[LINK] Standards, please! The third coming of electric vehicles

[David Boxall]

On 19/04/2012 10:55 AM, Karl Auer wrote:
> ... tell me what liquid fuel (aside from fossil fuels) you
> think might be a viable alternative. Most alternatives involve using
> arable land for making fuel and/or the destruction of forests to make
> room for planting fuel crops...
> ...
As the military, aircraft manufacturers and airlines have realised, 
algal biofuels work quite well. They're considerably more expensive than 
fossil fuels at present, but feasible. There are interesting 
developments in bacterial biofuels, as well.

Bioreactors don't need land devoted to them at all, certainly not arable 
land. Feedstock can be industrial waste, which is an environmental 
positive. Interestingly, carbon out of the exhaust pipe can be less than 
carbon into the process, so they're potentially carbon-negative.

One thing that surprised me is that processed biodiesel is more readily 
biodegradable than raw vegetable oil. I'd have thought the opposite.

In unmodified internal combustion engines, biodiesel (for example) has 
proven slightly less efficient than fossil fuel. That might change with 
engines designed for the fuel. In jet turbines, biofuels have proven 
more efficient.

In converstaion, the service manager at my local Mitubishi dealership 
mentioned that the company recommends full-body protection for people 
servicing its electric vehicles. I've no idea why and maybe it's just 
Mitsubishi, but there might be a problem there.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. To me, battery-powered 
vehicles are unlikely to be more than shiny technobaubles (within my 
lifetime, at least).

-- 
David Boxall                    |  Perfection is achieved, not when
                                |  there is nothing more to add, but
http://david.boxall.id.au       |  when there is nothing left to take
                                |  away.
                                            --Antoine de Saint-Exupery