Follow

So, as it turns out it's not necessarily the energy demand of /#eFuels that is mind bending.

Its demand is even more mind bending.

Falter et al come to the conclusion that: "The water footprint consists of 7.4 liters per liter of jet fuel of direct demand on-site and 42.4 liters per liter of jet fuel of indirect demand"

By the way: I don't see any reason why the numbers should significantly differ for car fuel.

Let's say the 42 litres will magically solve itself by and somehow processes (yeah, we hear you FDP, the future is going to be great!).

Then there is still a demand of 7 litres per litre of fuel on-site. On-site (as discussed in Germany at the moment) means: sunny regions towards the equator, deserts, South America, Africa, well basically were ever the colonies were.

This debate is stupid, utterly, utterly colonialist.

pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.e

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.