back

by emptybits·3y ago·view on hn ↗
> Are there use cases where we must burn propane because we can’t replace that process with electricity?

"Must", no. But hundreds millions of cars and trucks on the road right now can be converted to propane. It's relatively easy and well understood and you keep your same motor and drivetrain.

Converting existing cars and trucks to electric is so intensive it's almost unthinkable ... cost, energy input, waste, etc.

1 comments
That process relies on DAC, plus electrolysing H2 and that conversion processes, which means the propane would have to be at the equivalent of 15-45$ per gallon. What is less affordable?
It's a matter of time scales. If every car sold today were electric, it would still take 15-20 years for us to completely replace the fleet. Remember, there are a good 1.2 billion or so cars, and around 65-70 million are sold a year.

If the cost of this technology could be brought down within a decade, it would be a way of reducing emissions for the large chunk of the fleet that isn't electric, in a cost effective manner.

The other, more pragmatic, answer is that internal combustion engines aren't going anywhere. They have too many advantages over their competitors to ever fully go away, so we need cost effective ways of running them that are also carbon neutral or negative. Some of the links in this chain, like low cost electrolysis, are vital for other reasons (e.g. the food we grow uses fertilizer made from hydrogen split from fossil fuels. We need the fertilizer or the planet starves, and we need a source of hydrogen that doesn't also produce 11 tonnes of CO2 for every tonne of hydrogen produced).

The current iteration does. Research often brings costs down, though there is no guarantee.