There is no such thing as "decarbonized oil" (www.nationalobserver.com)

submitted 4 days ago by streetfestival@lemmy.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca

9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The decarbonized doublespeak may not be new but it was jarring coming from the mouth of our new PM, who has an undeniable grasp of the impacts of hydrocarbons but nevertheless talked about “decarbonized barrels” at the press conference following the first ministers’ meeting. And it was particularly painful considering the venue — a province under a state of emergency where more than 15,000 people have fled wildfires.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] SomeoneSomewhere@lemmy.nz 2 points 2 days ago

The issue with aviation hydrogen is... well, lots.

Fuel cells are heavy and direct combustion is inefficient and tougher than burning kerosene.
Aircraft typically use the wing structural members as the fuel tank walls. Both cryogenic and pressurised options make that a non-starter.
Lower density means much bigger tanks.
Self-vapourising fuel is a major crash issue.
Round trip efficiency for H2 is still terrible.

Plants may not be particularly efficient per km^2 but arable land isn't actually that hugely scarce.

Reducing aviation is really the only thing that's actually going to work.

[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 days ago

Delta wing designs will harry a lot of H2. It is suitable for LH2. Carbon fibre reinforced wing tanks. Efficiency is not as bad as other storage processes. Exportable/transportable fuel has huge advantages in monetizing surplus renewables.

Self-vapourising fuel is a major crash issue.

I don't know about this. Vaporization does create a cooling effect, and having some battery can increase takeoff power and be charged during flight. Venting pressure release is an easy option.