Synthetic petrol is not a silver bullet for decarbonising transport but will instead complement electric cars in years to come, according to the chief of solar fuels start-up Synhelion.
The firm last year opened its first plant in Jürich, Germany, using solar energy and waste biomass to produce “nearly” carbon-neutral jet fuel, diesel and petrol.
These are virtually identical to their fossil-based counterparts and can be used in cars or planes without any modifications.
But it does not eliminate the problem of particulate emissions (albeit reduced, as synthetic fuel does not have the contaminants found in fossil fuels), and producing it is less efficient than using the required electricity to power an EV directly.
“If you produce electricity in the UK or in Switzerland, I think it makes sense to use that electricity primarily to electrify [cars],” conceded Philipp Furler, CEO and founder of Synhelion. “You lose a lot in efficiency because of the process.”
He added: “We don’t really see a competition between the two”.
“The electricity you produce locally at home should be directly used for electrification, but the stuff which you cannot use could be used to produce fuels to store.”
He added that synthetic fuels should be “produced at really good locations in Europe or outside Europe and then transported”, while the electricity generated in Europe should primarily be used for EVs.
According to Furler, the electricity generated by a small wind or solar powerplant in Europe could be used to power 1700 electric cars annually, compared with around 450 ICE cars using synthetic fuels.
Join the debate
Add your comment
Industry should use thing, says man whose livelihood depends on selling same thing.
He's repeating a lot of what I've been saying, you can have EVs and you can keep the existing infrastructure running them on synthetic fuels. And in liquid form, you're able to store power that you've generated much easier than environmentally unfriendly batteries.
This then works better in equipment that you can't convert to elecric at the moment. Plant and machinery that's running all day. Be it for construction or farming. Even Lord Bampot is backing hydrogen instead of electric.
But the one part that is still not recognised with the need to scale up and produce synthetic fuels is developing nations. The nations that aren't going to buy very expensive EVs but continute to run ICE long after we've shot ourselves in both feet. If you want to decarbonise the world you've got to come up with a solution for them too, and that is synthetic fuels.
In reality we shouldn't be pushgin towards EVs, and certainly not as the only answer, but increasing the amount of renewable fuel inside our regular fuels. Mandate that a certain percetage comes from synthetic fuel (which is better than the ethonol rubbish they add now).
The situation will change when there's a step change in battery technology. When the costs of batteries are a tenth of what they are now, with a capacity ten times what they currently. With much lower environmental costs. That's what EVs and homes need.
Point 1, no 'law' is stopping this from happening. Synthetic fuels are just not practical, affordable or clean. That's why BEVs are proving a success and synthetic fuels are not.
Point 2, batteries do not 'need' to cost from £500 and have the capacity of 2,500 miles, silly distance.
"synthetic fuels should be produced at really good locations in Europe or outside Europe and then transported, while the electricity generated in Europe should primarily be used for EVs."
There are already 2 electric cables between Africa and Europe with a 3rd one coming into operation next year. So why is it easier to create these fuels and ship them round the world rather than use existing grids that already connect Africa to Europe. It's easier to transport electricity than dangerous liquids.
So, no more research, no more evaluation of alternatives, like any scientific transition process would require?
Just BEVs, BEVs, BEVs, and we don't need to search and research anything anymore, right?
Let's stay with an old, multiple-times-abandoned technology, very inefficient and polluting in ordinary long-term use, and ready to annihilate our energy grids for good.
It's "xxxx" saying this, who could dare contradicting the King of Electric cheerleaders in the kingdom of Autocar comments section?
I hope BEVs' manufacturers are paying you well for this. Defending BEVs regardless of any adverse evidence it's sure quite an hard work to do, right?
Someway I came to admire you in the end, after reading hundreds of your comments, all of them with a rate of bias that I never saw before, and any of them so movingly similar to the other.
Keep on the good (electric) work, xxxx. See you again commenting all over the place, once another Autocar article dares considering anything that is not 200%-full-completely-pure-electric.