Comment Re:Internal combustion isn't dead yet (Re:zip zap) (Score 2) 144
Sadly, some of your premises are false.
It is a well known fact that emissions from internal combustion engines cause air pollution. People commit suicide by breathing in the toxic fumes from their car parked in their closed garage with the engine running.
NOx air pollution is not from the fuel itself but from the atmospheric nitrogen and oxygen in the air-fuel mixture that is combusted. Synthetic fuel will also produce NOx air pollution in a combustion engine. Consequently, synthetic fuel will become banned in cities with Utra Low Emission Zones (ULEZ) such as London UK.
In China, the transition to BEVs is driven by the desire to reduce air pollution rather than reducing CO2 emissions. Note that China now has stricter vehicle emission regulations than Europe.
A Tesla Model S can do 400 miles on a battery charge. A typical combustion car has a fuel tank range of 600 miles. Your argument on battery energy density is flawed because BEVs have more mass than combustion cars due to the traction battery. In other words, the power to weight ratio is the better metric to analyse. Also, a combustion engine is about 25% efficient which means that 4 times the fuel is needed despite the higher energy density.
2025 is the first year that Norway has effectively banned the sale of new combustion cars. The surge in BEVs is spreading to Norway's neighboring countries such as Sweden, Netherlands, and Denmark. This trend is accelerating. By 2030, Northern Europe, including the UK will be selling more new BEVs than new combustion cars.
Synthetic fuel will fail because it does not resolve the air pollution issue.