilometre of "factory" required to make 20,000 litres a day. So just over 6 days output from 1 square kilometre will fill a 787 Dreamliner for one maximum range flight..
An area equivalent to Switzerland required to keep all current airliners flying "CO2 free".
This is a nice idea but the scaling is going to be "fun", although I could see this being a worthwhile export scheme for African nations benefiting from lots of solar insolation. If it can move the world away from the insidious influence of the House of Saud, I'd say it's worthwhile for that alone.
There is also the other end of this that it takes Co2 out of the air to use, so it 'saves double' so to speak.
This is the same project AFAICT, with spin-outs coming from the same original research group and overlapping or financed by the same EU supported project.Big Tea wrote: ↑28 Dec 2019, 19:58
I mentioned it a while back in the electric car thread. there seem to be several on the go
https://www.power-technology.com/featur ... -sunlight/
Burning this kerosene will be the same as burning naturally sourced kerosene (cracked from oil from the ground). There might be less sulphur etc but it'll still produce NOx etc.Andres125sx wrote: ↑29 Dec 2019, 12:13Emissions from this fuel are similar to oil-based fuel? Fair question, just out of curiosity
Unlikely. Compressed hydrogen requires a lot of volume - several times that of oil-sourced fuels for the same MJ. Liquid hydrogen is unlikely to be suitable. Neither are going to work for aircraft.Cold Fussion wrote: ↑29 Dec 2019, 18:07I wonder if hydrogen combustion jet engines will ever be a viable replacement.