[HN Gopher] Porsche Working on Synthetic Fuel to Make ICE Cars a...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Porsche Working on Synthetic Fuel to Make ICE Cars as Clean as EVs
        
       Author : monkeydust
       Score  : 26 points
       Date   : 2021-12-22 15:52 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.caranddriver.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.caranddriver.com)
        
       | elromulous wrote:
       | I've been following this for a little while. I can't help but
       | feel like it's too little too late. Don't get me wrong - I'm
       | rooting for it. But EVs already have so much momentum. And unlike
       | EVs, which in the worse case can be charged at home (thus not
       | requiring any infrastructure / supply), this solution necessarily
       | requires supply.
        
         | r_hoods_ghost wrote:
         | I'm guessing (literally, I have no idea if this is true) that
         | if these synthetic fuels can be stored and transported in the
         | same way as normal petrol then you wouldn't have to build that
         | much more distribution infrastructure. Instead you could just
         | repurpose what's already there. Obviously you still have to
         | make the stuff, which involves capital investment, but so does
         | building gigafactories, the power plants necessary to generate
         | the extra electricity and upgrading the grid.
        
         | toomuchtodo wrote:
         | Like Toyota, it is an attempt to not invest in battery R&D and
         | shifting manufacturing to EVs. They're holding on to their ICE
         | investments until the bitter end.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | klokwork wrote:
           | I think that's not entirely fair. There are several viable
           | reasons why an investment into something like this makes a
           | lot of sense.
           | 
           | Firstly, Porsche is a manufacturer that caters to enthusiasts
           | and many of those customers are very much wedded to ICE
           | engines, manual gearboxes etc. Those customers will continue
           | to buy new cars that utilise existing ICE engine designs, but
           | more importantly Porsche has many customers who keep their
           | cars for decades and this will allow them to continue to run
           | them without changing the cars character.
           | 
           | Secondly, Porsche (or more accurately, VAG) are very much
           | investing into EV's - arguably they could have done it faster
           | and earlier, but the investment is very much there now.
           | Having technology like this diversifies what they can offer
           | and in the case of some sort of global component shortage for
           | batteries for instance, they can continue to scale.
           | 
           | As a bit of an enthusiast myself, if I can continue to run
           | the cars I already own at a similar environmental impact to a
           | new EV, frankly I would be delighted, even if the cost of the
           | fuel is significantly higher.
        
           | Mikeb85 wrote:
           | Porsche literally already makes EVs... And a pretty good one.
           | 
           | It's more like battery advances aren't happening without a
           | major breakthrough in chemistry.
        
           | b3morales wrote:
           | Your comment seems to take it as a given that this is a bad
           | thing -- can you explain why you think so?
           | 
           | The only problem with ICEs, as far as I understand, is their
           | use of petrol and the contents of the exhaust that creates.
           | Assuming we can eliminate that problem, is there a remaining
           | reason that ICEs should be deprecated in favor of electric
           | engines?
        
             | toomuchtodo wrote:
             | AtlasBarfed's comment in this thread sums it up well.
             | 
             | "It also smells like a lot of the forced hydrogen hype, a
             | FUD, delay/distraction, undermining of EV popular support,
             | etc by the oil industry that once they get a crack they'll
             | drive a truck through."
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29653177
        
           | listenallyall wrote:
           | Porsche already makes popular EVs. They also recognize that
           | ICE cars (by all manufacturers) sold today, and for the last
           | few years, are likely to be on the road in 2030, probably
           | even 2040. Seems that the introduction of a new hydro-fuel
           | with significant CO2 reduction would be a massive
           | environmental win, for Porsche drivers and for everybody
           | else. I don't think you are doing the world any good by
           | painting Porsche's efforts in a negative light.
        
             | toomuchtodo wrote:
             | Porsche is currently facing a possible scandal about their
             | Taycan batteries. Also, it's clear their battery
             | engineering is poor based on the battery warranty
             | requirements [1]. Legacy automakers have made very little
             | effort to move to EVs or work towards climate friendly
             | goals, so no, I do not assume positive intent. I see their
             | efforts (just like Toyota's hydrogen fuel cell engineering)
             | as attempts to maintain the status quo at the lowest cost
             | possible until proven otherwise. If this fuel is truly
             | carbon neutral (which corn and sugar sourced ethanol fail
             | on), does not emit harmful particulate or other emissions,
             | and can be scaled up to support existing engines cost
             | effectively, I will eat my words (Mercedes, in this
             | article, says these fuels are a dead end and is pushing
             | electrification, so I don't believe this position is
             | without merit).
             | 
             | > An apparent hint of Porsche's challenges with the
             | Taycan's battery could be seen in the warranty for the all-
             | electric sports car, which happens to be one of the lowest
             | on the market with just 60,000 km or three years if
             | following conditions (Porsche Warranty Requirements) are
             | not met:
             | 
             | > Vehicles standing longer than two weeks supposed to be
             | connected to a charger
             | 
             | * Customers must assure that the Taycan's state of charge
             | remains between 20% - 50%
             | 
             | * Customers must make sure that their Taycan is not exposed
             | to continuous sunlight
             | 
             | > Vehicles standing longer than two weeks not connected to
             | a charger
             | 
             | * Customers must charge the Taycan's battery before to 50%
             | 
             | * Customers must check every three months and assure SoC
             | remains at or above 20%
             | 
             | * Customers must assure that their vehicle's temperature is
             | between 0C - 20C
             | 
             | Compare to Tesla's battery warranty (8 years across all
             | models, and between 100k and 150k miles, depending on
             | model):
             | 
             | https://www.tesla.com/support/vehicle-warranty
             | 
             | You can even park in continuous sunlight.
             | 
             | [1] https://www.teslarati.com/porsche-whistleblower-taycan-
             | batte...
        
               | listenallyall wrote:
               | You left out
               | 
               | > it is my duty to inform the public with this article
               | while I don't have hard evidence and therefore can't
               | confirm the information to be right.
        
               | toomuchtodo wrote:
               | "Facing a _possible_ scandal" from my quote you replied
               | to. The battery warranty I quoted is public information
               | and documented. The scandal may be nothing, but the
               | subpar battery storage engineering is evident from the
               | warranty terms.
               | 
               | Regardless, upvoted for transparency.
        
               | listenallyall wrote:
               | No, the battery warranty you quoted is NOT public NOR
               | documented. You've offered no proof it is real. Perhaps
               | Porsche makes recommendations, to help preserve optimal
               | performance, but you have ZERO evidence that those terms
               | are disclaimers written into the actual warranty, nor of
               | any warranty service denied due to failing to meet such
               | terms.
        
               | toomuchtodo wrote:
               | I will have an investigative reporter I work with reach
               | out to Porsche for comment on the whistleblower's claims
               | and let them know a Taycan pack will be provided to an
               | industry tear down expert for public stress testing. I'll
               | also have them contact the NHTSA to see if there's an
               | open investigation in the matter (separate from their
               | investigation earlier in the year on the vehicle's sudden
               | power loss events). I appreciate you keeping me honest,
               | and I'll come back to HN with additional documentation
               | when I have it. I'm either wrong or Porsche will need to
               | make their EV owners whole.
               | 
               | Seems pretty straightforward to clear up if there's any
               | truth to the matter, and no one should be purposely or
               | inadvertently spreading misinformation, including myself.
        
               | reitzensteinm wrote:
               | Would you mind keeping me updated with their response?
               | Email in the profile.
               | 
               | It reads to me like standard FUD - and I dare say if it
               | were about Tesla you'd be the first to insist on more
               | evidence.
               | 
               | But if it turns out to be true it will be shocking.
               | Especially damaging coming from the leader of the pack of
               | ICE companies ramping up BEVs.
        
               | toomuchtodo wrote:
               | Absolutely, happy to. FUD in all forms against any party
               | is unacceptable.
        
       | exabrial wrote:
       | Phew.
       | 
       | > In a similar vein, E85, a non-carbon neutral gasoline
       | substitute made from 85 percent corn-based ethanol
       | 
       | Ethanol is not:
       | 
       | 1. A clean fuel
       | 
       | 2. A carbon neutral fuel
       | 
       | 3. A carbon negative fuel
       | 
       | 4. A cheap fuel
       | 
       | 5. An effective fuel
       | 
       | 6. A responsible fuel
       | 
       | It takes a tremendous amount of fossil fuel to make ethanol.
       | We're better off just burning the fossil fuel.
        
       | barbazoo wrote:
       | Let those dinosaurs that can't let ICE go, fail, who cares.
        
         | idiotsecant wrote:
         | That's frankly an irresponsible and short sighted viewpoint.
         | Fossil fuels will be around for decades at least, maybe
         | centuries. Why would you not want them to be cleaner?
        
       | surfingdino wrote:
       | It's good to have options.
        
         | aaroninsf wrote:
         | In an ideal world I'd love our car (and everyone else's) to be
         | pure EV;
         | 
         | in the current one, we opted for a plug-in hybrid with a decent
         | EV range (~40+ miles) because it allows us to be 100% EV in
         | local driving, but not worry about charging
         | schedule/availability on longer trips. We're a single-car
         | household in the US and we do a lot of camping and wilderness
         | trips; for those there is currently no good EV option. Even if
         | you stage a full charge at the bottom of a mountain, vertical
         | climbs kill your range... and you end up in locations getting a
         | drive-in emergency recharge may be entirely infeasible.
         | 
         | I am sad about the complexity of our car. Lift the hood and
         | laugh out loud. But as long as it's reasonably reliable, I
         | would happily pay a serious premium for carbon-neutral gas for
         | the ICE part. 2-3x even. Because then I would sleep easier; and
         | we have the luxury of only burning that in the 5% case.
         | 
         | All for the YES-AND.
        
         | AtlasBarfed wrote:
         | I think there are huge quality of life and health improvements
         | that come along with EV: the air pollution death numbers are
         | likely understated, and I suspect there are carcinogenic and
         | micropollution effects from ICE emissions that are being hidden
         | by our addiction to gasoline and industry-sponsored denialism
         | and suppression.
         | 
         | It also smells like a lot of the forced hydrogen hype, a FUD,
         | delay/distraction, undermining of EV popular support, etc by
         | the oil industry that once they get a crack they'll drive a
         | truck through.
         | 
         | Hopefully EVs and solar/wind/battery continue their price curve
         | improvements, to make all these distraction projects
         | ludicrously economically infeasible.
         | 
         | It is a triumph, dare I say miracle, of modern technology and
         | (sigh, I hate praising economics) economics that we now have a
         | switchover path from dinosaur heroin to something that is EVEN
         | CHEAPER.
        
       | civilized wrote:
       | I'll wait to celebrate until a credible source estimates total
       | emissions impact of this fuel.
       | 
       | Sadly, there's a lot of "green cons" going on right now. For
       | years, America has been cutting down its own mature hardwood
       | forests to feed power plants in the UK and Europe on the
       | extremely questionable theory that these forests qualify as a
       | renewable energy source.
       | 
       | Con men administrators and officials are wrecking our environment
       | and society to pad their CVs with wins on fake metrics. It's
       | happening everywhere and we need to get wise.
        
         | errcorrectcode wrote:
         | Greenwashing. For another example, "Biodegradable" plastics
         | were mostly a big con.
        
         | boppo1 wrote:
         | I was just trying to dig up a bookmark on your example but
         | couldn't find it. You don't have an article handy, do you?
        
       | eloff wrote:
       | I'm sure many engineers would recoil at the inefficiency of
       | producing hydrocarbon fuel from water, CO2, and electricity, only
       | to then transport it all over the place, before finally burning
       | it in a small, inefficient engine to get water and CO2 again.
       | Hugely wasteful. Elon Musk would rightly scoff at it (actually,
       | I'm sure he already has.)
       | 
       | But if they could do it at an economically viable level - which
       | will almost certainly require government subsidies - it's a great
       | thing for the world. Climate change is a big, big problem without
       | a single solution. We need all hands on deck. Making existing
       | vehicles green could be a massive help. Outlaw crypto at the same
       | time and you could even get the energy free...
        
         | Reichhardt wrote:
         | Synthetic Fuel is not going to be for the masses, it will be
         | for the elite driving Porsches (hence the research funding), as
         | part of a giant green-washing scheme.
         | 
         | What's sad is that the EU will throw subsidy money at it,
         | instead of just doing the sensible thing and adopting EVs at
         | all levels - simply to maintain the corporate legacy of soon-
         | obsolete German automakers.
        
           | eloff wrote:
           | Fuel is fuel. Porsche doesn't own gasoline stations. If they
           | sell this fuel, it will be for any car with the technology to
           | burn it.
        
       | samwillis wrote:
       | I think it's worth noting that this is a much bigger play than
       | being just for Porches own cars. Porsche own VW Group, they are
       | the largest car manufacturer in the world, they are also a
       | literal bank. They have the capital to invest in a "moonshot"
       | type project.
       | 
       | So firstly, this is obviously important as a hedge for them -
       | more options for the industry moving forward (we absolutely
       | should not only be working on BEVs) / what if there is ever a
       | lithium or mineral shortage due to geopolitical conflict.
       | 
       | Secondly, air flight! Battery's will never have the energy
       | density for longer than regional flight at a long shot. Most
       | people agree that battery airplanes will only be successful for
       | metropolitan flights <20km. A green, high energy density fuel is
       | the only long term option for medium/long hall flight. Porsche
       | want to own as much IP on that as possible and have the cash to
       | invest.
        
         | arethuza wrote:
         | I believe that Porsche SE are a holding company that own a
         | majority share of VW Group who then own the Porsche company
         | that makes cars - it is probably the latter who are making this
         | fuel.
        
           | samwillis wrote:
           | True, although they are mostly a cohesive operation sharing
           | expertise and technology. For example the Porsche Taycan and
           | Audi E-Tron GT are built on the same platform and are almost
           | the same car. It's main development was lead by Porsche but
           | it's technology will be used by the whole group.
           | 
           | This may be being developed within the Porsche cars group but
           | the plan is bigger than that. It's just the PR that's focused
           | at the Porsche use case right now.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-12-22 23:02 UTC)