Can we replace fossil fuels with electricity and artificial fuels?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Manraj singh
  • Start date Start date
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
Sign up Log in
43 replies · 20K views
Manraj singh
Messages
66
Reaction score
0
My teacher says in a couple of hundred years we are going to run out of fossil fuels. What then? I am pretty sure we will manage to make artificial fuels, won't we? Is that possible? The main Concern is plains, they won't be able to run on electricity. I am pretty sure we will have electricity. So, even if we do run out of them and can't make them again, we will still be able to function well as we have electricity, right?
 
Earth sciences news on Phys.org

Discussion

Manraj singh said:
My teacher says in a couple of hundred years we are going to run out of fossil fuels. What then? I am pretty sure we will manage to make artificial fuels, won't we? Is that possible? The main Concern is plains, they won't be able to run on electricity. I am pretty sure we will have electricity. So, even if we do run out of them and can't make them again, we will still be able to function well as we have electricity, right?
It is being addressed: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=749219

Search for Fischer-Tropsch Synthesis.
 
If you mean planes, yeah, they could be a problem. If you mean plains, they'll still be just sitting there.
 
Manraj singh said:
My teacher says in a couple of hundred years we are going to run out of fossil fuels. What then?
If you are optimistic, this might lead to the disappearance of cars.
 
Fossil fuels are oil, gas, and coal. The Worldometers says world oil reserve will run out in about 40 years.

Scientists and technicians are making progress in developing and harnessing renewable energy sources especially solar energy which are literally falling on our heads. I've seen on tv that France is using molten salt that enable their solar power plant to still operate when the sun is out.

And most of all, I wish Allen J. Bard succeed in his endeavor about harnessing solar power. ”Bard’s current research focuses on harnessing the power of natural sunlight to produce sustainable energy. His lab at the University of Texas tests different chemical compounds in the hopes of discovering a material that will carry out artificial photosynthesis. Bard feels strongly that such discoveries must be sought and made because otherwise humanity will be in deep trouble as fossil fuels run out.” http://bard.cm.utexas.edu/
 
We can only wait and see for what future holds for us. Let's hope its good!
 
We must stay in school and participate in the research whenever possible. Fossil fuels are technically ancient sunlight that was stored through photosynthesis. And plant leaves are harnessing solar energy more than scientists can explain the process. Achieving synthetic photosynthesis will require more than chemistry... I guess the endeavor will require quantum mechanics and nanotechnology among other branch of science.

edit addendum: fascinating, I found this link a while ago through my email
http://www.isgtw.org/feature/nature’s-subway-quantum-tunneling-enzymes
 
Last edited:
Manraj singh said:
... The main Concern is plains, they won't be able to run on electricity...
Don't be so sure. The only transportation that absolutely can not be pure electric is rocketry outside the atmosphere.

EADS/Rolls-Royce distributed electric propulsion concept
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5t8VdLpsOA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIHBDaySH6U
 
Last edited:
DrDu said:
Note that Michel, who won the Nobel prize for his research on photosynthesis calls biofuels nonsense due to the low overall efficiency of biofuels:
http://climatesanity.wordpress.com/...ng-biochemist-says-all-biofuels-are-nonsense/

Some good points but this argument sounds weak:

Michel said:
“Microalgae have been advertised as the ideal candidates for biofuel production. There are many unsupported claims about their efficiency, some even exceeding the theoretical limits of photosynthetic efficiency…the existence of photoinhibition and a poor RuBisCO will limit the advantages of microalgae together with the demands for growing and harvesting them.”

The criticism is that biofuel is hyped? So what? The photosynthetic efficiency, by itself, is really irrelevant. What matters is, given a particular efficiency, is the particular biofuel process economic? I don't see Michel stating that it is impossible for biofuel to ever cost less than, say, $100/gallon.

And these microbe approaches don't necessarily require arable land, pesticides, etc.
 
Electric airplanes do exist - they are a niche market currently, (trainers) but slowly gaining ground.
There are several solutions for air travel in a post-fossil fuel world:
- Better electric planes. A solution to the battery problem will change the world.
- Beamed energy from the ground. A plane could be charged in flight, using batteries only for takeoff, landing, and gaps between beams.
- Biofuels: As others have mentioned.
- Genetically modified giant ducks.
 
There will always be fossil fuels. There will be a point were the cost to extract fossil fuels will exceed some economic and energy cost that will not be viable to extract and process the fuel.
 
the answer is population management but nobody likes that answer, 15 billion people and no food will force change.
 
Algr said:
Electric airplanes do exist - they are a niche market currently, (trainers) but slowly gaining ground.
There are several solutions for air travel in a post-fossil fuel world:
- Better electric planes. A solution to the battery problem will change the world.
- Beamed energy from the ground. A plane could be charged in flight, using batteries only for takeoff, landing, and gaps between beams.
- Biofuels: As others have mentioned.
- Genetically modified giant ducks.

Sci Fi writers love to scare us with visions of a post singularity world whee AI rules the planet, but personally the future I fear is the post fosil fuel era in which desperate genetic experiments have run amok and we all live in fear of our giant Avian Overlords.
 
czelaya said:
There will always be fossil fuels. There will be a point were the cost to extract fossil fuels will exceed some economic and energy cost that will not be viable to extract and process the fuel.

True, but it comes down to the same thing - fossil fuels will become a niche restricted to applications where they can't be replaced. Oil at too high a price will become worthless - it isn't like gold where it is prized for it's beauty.
 
thankz said:
the answer is population management but nobody likes that answer, 15 billion people and no food will force change.

And what is it that makes you think there will be no food? This sounds like an unsupportable personal theory.
 
well if you have a sizable garden you'll have something to eat, mostly the coasts where most people live will go without. I'm sure their will be land grabs before people go completely hungry still if your not used to living like the amish. I just ordered this book https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0865715653/?tag=pfamazon01-20

I'm sure people will stretch out biofuels as long as they can but all the things petroleum creates will be rationed until the military takes over. I give it 300 years but really it will be much sooner than that. I don't know why anyone alive right now should care unless you have kids.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
russ_watters said:
Yes, lack of enough food is pretty far down on the list of our problems.

what are the problems? I'd like to know.
 
Population management? To prevent decrease? Even China's working age population is now decreasing.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population_estimates

the worlds population is only increasing, even at 2.3 children per couple in the us we're only growing. what will happen is that first world country's like japan will see a decrease in population growth and second and third world country's will have an increase.

an inconvenient truth indeed
 
How much farming can still be done without oil? Enough to support 8B people?
 
thankz said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population_estimates

the worlds population is only increasing, even at 2.3 children per couple in the us we're only growing. what will happen is that first world country's like japan will see a decrease in population growth and second and third world country's will have an increase.

an inconvenient truth indeed

The US fertility rate has been below replacement since 2007. US population currently grows only due to immigration.
http://money.cnn.com/2013/09/06/news/economy/birth-rate-low/
And, if not for the larger family size of recent US immigrants, US fert rates would be far lower.

As for the rest of the world, for most of it the peak is already built in, esp China, so that population is not "only increasing" without end. There are really only two nations left now with conditions that could drive large increases in future global population: Pakistan and Nigeria. Both still have large fertility rates and large populations.
 
Last edited:
thankz said:
what are the problems? I'd like to know.
Well this thread is about fossil fuel depletion. The larger issue is where we will keep getting our energy. Then there's the pollution that comes with it.
 
About the population, its going to increase till 2050. It will strike 9.2 billion, when India will be the most populated country. It will then start to decrease.
 
phinds said:
And what is it that makes you think there will be no food? This sounds like an unsupportable personal theory.

When has this ever NOT happened? From microbes to animals to humans (Ex. Easter Island, Dark ages) whenever you have a population boom, resources get depleted and then you have a crash. It is simply what life does.

There is no such thing as "no population control". Nature has a foolproof plan: It's called War, Famine, Pestilence, and Death. We can choose a different plan, but ignoring the problem is choosing nature's way.

Technological advances have let us stretch out the game, but can we keep finding new tricks forever?
 
Algr said:
...Technological advances have let us stretch out the game, but can we keep finding new tricks forever?

Yes, I think we can. It is what we do, and have done. It is how you can distinguish between humans and yeast.

When has the total human population decreased in the past 20,000 years (or since Noah's flood, if you prefer)?
 
We can... if we can convince ourselves to choose to.

"Sometime before the arrival of Europeans on Easter Island, the Rapanui experienced a tremendous upheaval in their social system brought about by a change in their island's ecology... By the time of European arrival in 1722, the island's population had dropped to 2,000–3,000 from a high of approximately 15,000 just a century earlier."

They thought the trees would never run out either.
 

Similar threads

Can clean energy replace fossil fuels?
  • Ad VanderVen
  • · Replies 80 ·
  • Computing and Technology
3
Replies
80