On the NP website, I published an article two times in which I argued why electric cars (in terms of greenhouse gas emissions) are increasing snowballs, and later I posted an article showing that vodka-powered cars are also increasing snowballs. Now is the time to show that synthetic fuels are increasing dream bags.
In the ecological rag, the killer ed vodka is used, this is a very limited possibility to make vodka in some chemical plants. Similarly, there is a quantitative limit to the possibility of making fuel from plastic when it is recycled.
In principle, synthetic fuel must be produced from atmospheric CO2 and from green vodka. Let’s face this nonsense.
In the course of photosynthesis, CO is produced as a result of sunlight, water and air2 carbon bound in glucose, which in energy. The simplest way to write the equation is as follows:
Svteln zen + 6 CO2 + 12 H2O C6H12O6 (in energy) + 6 O2 + 6 H2O
and display like this:
The reverse process (hoen) can be simplified (without vodka) as follows:
C + O2 -> WHAT2 + energy
This means that either we use the energy of two photosynthesis, and then we talk about fossil fuels, or we use the energy of non-photosynthesis, and then we talk about biomass (for example, grass).
Now there is a theory that CO can be isolated from the air (using energy).2, combine with vodka and use this composition to produce synthetic fuel. All this theoretical possibility against a total zero CO balance2 about the so-called green vodka, which appears here as a deus ex machina.
The main problem with green vodka is, of course, that it does not exist and will not exist in this quantity, and many environmentalists are going to make green vodka with five times black vodka for green. I assume that I use two cheats, the allocation cheat and the one clutch cheat.
A bit of marginalism
The Marginalist revolution took place (in economics) in 1871 and (among other things) we can relate to each other the causal link of the epic without a pedestal. I will give an example: mm two tyes, a meter and a meter. A two-meter-long zatlua on the top of Pu, a meter-long one on the top of Snka. Political ecologists are afraid to tell us that the meters on the Sun are 3.5 times longer than the meters on the ground, but only the meters are affected by the decisions about them, and therefore the ones on the ground are 3 times longer. Snka ap are pedestals that do not flow from our decision, they were there before them and they will be there after us.
If we place the electrolysis plant in Solenica (under the Orlk dam), then the production of the Orlk power plant will be the same before and after. The production of fossil power plants (today and for a long time coal-fired) will change. The causality is more produced vodka more coal. Politician environmentalists will show the newspapers that here are the grindings from the green machine shop, here is the creation of green vodka, here is the pressing of vodka into bottles by green compressors, here is the transportation of vodka by the green method of green vodka to the place of the green urn, but in reality it is all on coal , because Sneka does not fall there, only those causally connected epics that result from our decision fall there. One epic is vodka, a kind of epic is coal. The portfolio of power plants in the system does not enter into this relationship, which in the case of electric cars is merely a window for the calculated emission of electrical energy entering the electric car. What I can’t move, I can’t sweat.
Wind, photovoltaic and water (work per year, MWh/yr) power plants run according to the wind, the sun and the weather. Even a nuclear power plant will not change its production after the allocation of electrolysis. To understand that the electrolysis of two nuclear power plants using fossil electricity (today coal) is very counterintuitive and stupid. The test is turned off: what will change on the production side? And there will be electrolysis in R wherever it is (in Solenica, in Tuimice, in Temeln or somewhere else), it will always burn fossil fuel, today coal, in the distant future natural gas, including that of Blicic. It definitely doesn’t go to the wind, to the sun, or even to the portfolio (i.e. to all electric stations).
Emission (fossil) power plants adapt to demand, emission-free power plants do not adapt to demand. This means that marginal (actual) consumption is covered by emissions (fossil) power plants. The closest example is Iceland, because it has geothermal energy, which heats up as fast as the system needs and therefore has a certain end.
The electrified system is not operated only on the core, the sun and the wind. There will always be fossil power plants as an elastic element and they will cover marginal consumption. This applies despite the few political ecologists who do not bother with the causality between production and consumption.
Fraud with one clutch
Fraud with one coupling is practiced today by some electricity traders, who simply link some consumption with some production, and that goes in the category of work per year (MWh/yr). The shopkeeper bought me green electronics, but I preferred to order a expensive tariff, because I do not accept these fraudulent practices. As a result of my decision to electrify the system, nothing happened at all, only the ink went elsewhere. The future probably depends on this fraud, because it’s easy to invest in electrolysis, write something on something and have green vodka. Even a dog could tear through that stock market
It’s not about emissions
- Electric cars are increasingly a dream come true
- Vodka-powered cars are more promising because they are electric cars plus advanced technology (electrolysis, compressor, fuel line)
- Synthetic fuels are going uphill, increasing snowballs, because they will burn carbon to make vodka behind the element of transformation of carbon dioxide back into carbon, which then pours into the car in the form of some hydrocarbon, with great losses. Actually, there is a classic burning of coal and a kind of free industrial parody of photosynthesis. Synthetic fuels are not a solution to the problem, but it is exacerbated. Don’t clap here, don’t squeal.
Political ecologists are not concerned with emissions. In the short term, these forces are concerned with transferring money from the pockets of the congress to the pockets of the congress, and in the long term, the destruction of industry and civilization and the establishment of a political system in general.