I know this is a little off the karting spectrum as well as the fact that Donut Media can be a little childish, however I found this video really interesting and informative! The science behind it amazes me and I have such an appreciation for the brains that figure this stuff out. Who knows maybe our Karts will be powered by this stuff in the future!
What is⌠a solution looking for a problem?
Not quite sure I follow what you mean?
What is it other than a very expensive fuel that almost nobody can afford? It is neat that it can be done, but why?
He didnât help his spiel by saying oil comes from dead dinosaurs (LOL), as much as Sinclair wanted you to believe that. Sorry no, the natural process is essentially plants > coal > oil > natural gas. And those so-called pollutants like CO2 (the same stuff we all exhale) are needed to grow crops (and weâre at a low level currently). Splitting water is not easy peasy, but quite energy intensive, along with all those other chemical processes. And well⌠we canât really get the CO2 out of the air for any reasonable volume or cost, so we truck it in. Ouch.
So yes, an EXPENSIVE solution looking for a problem.
I agree, my intention was not to advertise for this. I only wanted to share as the technology and science is fascinating even when dumbed down.
Carbon = pollution is a myth.
Even in a congested city? Interesting.
You lost me at $40 per gallon. . . might as well tell me it runs on picksey dust.
Conceptually, the answer to âwhyâ lies in the fact it requires Co2 to produce. If you extract that from the atmosphere, and run the chemical reactions required to create the fuel on renewable energy, then it should be carbon neutral. All in theory, of course. Where, if reducing the carbon emissions of ICE is the aim, this is attractive.
Water vapor is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2. Like most everything else, itâs about balance. Trees consume CO2, strip the carbon, & release the O2. Itâs not a âpollutantâ.
Thatâs almost like saying thereâs no point in taking lead out of gas because thereâs other bad stuff in there.
Is it? I canât think of a natural process that utilizes lead. From a pollution standpoint, it would most likely harm just about nothing if it could be entirely eliminated from the environment. Canât say that about CO2, which is actually necessary for the process of photosynthesis.
There are a few things you got wrong.
Water vapor created by human doesnât stay more than a few days in the atmosphere, having negligeable effect on global warming/climate change, because the added volume of water vapor is going to condensate and go from vapor to liquid state. CO2 stays in the atmosphere for decades, influencing the greenhouse effect a lot more and for longer.
Also, while trees capture and transform CO2 into O2 during the day, they do the exact opposite during the night, meaning the influence of trees in recycling the CO2 is non existent.
I wasnât referring simply to respiration. Japan has been making moves to employ hydrogen fuel for ICE applications. Significantly scaled mass produced applications could pose an impact in atmospheric water vapor content, volume production depending, to facilitate a warming trend. Yes, plants reverse the process in the day time (I wasnât denying that). My point simply was, strictly speaking, CO2 is not a pollutant in & of itself, nor should it be viewed in this same context as lead. Proportion & balance is what matters; itâs possible to have too much of anything. Too much oxygen in the atmosphere would pose a biologically toxic hazard. Nitrogen is the predominant atmospheric element by an overwhelming proportion.
Why is man being carbon neutral at all important? Our whopping 3% CO2 contribution is meaningless compared to what the oceans naturally absorb or release based on solar radiation cycles and magma releases. Both of which we have zero control over.
Attractive to whom? This is certainly DOA at this price point. For a new technology to overtake an old one it has to be both better and less expensive. With more energy required to create and transport it than can be extracted, it is basically a highly inefficient energy storage medium.
If anyone was serious about reducing global pollution, it would be more significant to get the remaining third of Earths population off of animal dung and wood fuel sources and into something low-cost and reliable like natural gas.
Sorry if this sounds harsh, Iâm not trying to be that way or attack anyone. Iâm just tired of organizations creating âemergency crisisâ over insignificant things so they can enrich themselves off of all of us.
It would probably be easier to throw this on a kart Diesel Generator engine build a filtration system and get some grease from a restaurant and run biodiesel. However it seems as though battery power is likely the environmental direction will need a gas powered generator to charge it 
