7 Major Problems with E-Fuels / Synthetic Fuels
Headlines have been suggesting that synthetic fuels like Porsche’s E-Fuel will extend the life of internal combustion engines. That there will be special dispensation for an engine running exclusively on E-Fuels/Synthetic fuels. Namely that engines which run on e-fuels will be allowed to be sold after the ban on conventional petrol engines has passed. (How this is going to be policed ie how will anyone know what fuel is being used in the waivered cars I don’t know. But for the purpose of this article lets assumed that problem is solved).
Why should e-fuels get an exemption?
Because e-fuels are carbon neutral. The CO2 released by burning e-fuels was originally captured in the manufacturing process of the e-fuel.
The 7 major problems with E-Fuels/Synthetic Fuels
On paper, e-fuels look great, they should allow us to retain the convenience and range of internal combustion engines while being carbon neutral.
However there are 7 huge problems, some might say fundamental flaws with e-fuels.
1.Not designed for environment
E-fuels were created to give us an alternative source of fuel, if the supply of oil was cut off for any reason eg the 70’s oil crisis or losing access to Arabian oil in the second world war. E-Fuels were never intended to be “environmentally friendly”. And probably, the methods would have still be perfected even if they were damaging to the environment.
Which brings us on to the next point.
2.Takes a ton of energy to make
It takes around 27kw/h to make 9 kw/h of e-fuels. The manufacturing process is around 30% efficient. And only around 20% efficient when you take into account energy needed to get it to a petrol pump. Conventional petrol production is around 80% efficient, including transport to the pump.
3.Does not provide national security
Porsche E-Fuel potential manufacturing sites, ignoring South America are generally based around the same places we get oil from now. The energy requirements for e-fuels (and the fact that this energy has to be carbon neutral to give e-fuels any hope of being carbon neutral) means the e-fuel manufacturing sites have to be located in areas where land is plentiful and cheap and where the weather is either extremely sunny for the vast majority of the year. eg deserts.
4.Not capable of replacing oil
The amount of energy that needs to be produced from renewable sources makes the likelihood of e-fuels replacing oil extremely unlikely.
5.More expensive
The energy and manufacturing infrastructure required for e-fuels makes the cost so expensive, it would probably lead to the world looking for an alternative fuel instead of e-fuels.
6. Same emissions of conventional fuels
There is no difference in the tailpipe emissions of e-fuels vs conventional fuels. The problem of emissions in highly populated areas is not solved by e-fuels.
7.Better of ways of sequestering CO2
And the biggest issue with e-fuels is that there is a far better, cheaper and more obvious ways of sequestering CO2.
CO2 sequestration in the e-fuel manufacturing process increases the cost of the fuel massively.
On the other hand, CO2 can be sequestered by planting crops. Farming crops which absorb high quantities of CO2 (hemp for example) reduces the cost of fuel because the crop can be sold, you get a tradeable commodity out of the process rather than just putting money in.
In short, companies wanting to create a carbon neutral fuel would be financially better off selling oil based petrol/diesel while simply buying cheap farmland and growing hemp to offset the CO2 emissions of the fuel they sold.
The Good Points
I’ve highlighted the main issues with e-fuels but they have some benefits in the short term. In motorsport for example.
It might be argued that the cost of the fuel is small compared to the other costs involved. In this case the customer (motorsport team) is not as cost sensitive as a car driver or a transport company. Theoretically the higher cost forms of motorsport such as Formula One & WEC could transfer to e-fuels today. But on the flip side, they could also make their emissions carbon neutral by growing hemp and using the hemp as a composite in the construction of their race cars.
Hybrid Vehicles & Public Transportation
A side argument to reducing emissions in transport is the use of electric vehicles and greater use of public transportation.
I’ll touch on these only lightly because this article is focused on making carbon based fuels carbon neutral.
EVs
EVs have their own issues, for example sourcing the metals needed for the batteries, the charging infrastructure and accurately assessing their CO2 emissions. But for some people a fully electric vehicle will do what they want.
Public Transport
Better organised public transport, making public transport more appealing to car drivers is for sure another way to reduce CO2 emissions.
Whatever the alternative, be it e-fuels, electrification, hybridisation, public transport, a single one will not be the answer, each will play a part and all of these alternatives emit CO2 at some stage of their manufacture and distribution and all can benefit from sequestering CO2. And I’m almost positive, that the renewal electrical energy needed to power these alternatives would be better coming directly from the solar panel or the wind/wave turbine (their efficiency is low enough already) then first going to an e-fuels plant and losing an additional 70% of the power in the e-fuels manufacturing process.
Not a Dead-End
This is not to say e-fuels do not have a place, or that EVs do not have their place, they do. We just have to be realistic about the amount of energy we consume and we have to be smart how we use that energy. Creating energy in a way that consumes more energy than it gives out, I don’t think can never be called efficient or sustainable. EVs will have their place, public transport has it’s place but in the big picture, global energy demand is going to increase as time goes on.
Yes, EVs and public transport can take a bigger piece of the pie, but the pie is growing and so will the need for traditional fuels. The priority, for this article at least, is to look at ways to make traditional fuels as carbon neutral as possible in the cheapest way possible and I think if we can produce a valuable resource in the process of sequestration, that would seem the ideal scenario.
E-Fuels/Synthetic Fuels – In Summary
All of the problems associated with e-fuels come from the fact that the processes were never designed to compete with oil. Oil is the most efficient energy source by far and the designers of e-fuels knew this.
While oil is available, e-fuel manufacturing seems to be a slight folly (if the goal is to completely replace traditional oil sources). And if creating a carbon neutral fuel is the goal, sequestering CO2 indirectly from traditional fuels, in a way that could even be profitable and/or productive, seems like the goal we should be heading towards (whatever that method of sequestration is).
