[i_am_proteus]

Yes, and: the question revolves around total financial and material capital needed to transition away from fossil fuels.

Synthetic fuels are potentially valuable because they allow existing capital assets (internal combustion engines and the industry that produces them, fuel distribution infrastructure) to continue to be used.

I am glad to see research into them continue- it's difficult to predict what will scale well economically in five or ten or thirty years.

[PaulHoule]

The Fischer-Trospch process has a stupendously high capital cost because, even though cheap catalysts work, chemical reactions that build up larger molecules (that can proceed explosively under some conditions) compete with chemical reactions that break molecules down and have to be balanced on a knife edge to get hydrocarbons of the right length.

For any normal industrial process people would be really delighted that they could use iron as a catalyst but the economics of FT are so bad they've scoured the periodic table for something better and not had much improvement.

[jmole]

Why cant you just distill them after producing them, instead of worrying about getting exactly the right length?

[PaulHoule]

Main issue is they want to be length 1 methane or length 1000+ polyethylene

[themitigating]

Synthetic fuels are potentially valuable because they allow existing capital assets (internal combustion engines and the industry that produces them, fuel distribution infrastructure) to continue to be used.

Won't engines have to be modified and reprogrammed?

[Oxidation]

According to this article: maybe not, since they used an unmodified engine.

[PaulHoule]

For alcohol, DME and other single entity fuels you may need to change the engine, but synthetic hydrocarbons really are a drop in replacement.

[jacquesm]

Most engines that run on gasoline will run unmodified on LNG and many other combustibles besides, alcohol would work but the way in which it and ethanol attack various materials found in the fuel systems of vehicles means that your problem is likely not going to be the engine but further upstream towards the tank (seals, membranes).

[mfer]

The cost to transition away from fossil fuels isn’t really talked about much.

For example, our electric grid can’t handle everyone using electric cars. Everything from electricity production to distribution needs to be upgraded. There is a massive cost to that.

[brk]

All the crypto mining dying off should free up a lot of grid resources for EVs.

I've heard the "grid can't handle all EVs" statement, but have not seen anything backing up the claim.

I believe the grid can in fact handle EVs becoming prevalent. We might need more power generation, which could be new plants, and/or residential solar.

Baring some kind of crazy legislation requiring ICE vehicles to be crushed or permanently parked, we are decades away from a scenario where pure EVs are the dominant vehicle type on the road. There are just too many serviceable ICE vehicles in play to expect them to really go away in the next quarter century or so. That allows plenty of time for anything the current power generation and distribution infrastructure lacks to be adequately addressed.

[delecti]

The global energy usage from crypto was in the ballpark of 120-240 TWh/year, but a couple figures repeated the specific 150 TWh/year figure, so I'll use that.

The US's annual gasoline consumption is 135 bn gallons (2021 figure). At around 20 mpg (random estimate because I have to pick something), that works out to 2.7 trillion miles. At 30 kWh/100mi (figure from google), that works out 800 TWh if every gas vehicle in the US was suddenly switched for an electric one, or about 20% of the US's annual electricty generation of 4222.5 TWh (2018 figure). Also, that's about 5x the global crypto energy usage, vs just America's cars. [Obvious disclaimers: some of those estimates are arbitrary and not perfect, but they're in the right ballpark, and we obviously wouldn't switch to electric cars overnight]

Crypto was bad because it didn't actually accomplish anything with that power usage, but it was a pretty small footnote on the grand scheme of things.

[megaman821]

If it is only 20% more generation, that seems pretty feasible. The widespread usage of air conditioners caused a greater increase in electricity usage than that.

[phpisthebest]

As more and more people switch to Electric Heat (heat pumps i.e AC run backwards) off of NatGas more and more energy companies are pleading with people to turn down their heat in the winter and up in the summer as the grid can not handle it

For the first time I can remember, my power company was sending out Texts here in the midwest during that last Arctic blast telling people to use less electricity because the grid was over taxed.

Our National Energy grid is very very fragile.

[megaman821]

That is such a misrepresentation. It has nearly nothing to do with heat pumps, it because there is a large amount of electrical resistive heating used in Texas.

Converting natural gas furnaces to heat pumps and replacing resistive heating with heat pumps, would not increase the total electricity usage at all. Last I looked 40% of heating in Texas was done through resistive heating, heat pumps would be 3-4x more efficient. There is current power devoted to resistance heating to run heat pumps for every home.

[megaman821]

I read Texts as Texas.

Anyways in areas where it regularly goes below 0F, the transition will not be smooth (but probably still necessary). Heat pumps that operate efficiently down -20F are just coming out and will be even more expensive than normal heat pumps. Also most residential energy usage in really cold areas are from burning natural gas, so electricity generation is quite low compared to warmer parts of the country.

[ianai]

Texas has its own electrical grid separate from the rest of the US.

[mmoskal]

Interesting to note that there is ~30kWh of energy in a gallon of gasoline, so the reason EV would only take 20% of US electricity consumption is that they are 5x more efficient (than the 20mpg gas figure used).

Indeed seems manageable.

[AtlasBarfed]

I did not verify his figures, but his methodology was BEV efficiency, not the amount of energy in a gallon of gasoline. Electric drivetrains and cars are designed ground-up for efficiency to a degree that ICE cars are not, as well as the fact that something like 80-90% of energy in a gallon of gasoline is wasted (60-70% due to Carnot efficiency alone).

[AtlasBarfed]

Crypto was 1/5th of the ENTIRE US CONSUMER TRANSPORTATION (BEV efficiency converted)????

That is an astonishing amount of electricity for something of so little value.

But anyway, to the larger point, I agree the grid impact is overblown, especially since we should be coupling consumer BEVs with home / business / warehouse / commercial solar.

[tigeroil]

The main thing your comment highlights for me is how much of a push we need for more sustainable methods of transportation in general.

There's always going to be people who will need to drive, but there's a hell of a lot of people who could be perfectly adequately served by strong public transportation.

[phpisthebest]

>>but there's a hell of a lot of people who could be perfectly adequately served by strong public transportation.

Never going to happen for 80-90% of the US. It is neither economically feasible, culturally feasible, or practically feasible for most people in the US.

Work places are too spread out, homes are not located near workplaces, and there is no desire from anyone (my self included) to increase density.

I want less density not more, "walkable" cities only work if people actually want to live in a walkable city. Many many many dont

[s0rce]

The grid seems fine from my non-expert view, its sized for peak loads on the highest capacity days. EV charging can be done at night once AC use drops off. In my 5 years in California there was maybe 1-2 days midsummer when there wasn't enough power and still was entirely due to inadequate generation and high usage in neighboring states as well which limited imports.

[mfer]

Two important things to note…

1) where power is generated and used for crypto isn’t the same as needed for electric cars. Locations matter when you’re dealing with the creation of and distribution of electricity

2) moving electricity to all of the locations where it will be used is another problem. That deals with transmission lines, transformers, the last mile, and all of that stuff. That we don’t hear about it doesn’t mean it’s not a problem. It is Andy the lack of awareness and planning concerns me.

[kybernetyk]

In Germany the government asked people not to use electric heaters this winter because the grid could break down.

An ev drains way more power then a 2kw space heater.

[Retric]

An average EV averages far less power than an average 2kW space heater over time.

A 2kW space heater used just 12 hours a day uses the same power per day as 4 mile per kWh EV driven 35,000 miles per year. Many space heaters see more than 12h/day of use but 35k miles per year is extremely rare.

EV’s are like microwaves, they use a lot of power when on but the grid cares about average load across millions of them not what’s happening in any one home.

[jodrellblank]

> “as a 4kWh/mile EV”

“The battery size for a Tesla Model 3 ranges from 50 kWh to 82 kWh” that would give the largest a range of 20 miles.

Ev-database.org says they use 151Wh/km which is about 240Wh/mile.

[Retric]

Just a typo. A reasonably efficient EV is 240Wh/mile or ~4 miles per kWh.

[D13Fd]

This is a ridiculous comparison. Google tells me an electric vehicle uses around 14kWh per day if you drive ~14k miles per year, and is much more efficient than an internal combustion engine.

Your hypothetical 2kw space heater uses 24kWh a day and is drastically less efficient than a heat pump.

[kybernetyk]

Peak loads let the grid collapse. Not constant loads over N hours. If everyone starts charging their EVs at roughly the same time (like when getting home from work) it won't matter that the EV uses less power over 24hours than a space heater.

EV zealots are just blind to the issues their silver bullet creates. Just like the "walk-able cities" folks.

[theshrike79]

This is why we have different pricing for different hours. Only those that actually need the capacity will use the expensive power from 16-20.

Others will use dirt-cheap night time electricity.

And with Vehicle to Grid smart people can sell the extra energy in their car battery during peak hours and use the credits from that to charge their car overnight.

None of this is some kind of magical tech that's hard to use. Gridio (https://www.gridio.io) already exists and works directly with multiple EV brands.

[raisedbyninjas]

It looks like Germans drive an average of 19 miles per day. Charging an EV to cover that would only need 7kwh at 100% efficiency. So a space heater could use more or less overnight depending on its duty cycle.

[Semaphor]

Well, yes. If tomorrow everyone replaces their ICE cars with EVs, then the grid won’t be able to handle that. Completely different situation, though.

[hasmanean]

We should not replace ICE cars with EVs, but something smaller. Steam engines were large because that was how they got efficiency up. ICE cars could afford to be smaller and more efficient. If they had just replaced steam locmotives with diesel ones that would have been stupid...instead they built a whole new infrastructure around smaller cars that was much better than the rail network and redesigned our entire cities. Existing cars are the optimal configuration for a given engine cost and gas price.

Electric motors are even more efficient, but using them in the form factor of a car is also stupid. With robotics we can now make tiny self-driving vehicles that can do chores for us. Why should I drive a 2-ton car to the store to pick up a gallon of milk, when the store can send a small robot to deliver it to me? Similarly a large empty bus can be replaced with smaller ATV sized EVs that drive me from my house to the main artery and merge to form one train. That reduces the size of the EV engine and battery pack by 10x. Some of the problems to be solved are not merely technological but organizational and cultural.

[vfclists]

Why should the store send a small robot to deliver it you?

You can ride a bicycle to the store to pick it up. Just think of the cardiovascular benefits.

And you know what? Think of the energy cost of the robot's manufacture, and the energy the delivery takes.

[theshrike79]

My EV is currently charging at 2.4kW power. Or was, I'm pretty sure the battery was already at limit a few hours ago.

The next time I need to plug it in is maybe on Saturday.

You need to use your electric heater 24/7 to not freeze.

[themitigating]

A Tesla Model 3 charges at the rate of 3~ per hour using about 1.2 kw. Over 12 hours that's about 36 miles each night.

[smileysteve]

What the grid can't handle is if everybody all at once needed a full 300 mile charge in 8 hours, while they are showering, running ac, and factories are producing. This is partly resolved by sun heating, cold sleep patterns, factory shifts, smart charging, and that 95% of consumers do not make 300 mile daily commutes.

Substation and individual point of charge capacity may not be there for areas without ac, or high density apartments - but that's where distributed charging stations come into play (aka charging stations) (very low volume of gasoline is distributed to home parking, currently). In the worst cases this is readily reduced with storage (liquid or power wall) at distribution centers.

[themitigating]

"For example, our electric grid can’t handle everyone using electric cars"

I bet you the electrical grid couldn't handle everyone having an air conditioner in Texas in the 1920s but slowly people installed window and later central ACs and the grid grew.

The situation where everyone suddenly had an electric car is implausible

[ajross]

> For example, our electric grid can’t handle everyone using electric cars. Everything from electricity production to distribution needs to be upgraded. There is a massive cost to that.

Cite for that? That's simply not true. In fact of all major infrastructure media in modern society, electrical transmission is by far the cheapest to upgrade. Even discounting industrial electricity and adding on DC charging of the EV, my household usage has gone up 35%.

You really don't think society can absorb a 35% growth in one infrastructure sector? That's just silly. Obviously there are "costs", but there's no justification for "can't handle" or "massive". At all.

[ozzydave]

And the majority of people will charge when power is cheapest, meaning peak power won’t increase nearly as much.

[briffle]

plus there are other significant changes that can change in that time. HVDC power transmission lines lose something like 3% of their power over 600 miles, where AC ones lose closer to 7%. And use much less precious metals, since they require 2 lines instead of 3.

[thworp]

Is that 3% for the cable only or the entire system including conversion to AC at both ends?

[thomasmg]

The grid can handle everyone using electric cars. Yes some upgrades are needed, but they are needed anyway. See for example https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-electric-vehi...

Electric car batteries are even seen as part of the solution to move to renewables.

[masta]

Same when we went from horse carriages to gasoline powered cars. There was no infrastructure in place to buy hydrocarbons for otto-engines, other than in pharmacies.

Industries are built when demand is rising, infrastructure always has to change to cover the needs of the population.

EVs will be important sinks for electrical energy in the future, to balance out demand.

[Retric]

The EV transition is really slow and easy for the grid to adapt to.

Assuming 100% of new cars where EV’s you’re talking 25 years before adoption approaches 98%. Plus on average each EV is only using ~50,000kWh / year or 400 watts average load.

[marcosdumay]

Oh, you mean some non-zero investment is required? What change doesn't require investment?

In all likelihood, gasoline transportation costs an order of magnitude more than electricity. And that's not just infrastructure that is already paid for. There is a much larger maintenance cost, an ongoing labor cost, and a much shorter useful life for anything related to fossil fuels.

[dsfyu404ed]

>In all likelihood, gasoline transportation costs an order of magnitude more than electricity.

This statement just doesn't pass even the most lax economic sanity check.

Why don't all the use cases where people don't care about anything other than the bottom dollar and don't run up against the weaknesses of modern batteries already run electric vehicles. I'm thinking like low daily mileage fleet of small vehicles in a warm climate somewhere with high fuel costs. Like why doesn't an EV Fiat Promaster exist and why doesn't every tradesman in Sicily run one? If the numbers penciled out then surely we'd have it, at least in some niche somewhere. We are starting to see mass EV adoption but it's right on the margin and the details on any specific use case make it cheaper or maybe not.

[rainsford]

Because vehicles are expensive and people don't replace them all that often? Affordable, capable EVs are relatively new and being competitive with gasoline vehicles doesn't necessarily mean they're so competitive that it makes sense to prematurely replace a working gas powered vehicle.

Longer term though, EVs replacing gasoline vehicles for those kind of use-cases is exactly what we're going to see. In the US, the postal service intends to start deploying tens of thousands of EVs over the next few years as they replace older gasoline powered delivery vehicles. The economics do apparently work out and pass the sanity check, just not overnight.

[marcosdumay]

Well, you seem to not have read my answer...

But anyway, your answer is because transportation costs are irrelevant for both gasoline and electricity. So, even tough they are much cheaper for electricity, none makes any difference, and nobody picks a power source based on them.

But some people makes a huge effort to focus on this non-issue and turn it into a showstopper on their discourse. People resorting to this is good evidence that there aren't any large showstoppers for cars electrification.

[greenthrow]

The grid today can't handle all the industrial power use and residential power use increases that will happen over the next 20 years either. So what? Everybody switching overnight is not and was never on the table. This is a silly non-issue pushed by the fossil fuel industry.

[mulmen]

Sounds like an opportunity to me. Think of the jobs.