The Uncertain Future of Jet Fuel

2021 ж. 3 Шіл.
1 252 664 Рет қаралды

Sign up to Nebula here: go.nebula.tv/realengineering
New streaming platform: watchnebula.com/
Links to everything I do:
beacons.ai/brianmcmanus
Get your Real Engineering shirts at: standard.tv/collections/real-...
Credits:
Writer/Narrator: Brian McManus
Editor: Dylan Hennessy (www.behance.net/dylanhennessy1)
Animator: Mike Ridolfi (www.moboxgraphics.com/)
Sound: Graham Haerther (haerther.net/)
Thumbnail: Simon Buckmaster / forgottentowel
References:
[1] www.carbonbrief.org/aviation-...
[2] www.ge.com/gas-power/products...
[3] www.ethanolproducer.com/articl....
[4] www.chevron.com/-/media/chevr...
[5] www.sciencedirect.com/topics/...
[6] nwfuel.ca/whats-deal-winter-d...
[7] www.history.navy.mil/research...
[8] www.engineeringtoolbox.com/et... &
pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/comp....
[9] www.engineering.iastate.edu/b... & neutrium.net/properties/speci...
[10] www.pnas.org/content/117/23/1...
[11] www.airbus.com/newsroom/press...
[12] www.nasa.gov/press-release/na...
[13] www.reuters.com/article/us-no...
[14] simpleflying.com/sas-2019-fin...
[15] news.stanford.edu/2019/03/18/...
[16] www.energy.gov/eere/fuelcells...
[17] www.sciencedirect.com/science....
[18] www.sciencedirect.com/science...
[19] I can’t be arsed to find a reference for this one. I have a masters degree in aeronautical engineering, just trust me.
[20] www.airbus.com/innovation/zer...
Select imagery/video supplied by Getty Images
Thank you to AP Archive for access to their archival footage.
Music by Epidemic Sound: epidemicsound.com/creator
Thank you to my patreon supporters: Adam Flohr, Henning Basma, Hank Green, William Leu, Tristan Edwards, Ian Dundore, John & Becki Johnston. Nevin Spoljaric, Jason Clark, Thomas Barth, Johnny MacDonald, Stephen Foland, Alfred Holzheu, Abdulrahman Abdulaziz Binghaith, Brent Higgins, Dexter Appleberry, Alex Pavek, Marko Hirsch, Mikkel Johansen, Hibiyi Mori. Viktor Józsa, Ron Hochsprung

Пікірлер
  • Former US Navy fuel systems engineer here. Well done, this is a fairly comprehensive look at jet fuel production, constraints, and alternatives. I would like to add that the Navy did evaluate a 100% biofuel version of JP-5 back in 2016. Performance-wise it was nearly identical to traditional JP-5, but as you observed, the problem with all biofuels is the cost of production. Edit based on some of the responses: The Navy's main motivation for investigating biofuels is more to do with diversity of fuel sources (i.e. less dependence on the Middle East) than it is to do with saving the planet. That would be a nice side-benefit, though.

    @damightymage5049@damightymage50492 жыл бұрын
    • I definitely care more about the planet than going on holiday so I am probably bias, but I think that a higher cost is worth it. There are other problems of course but I don't think cost should be the thing that stops us using it.

      @seanfitzpatrick7441@seanfitzpatrick74412 жыл бұрын
    • Interesting name for a former US navy fuel system engineer

      @Ghazzoul@Ghazzoul2 жыл бұрын
    • @@AndenMowe-hh5qk Take a train. Its not that you can't travel around the world. I can walk 10 minutes to the train station and be in Paris today. Then all of Europe opens up. Also most people are not traveling around the world to learn everyone different culture and ways of thinking, that's just bullshit. People are going to sit at a resort at the beach and drink (usually on the same continent that they are already on).

      @seanfitzpatrick7441@seanfitzpatrick74412 жыл бұрын
    • @@seanfitzpatrick7441 yea let’s built a transatlantic train... I’m sure people will love the traveling taking a week more to get there,

      @CARBONHAWK1@CARBONHAWK12 жыл бұрын
    • @@seanfitzpatrick7441 you do realize that Europe is not the entire world. .right?

      @Hygix_@Hygix_2 жыл бұрын
  • I love how you drew the different fuels with slightly larger atoms for C and H, indicating they are closer and farther away. Such a nice touch.

    @SapereAude1490@SapereAude14902 жыл бұрын
    • Like the cows

      @carltonleboss@carltonleboss2 жыл бұрын
    • When in the video did he do that?

      @RammusTheArmordillo@RammusTheArmordillo2 жыл бұрын
    • Nice, too bad he ignored the one with one carbon and 4 hydrogens

      @tesicnr@tesicnr2 жыл бұрын
    • @@RammusTheArmordillo 3:14

      @callumbrown9806@callumbrown98062 жыл бұрын
    • @@tesicnr methane

      @Henrix1998@Henrix19982 жыл бұрын
  • "made by someone I actually like" LOL I think there was a recent Wendover video where he referred to you as "that Irish engineering guy"

    @samschellhase8831@samschellhase88312 жыл бұрын
    • That wouldn’t surprise me, these two banter loads 😂

      @almostanengineer@almostanengineer2 жыл бұрын
  • 14:40 Something went wrong here, the chart is showing cold hydrogen having a much _lower_ density than room-temperature hydrogen, which is obvious nonsense. Are the labels accidently swapped?

    @MatthijsvanDuin@MatthijsvanDuin2 жыл бұрын
    • Think so

      @machielluchtmeijer7796@machielluchtmeijer77962 жыл бұрын
    • Yeah, and he still seemingly read the wrong number off the chart. I'm confused.

      @jonathanvogt2@jonathanvogt22 жыл бұрын
    • I remember noticing that, too. I commented this: "14:40 I think this graph is wrong. Why is hydrogen less dense when it's colder? Is the 19°C one actually Kerosene? I really doubt it if the number you gave immediately afterwards was right."

      @Mr.Nichan@Mr.Nichan2 жыл бұрын
  • "We will explore this kind if plane in more detail in a future video" I shall wait paciently for my favorite Video

    @maxsinn402@maxsinn4022 жыл бұрын
    • Patiently

      @CMon_Jack@CMon_Jack2 жыл бұрын
    • @A Z He/she just corrected someone and you are accusing him/her of not knowing anything

      @tomatosoupwoo@tomatosoupwoo2 жыл бұрын
    • @@tomatosoupwoo how bout that ? Sometimes we just need a laugh , or at least a smile

      @NCOGNTO@NCOGNTO2 жыл бұрын
    • @A Z so what you're saying is we have to find the one multilingual person who has the right to correct people's mistakes because somehow Americans don't have that right... OP made a mistake and was fairly corrected with no hint of disrespect for the betterment of his spelling and everyone who reads it. You are the one who needs to move on.

      @zioxei@zioxei2 жыл бұрын
    • @A Z When I learning English, some people were too polite to correct me even when I was wrong. As a result, it took much longer for me to learn English properly. They were doing me a disservice.

      @magnetospin@magnetospin2 жыл бұрын
  • On the freezing point of jet fuel: It's really cold at cruising altitude everywhere in the world. What matters more is the duration of the flight. The fuel takes some time to cool, simply because there is so much of it compared to the fuel tank surface area. Long flights require more careful management of fuel temperature.

    @awasaz@awasaz2 жыл бұрын
    • The engine oil goes through tubes that run inside the fuel tanks. Oil gets cooler while fuel gets hotter. So no it will not freeze.

      @antoniohagopian213@antoniohagopian2132 жыл бұрын
    • But if you're at the end of the flight and there isn't much fuel left, that might be a problem. It could cool down faster.

      @Yonatan24@Yonatan242 жыл бұрын
    • @@Yonatan24 I think it shouldn’t be a problem to redirect some of the turbines’ heat back to the fuel tanks, whether with oil or other means. I believe that even a primitive electric heating system could solve the issue.

      @andreirachko@andreirachko2 жыл бұрын
    • Or you just go full SR-71 and fly so fast you need to use the fuel as a heat sink instead of worrying about it freezing

      @damstachizz@damstachizz2 жыл бұрын
    • @@andreirachko thats basically already being done. Although heating the fuel tanks is the least priority of that system. The primary uses (AFAIK) is to heat the leading edges of the wing and the ailerons and other aerodynamical devices to prevent ice growth, and then it also heats up the cabin, and then parts of the fuel system if at all

      @Gary_Harlow@Gary_Harlow2 жыл бұрын
  • The thing about E-fuels as well is that it apparently works with existing ICEs in cars as well, there have been some tests here in Europe. It could be mixed with normal gasoline in that case as well, so I hope it will catch on in which case there might be more of a chance of it becoming cheaper (?)

    @DatPenguin97@DatPenguin972 жыл бұрын
    • E-Fuels only make sense if there is an abundance of electricity available, that is cheap and not harmful to the environment. Renewables are often limited by the grid they operate on and fission nuclear plants are mostly used for base loads (and you are also dependant on imports of fissile materials depending on where you live). It is gonna be tough to justify their use.

      @Skullair313@Skullair313 Жыл бұрын
    • E-fuels will be powering the next gen Formula 1 cars in 2026, so that should also allow car manufacturers to start experimenting with them soon. Porsche is currently making E-fuels in Chile using the abundance of wind power on the Chilean coast. As mentioned in the video though, scaling this for air travel will need way more excess renewable fuel than we currently have. It's going to take some time until it's feasible.

      @AlexanderPavel@AlexanderPavel9 ай бұрын
    • The swedes were at it for years. Their e85 and m85 fuel, containing 85% metanol or etanol 'suffers' from extra horsepower, not really needed in turboSAABS and Volvo's, due to higher octane content......

      @user-pt1ow8hx5l@user-pt1ow8hx5l9 ай бұрын
    • @@user-pt1ow8hx5l e85 and m85 are not e-fuels.

      @AlexanderPavel@AlexanderPavel9 ай бұрын
    • ​@@user-pt1ow8hx5lWhat about seaweed biofuels

      @ayushtieari385@ayushtieari3853 ай бұрын
  • Yet another incredibly well produced documentary. Your channel keeps hitting these home runs and I forecast thousands of people bookmarking your KZhead channel. I've been sharing your most recent aviation videos with most of my pilot friends and the positive feedback has been significant. Keep up the good work buddy! Please look into the Embraer Praetor jet. I'm sure there's something interesting to cover in a video with that one. And your "but" is still my favorite on KZhead! Cheers!

    @agoogleuser2369@agoogleuser23692 жыл бұрын
  • 25% sounds like a big number, but said differently: the other 75% is what used to account for 97%.

    @ButtKickington@ButtKickington2 жыл бұрын
    • Exactly, that's what I was just coming to the comments to say. So for those that still don't see why this really isn't a huge impending issue that spells doom. If all the carbon being produced right now per year equals, (I'm going to use an imaginary unit of measurement to keep this really simple) let's say 100 Remi's. Then the aviation industry produces 2.5 Remi's every year. In about 30 years even if you were to forecast the amount of planes and passengers were to double. According to the video, the aviation industry is still only producing 5 Remi's in 2050. Remember this video is saying that will be 25% of all carbon produced in a year in 2050. So that means all the human activity on Earth would still have went from producing 100 Remi's in 2021 to 20 Remi's in about 30 years. That's an astonishing reduction if you take into account the massive population explosion that were about to see in the next 30 years. Unless they decide to artificially cull the herd with a man made cataclysm. Which lets all be reasonable for a moment. That's not that far fetched, at all. If you honestly believe that comment is insane. I would politely ask you to do some research into the exponential growth of the human population that's forecasted for the immediate future to say the next 50 to 100 years. Likewise, if you think the people and governments that hold the power in the world now wouldn't do that, then I would also suggest you should do some research into them. I would actually be (and am) much more concerned with the thought of that. Than I am about the aviation industry not being able to find an alternative fuel before the planet dies from global warming. Can anyone say global test run 2020? Or more accurately 2019 to today.

      @remiweaver7668@remiweaver76682 жыл бұрын
    • ​@@remiweaver7668 Humanity has already gone through an exponential growth in population since the Industrial revolution. As standards of living continue to rise Birth rates will go down. Japan currently has a negative birth rate as in They LOSE population every year. Germany and China are expected to follow along in about a decade and in 2 or more decades a good chunk of the world will have negative birth rates aswell. Most other countries will just have enough births to maintain status quo. Not to mention all kinds production will get more and more efficient. There is no Population Crisis anytime soon. The whole population doom thingy was something a nutjob german Economist said in the Early 20th century and is objectively false. Also while I do not think governments are angels by any means, I absolutely do not believe that the Modern Neoliberal Authorities would commit genocide because they can't handle overpopulation. 2020 was not a test run of any kind. People dying is not good for anybody. There is no Shadowy secret world order that would benefit from population culling. Why would they kill you if they can enslave you Instead ? Isn't that how capitalism works ? I generally disagree with your claims and belive that you have rather conspiratorial thinking. Have a nice day.

      @Bananaman36969@Bananaman369692 жыл бұрын
    • Biofuels needs to be produced when wind and solar is up, as a backup battery. The costs are just too much, one might just pay "a few bucks more" at the gaspump to use them, but everything moves on wheels, it cannot be more expensive.

      @LevitatingCups@LevitatingCups2 жыл бұрын
    • The "global warming"/carbon dioxide topic is a complete and vicious scam. Plants use carbon dioxide and sunlight to grow. It's called PHOTOSYNTHESIS. There are no exceptions. No qualifications. **NO** implausible and contrived exceptions to the rule. More CO2 = more plants, taller plants, bigger plants. More plants means more food. Carbon dioxide stupidity.

      @clarkgriswold-zr5sb@clarkgriswold-zr5sb2 жыл бұрын
    • @@clarkgriswold-zr5sb plants use CO2 to grow, yes. concentration of CO2 alone is not the issue that causes global warming. even in cities, where CO2 concentration levels may be 5 times as high as those in rural areas, the CO2 itself is not harming anyone other than those with asthma. very little of the air we breathe is actually composed of CO2. the problem with CO2 and other greenhouse gasses is their heating effect on the planet. CO2, along with methane and nitrous oxide are effective insulators, and therefore prevent heat from escaping earth’s atmosphere. when we release more co2 and methane into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels, the concentration of those gasses increases, resulting in less heat escaping earths atmosphere. this results in overall temperatures rising, which has had and will continue to have drastic effects on weather patterns. droughts, hurricanes, tornadoes, and flooding are all natural disasters which will increase in their rate of occurrence as the global average temperature increases. rising sea levels are also a big part of climate change, resulting from melting icebergs at the poles of the earth. these increasing sea levels will wipe out the homes of hundreds of millions of people forcing mass migration. TLDR; this isn’t about plants. co2 is more than just a reactant in photosynthesis.

      @boxr_4214@boxr_42142 жыл бұрын
  • Excellent!! " [19] I can’t be arsed to find a reference for this one. I have a masters degree in aeronautical engineering, just trust me. "

    @jonathanm9436@jonathanm94362 жыл бұрын
    • Would you recommend a university degree or apprenticeship when pursuing a career in aironautics

      @agravemisunderstanding9668@agravemisunderstanding96682 жыл бұрын
    • @@agravemisunderstanding9668 A mechanical engineering degree goes a LONG way toward making you marketable in ANY industry. Tack on a 2 year master's in aeronautical engineering and you'll have companies beating down your door to hire you.

      @PoeRacing@PoeRacing2 жыл бұрын
    • @@agravemisunderstanding9668 are you getting your academics career advice from a youtube comment section? Lmao

      @kpp28@kpp282 жыл бұрын
    • @@kpp28 I don't see a downside. I get all my education from KZhead. Thinking of furthering my education. I think that means I need to subscribe to Curiosity Stream and Nebula. :-)

      @angeluscorpius@angeluscorpius2 жыл бұрын
    • @@agravemisunderstanding9668 Both. I was educated in the 1970's (UK) and did a "sandwich degree" which combined a degree with an EITB apprenticeship - REPEAT: 6 months at the Poly, six months in industry UNTIL 4 years done. Result, I could at age 22 sit down and design complex electronic systems with confidence. Of course this was all scrapped during the Thatcher dictatorship in the 1980's. A great pity and loss. Before then, from 1824 until 1979 the UK led the world and our engineers were in great demand all over the world, with a "brain drain".

      @nosnibor800@nosnibor8002 жыл бұрын
  • Between 1950 and 2018 the efficiency per passenger grew from .4 to 8.2 (a 20+x improvement) RPK per Kg of CO2. The question is what RPK curve was used for the 2050 projection. While I appreciate all the work put into this video it would have even more impact if more time was spent reviewing the study assumption upfront.

    @user-hl8tq8uw2b@user-hl8tq8uw2b2 жыл бұрын
    • Lies again? Serie A Leader Joma Fila

      @NazriB@NazriB10 ай бұрын
  • Petition to get fast food restaurants to sell their used cooking oil to biofuel manufacturers: 1: cooking oil is already super common, and used en masse by fast food industries 2: most fast food restaurants currently just dispose of their cooking oil once used, so it's currently being wasted 3: as mentioned in the video, cooking oil is a great feedstock for biofuel production

    @SirNobleIZH@SirNobleIZH Жыл бұрын
  • Unfortunately, I doubt we will ever see excess energy 'flood the market'. Every time we figure out how to produce more power, esp if it brings the price down, demand goes up. Multiple times over the last hundred years or so people proclaimed that soon power would be too cheap to meter and the market always re-scales to make it expensive again.

    @neeneko@neeneko2 жыл бұрын
    • So basically induced demand?

      @cdvideodump@cdvideodump2 жыл бұрын
    • Also price fixing

      @HazeGreyAndUnderway@HazeGreyAndUnderway2 жыл бұрын
    • what are you talking about, it is excessive and abundant availabe since a century at least.

      @JohnSmith-pn2vl@JohnSmith-pn2vl2 жыл бұрын
    • Right - and manufacturing fuels will be one of those things expanding demand as energy prices drop.

      @rubidot@rubidot2 жыл бұрын
    • Good old free market

      @zee9709@zee97092 жыл бұрын
  • "...in this case, no." The way he says that made me chuckle. :P

    @Isopropyl_Alcohol@Isopropyl_Alcohol2 жыл бұрын
    • First take was. '...in this one single outlying example, a complete exception to the norm, an exceedingly rare break from insanity, no.'

      @sevex9@sevex92 жыл бұрын
    • I am the cool kid from Germany making videos for the USA and the rest of the world. I will make your day so don't say nay to me today, dear rus

      @AxxLAfriku@AxxLAfriku2 жыл бұрын
    • @@AxxLAfriku stop doing crack

      @gofergofrunio6281@gofergofrunio62812 жыл бұрын
    • @@AxxLAfriku the world's most hated youtuber

      @xvor_tex8577@xvor_tex85772 жыл бұрын
    • That semi-disappointed "no".:)

      @string-bag@string-bag2 жыл бұрын
  • 21:28 Nice to have a video that's both enthusiastic towards technological solutions, yet acknowledges that some unsustainable practices should probably cost more. It's refreshing to see both approaches combined rather than opposed, kudos for that! And excellent video as usual.

    @rararou@rararou2 жыл бұрын
  • Another great video. I love that you look at the matter from different perspectives. Thank you so much for your videos.

    @Tornvongeldern@Tornvongeldern2 жыл бұрын
  • 3:44 "Longer chain hydrocarbons liquify... thanks to their lower boiling point"? A lower boiling would mean that the substance is more likely to stay in gaseous form. Longer carbon chains should have higher boiling points no?

    @swxk19@swxk192 жыл бұрын
    • Yip 👍

      @nobilismaximus@nobilismaximus2 жыл бұрын
    • I didn’t understand anything you just said.

      @brandonbowden1262@brandonbowden12622 жыл бұрын
    • @@brandonbowden1262 That's why you should stay in school.

      @Ebani@Ebani2 жыл бұрын
    • Longer chain hydrocarbons (have greater strength of IMF) have a high boiling point so are more likely to be liquid at room temperature. You are damn right, what he said is wrong. :D

      @marcustandino103@marcustandino1032 жыл бұрын
    • How dare you correctly correct an incorrection

      @SopaDeLengua@SopaDeLengua2 жыл бұрын
  • I love in the description if you scroll to the references you'll find this. "i can't be arse to find a reference. I have a master degree in aeuronautical engineering , just trust me"

    @gilbertxaviertansri9c853@gilbertxaviertansri9c8532 жыл бұрын
    • A man of details I see

      @roshko321@roshko3212 жыл бұрын
    • @@roshko321 yes indeed

      @gilbertxaviertansri9c853@gilbertxaviertansri9c8532 жыл бұрын
  • always love the references included. keep up the great work

    @senor135@senor1352 жыл бұрын
  • The visuals are incredible in this video on top of the (as always) great explanation of the topic.

    @RISCy27@RISCy272 жыл бұрын
    • I often just listen to the audio on these videos while I'm doing the dishes or other chores. It sounds like I'm going to have to block off some time to sit down and actually watch it as well.

      @tracyhardyjohnson1315@tracyhardyjohnson1315 Жыл бұрын
  • One of the big issues with the Blended Wing Body design is with safety. There would need to be a new way to escape the central sections of the airplane, so hopefully that will be addressed if you make a video on that design.

    @grahamturner2640@grahamturner26402 жыл бұрын
    • Put a hatch in the roof, and have it board like the disney world submarine.

      @Attaxalotl@Attaxalotl2 жыл бұрын
    • Or you could have the passengers near the leading edges by the emergency exits, and fill the central section with fuel tanks and luggage space.

      @HalNordmann@HalNordmann2 жыл бұрын
    • plus the additional vomiting

      @jackdeniston59@jackdeniston592 жыл бұрын
    • @@Attaxalotl more like the container in Thunderbirds 2. Just drop the entire container where people are in. the only people left then are the flight deck crew.

      @sirBrouwer@sirBrouwer2 жыл бұрын
    • Several hundred ejection seats is the clear and obvious answer. Shoot the passengers out like fireworks 🎆

      @che3se1495@che3se14952 жыл бұрын
  • What I like about your climate change related content is that it is well researched and carefully thought through. In this video for example you're carefully analyzing the feasibility of a renewable aviation industry, rather than just complaining that we should or shouldn't have it. There are people who make off climate change as a non-issue and there are others who drive up fear without making rational arguments or reasonable demands. You are neither of those and I like that.

    @kalebbruwer@kalebbruwer2 жыл бұрын
    • he doesn't factor in anything to do with how we incinerate spent and toxic fuels and oils that get used in the shipping industry. getting rid of the mass co2 to increase toxic dioxins and toxic vapours and fumes into the atmosphere is considered better, perhaps better but absolutely and certainly not clean.

      @Dockhead@Dockhead2 жыл бұрын
    • Real life is nuanced and gray. Children (and the internet) are all or nothing black and white.

      @oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin13682 жыл бұрын
    • True! Since you're talking about fear, here's a question: If you want lower carbon emission, what do you think about nuclear power? (Sorry in advance, a pet peeve of mine, still I'm interested in the response)

      @thibauthanson7670@thibauthanson76702 жыл бұрын
    • @@thibauthanson7670 It's practical for large installations, but it's too heavy for aviation, or ground-based transportation, but that shouldn't stop us from using it responsibly for what we can use it for. Full disclosure, Three Mile Island melted down on my birthday, only a few years after I moved away from the area. It released radioactive fallout into the atmosphere before the accident was even reported.

      @buddyclem7328@buddyclem73282 жыл бұрын
    • The anti aviation activists are just playing for the rich, if only they can air travel thats great for them.

      @werrkowalski2985@werrkowalski29852 жыл бұрын
  • Your videos are completely enlightening. Thanks for them. I will look at your application to which you refer.

    @indepviewpt@indepviewpt2 жыл бұрын
  • Thanks for sharing these video. I learned d a lot of things about the various types of fuels in 24 mins. The technical terms were a little too much for me but your detailed explanation made me understand the basics. I didn't even have to pay. Thanks buddy.

    @deebee1284@deebee12842 жыл бұрын
  • "hydrogen could be a future aviation fuel" Hindenburg 2: My time has come

    @ericdueck9405@ericdueck94052 жыл бұрын
    • It's not like jet fuel is much less flammable to be fair

      @TheDarkSide11891@TheDarkSide118912 жыл бұрын
    • @@TheDarkSide11891 It is SIGNIFICANTLY less flammable.

      @letsmakegadgets6899@letsmakegadgets68992 жыл бұрын
    • @@letsmakegadgets6899 I meant within the context of using it as a fuel. Unlike in the Hindenburg, an aircraft fuel tank isn't gonna be pumped up with enormous quantities of pure hydrogen. Of course pure hydrogen in high concentration is going to be much more flammable.

      @TheDarkSide11891@TheDarkSide118912 жыл бұрын
    • Hindenburg was a disaster in that it ended hydrogen airships. They make a huge amount of sense. Think about it, why are you happy to travel on a big bag of highly inflammable kerosene, or a big bag of hydrogen, much safer. Hydrogen lifts itself into the air, kerosene has to use lots of fuel to do so.

      @markthomasson5077@markthomasson50772 жыл бұрын
    • As someone that works with hydrogen, the Hindenburg's event was more to do with having flammable things entrapping hydrogen than hydrogen itself. Hydrogen is explosive with oxygen nearby, but due to how light it is, generally it'll escape right away. Hindenburg was designed to essentially trap the hydrogen and oxygen inside the balloon. And also the fabric was highly flammable to begin with. It also didn't help people were allowed to smoke near the hydrogen tanks also.

      @asifmsadik@asifmsadik2 жыл бұрын
  • I'm hearing pam oil and I'm thinking pam spray and then he goes and shows pictures of palm trees and oh that makes more sense. Accents are fascinating

    @reklessbravo2129@reklessbravo21292 жыл бұрын
    • The Irish have never liked ells.

      @RokeJulianLockhart.s13ouq@RokeJulianLockhart.s13ouq2 жыл бұрын
    • Reminds me of the formula one video where he had to say "cars" and "KERS". Yeah.

      @klobiforpresident2254@klobiforpresident22542 жыл бұрын
    • Lolol that's hilarious

      @zachariahstovall1744@zachariahstovall17442 жыл бұрын
    • Palm oil

      @bpcgos@bpcgos2 жыл бұрын
  • So, after going around with all these new technologies we finally arrived back to the simplest and the best solution for the future planes - currently used jet fuel from the crude oil.

    @justincase6744@justincase67442 жыл бұрын
    • Which won't last forever.

      @mdoerkse@mdoerkse2 жыл бұрын
    • The problem isn’t that it won’t last forever, the problem is the amount of environmental destruction it’s doing.

      @peteradaniel@peteradaniel2 жыл бұрын
    • @@mdoerkse there processes available now that we can make crude oil from algae which depending on the variety used can grow just about anywhere with some water be it sea water, fresh water, or. sewage waste water. process it using the fuel it makes or renewable energy and its carbon neutral and can make drop in fuels on demand.

      @arthurdurbin370@arthurdurbin3702 жыл бұрын
    • @@peteradaniel if we decarbonize every other parts of industry, the airplanes pollution will be something negligible for the planet. Even of its use tripple, it would still be a minor contribution. And current crude oil stock will last centuries

      @codeartha@codeartha2 жыл бұрын
    • @@codeartha it’s not even that. It’s the amount society decarbonises as well. If it’s affordable for oil companies to continue searching for crude oil fields the less importance it has in transportation across society. Also the cultural impact of individual decarbonisation will put immense financial pressure on those industries which still can’t, with governments to fines people’s environmental consciousness deciding to find alternative modes of transport. Edit: his 25% estimate at the beginning is important to how the aviation industry sells itself in the future.

      @peteradaniel@peteradaniel2 жыл бұрын
  • Very great and informative video. I learnt a lot and subscribed. I love the positive general demeanor.

    @RalfSiegesmund@RalfSiegesmund2 жыл бұрын
  • How did it take me this long to find this youtube channel??? Its so dope! Reminds me why I chose to major in engineering

    @louisfoley6955@louisfoley69552 жыл бұрын
    • We are in the end game of affordable oil Perhaps you can solve the problem No worries if you like walking

      @grahammewburn@grahammewburn2 жыл бұрын
    • Welcome to the club!

      @tintedmetal2107@tintedmetal21072 жыл бұрын
    • Welcome

      @miguelvids9531@miguelvids95312 жыл бұрын
    • Love his channel. Very clean explanations.

      @Magavynhigara@Magavynhigara2 жыл бұрын
    • Because You Tube recommendations are getting crappier everday.

      @chefnyc@chefnyc2 жыл бұрын
  • Check out the writing on the page titled 'Ethanol Properties' at 10:00: "Something weird is going on in this office. The clock is going out of control. People are acting weird, saying it feels like the room is spinning... I'm not sure what goes on here, but I don't like it."

    @ObfuscateEmail@ObfuscateEmail2 жыл бұрын
    • I see that. Like something out of a horror/mystery novel

      @GodwynDi@GodwynDi2 жыл бұрын
    • Maybe it's a reference to another use of ethanol - in the bar.

      @rwall514@rwall5142 жыл бұрын
  • Great video, thanks for posting. I should comment on the hydrogen element since I work in the field researching it, and there are a couple of points I might add. LH2 is volumetrically poor compared to the incumbent, no doubt about it. But what people often don't realise is the immense thermal opportunities it potentially offers, thermal management and advanced engine cycles in particular. Aircraft designs traditionally have been weight constrained, hence the emphasis on MTOW as a fundamental limitation, however with LH2, the challenge shifts as you've rightly identified to a volume constraint. That implies increased drag (larger fuselages to accommodate the fuel for example). What this means is that designs have to change in terms of priority, so blended wing designs, longer fuselages, and potentially drag reduction measures such as boundary layer ingestion become more interesting. Since weight isn't as concerning, engines can become more elaborate too, with the advantages gained being used to mitigate the drag impact.

    @onetrickhorse@onetrickhorse2 жыл бұрын
    • Or since oxygen is made with the hydrogen in electrolysis we could propel our planes using LH2/LOX rocket engines. A guy can dream can’t he?

      @MadMadCommando@MadMadCommando2 жыл бұрын
    • What about using Ammonia?

      @625shapiro@625shapiro2 жыл бұрын
    • @@625shapiro the main problem with ammonia is that it’s extremely poisonous. Also, it requires hydrogen to make so you might as well use hydrogen for as many applications as possible for energy efficiency.

      @MadMadCommando@MadMadCommando2 жыл бұрын
    • @@MadMadCommando Rockets are much, much less efficient than air breathing engines. Getting your oxygen for free from the atmosphere is just so much simpler and lighter than bringing your own LOX.

      2 жыл бұрын
    • @@MadMadCommando Amonia is easier to store than hydrogen. Though you mind want to use methane, not amonia or hydrogen anyway. That's what they want to use in rockets now at SpaceX for example.

      2 жыл бұрын
  • Oh my god the quality of your videos has gone up so much. My mind was blown during that chalkboard segment.

    @alio2269@alio22692 жыл бұрын
  • Love the "realistic" animations/renders!

    @kallee7284@kallee72842 жыл бұрын
    • Mustard channel

      @e.sstudios1015@e.sstudios10152 жыл бұрын
    • Mustard channel

      @leiivanjuarez5994@leiivanjuarez59942 жыл бұрын
    • Mustard channel

      @DeadDolphinMan@DeadDolphinMan2 жыл бұрын
    • Mustard channel

      @J4yT3a@J4yT3a2 жыл бұрын
    • Mustard channel

      @ipapify276@ipapify2762 жыл бұрын
  • "Something wierd is going on in this office. The clock is going out of control, people are acting wierdsaying it feel like the room is spinning .... I'm not sure what goes on here, but I don't like it" Am'i the only one worried by this note ? at 10:00

    @amnesio42@amnesio422 жыл бұрын
    • Woah, I didn't notice that in the first watch

      @isaackolman2861@isaackolman28612 жыл бұрын
    • Exactly! WTF is going on there? And where is it, I don't wanna job there.

      @Nerd_of_Anarchy@Nerd_of_Anarchy2 жыл бұрын
    • I think this is a joke related to "gas intoxication" where people get high on gasoline.

      @hugocorminboeuf8007@hugocorminboeuf80072 жыл бұрын
    • It must have taken weeks to create that scene anyway, even without editing it at the end, so to still find the time to add a few hidden messages; big up!

      @rjfaber1991@rjfaber19912 жыл бұрын
    • He is talking about ethanol. The joke is they are drunk

      @yiming624@yiming6242 жыл бұрын
  • I'm looking forward to the blended wing episode!

    @tec4303@tec43032 жыл бұрын
  • I'm always amazed at your skill to not talk about nuclear at all

    @NobleMarcos@NobleMarcos2 жыл бұрын
  • "The United States doesn't need to worry about low temperatures." Texas: 🥶

    @Ikbeneengeit@Ikbeneengeit2 жыл бұрын
    • As someone who lived through the snowpocalypse.......yes.

      @RealEngineering@RealEngineering2 жыл бұрын
    • On the flip-side…. Washington & Oregon June 2021: 🥵 Where I live in British Columbia, Canada, 115F is hellish.

      @CarFreeSegnitz@CarFreeSegnitz2 жыл бұрын
    • @@RealEngineering No way you live in the freedom state. I thought you were Irish.

      @kadenengland45yearsago9@kadenengland45yearsago92 жыл бұрын
    • Yeah and all them wind farms that froze over too, didn't that leave people without power?

      @highlanderjeff2720@highlanderjeff27202 жыл бұрын
    • I’m still waiting for the peer reviewed study that show’s human carbon production has any affect on mean Climate. Which has been cooling and warming at different rates for billions of years. Did you know that the amount of Carbon from one Volcanic eruption = the human production of Carbon for over a decade? It’s called thinking people. Use your thinker and stop being told what to think!

      @101SassyJ@101SassyJ2 жыл бұрын
  • “Repeated pressure cycles can lead to rapid failure“ veery nicely said!

    @homericstate216@homericstate2162 жыл бұрын
    • Yeah flying pressurised hidrogen What could go wrong?

      @entropicprinciple9276@entropicprinciple92762 жыл бұрын
    • @@entropicprinciple9276 i think he is referring to something else. lol

      @lesonen1@lesonen12 жыл бұрын
    • He could just say fatigue :)

      @ukaszRadomski@ukaszRadomski2 жыл бұрын
    • @@entropicprinciple9276 Hans looks like he's sweating...

      @sethjansson5652@sethjansson56522 жыл бұрын
    • Are you referring to Elon Musk’s “rapid unplanned disassembly” or to sex?

      @andreirachko@andreirachko2 жыл бұрын
  • This information helped me to appreciate my Dad a bit more. He used to be a Senior Aeronautical Engineer and designed every jet cockpit and fuselage made for the Air Force from 1954-1972. I never thought about just what the fuselage did. I thought it just held the gasoline but this showed it does a lot more. Thank you.

    @lorim8070@lorim8070 Жыл бұрын
  • Would be great with a detailed video on biofuels and biodiesels. I know there is FAME, HVO, but its hard to get a sense of the differences between them all and would appreciate to get your view on these including their full life cycle impact.

    @Sussurrus@Sussurrus2 жыл бұрын
    • Real Engineering already did a lazy, kindergarten level analysis on biofuels. He has no understanding of the industry or the biofuel alternatives.

      @ForzaJersey@ForzaJersey2 жыл бұрын
  • going from 2% to 25% sounds really scary, but if the total amount goes down, obviously the ratio will shift significantly. What's the estimation of actual output in 2050, instead of ratio?

    @SoftTofu123@SoftTofu1232 жыл бұрын
    • Triple, though that was pre-COVID. Who knows now. 2% underplays its impact though. Due to altitude, its impact on warming is 2-3 times more than the raw emissions. It's on a completely unsustainable trajectory, and ignoring it because it's not too big today will just land us in the same problem that ignoring global warming for the past 50 years has - it gets much harder to change an industry the bigger it is, and the less time you have to do it. Better to slowly shift aviation starting yesterday than wait for it to be huge problem before acting.

      @Yaotzin86@Yaotzin862 жыл бұрын
    • @@Yaotzin86 triple also assumes the pilot shortage gets reversed big time!

      @Allan_son@Allan_son2 жыл бұрын
  • Clearly, nuclear powered planes are the answer! How could you have missed this, it's got incredible energy density and volume. Oh wait.

    @Charlie-js8rj@Charlie-js8rj2 жыл бұрын
    • Turns out that's a biological issue more than an engineering one. Humans just need to learn how to not be such wimps about radiation.

      @whatelseison8970@whatelseison89702 жыл бұрын
    • Imagine all the nuke fly all over US

      @mchmchminecraft1637@mchmchminecraft16372 жыл бұрын
    • @@whatelseison8970 well there’s also a problem if one ever gets hijacked o.O

      @willmungas8964@willmungas89642 жыл бұрын
    • @@whatelseison8970 yeah people are making things difficult for us engineers. Given that only 11% of people in the world use air travel, them getting infertile would only help control the world population. But we need not be sad about the deaths of mutated babies because an increase in mutation at birth may someday give us a super-powered human species capable of withstanding nuclear radiation !!!

      @mindprobe3587@mindprobe35872 жыл бұрын
    • Actually, land-based nuclear power plans could provide the kind of power needed to make those fuels clean, and the fuel industry could serve as balancing for the difference in demand for every hour of the day (google "duck curve" for energy production and energy consumption curves and when they overlay). In other words, while the humans need power, they use it, when the humans don't need power, it's used to create fuel, so the nuclear reactor can be kept running at optimal settings.

      @SapioiT@SapioiT2 жыл бұрын
  • Nice overview here over the available alternatives in the future. And I think your conclusion is pretty much spot on. Just one minor detail that is misleading is your cost calculation for the biofuel. You compare the cost of a total switch to the airlines revenue and not their current operating cost. So it is impossible to tell how much the actual increase in costs for the airline is (and how much ticket prices would need to rise to cover that increase costs).

    @dadriel@dadriel2 жыл бұрын
  • This is an extreme technicality nit-pick, but the goal of jet fuel is not to "raise the temperature to raise the pressure". This is because as you know, the Brayton cycle operates with isobaric combustion.

    @JaySmith91@JaySmith912 жыл бұрын
    • So you have to understand that during the design phase of an engine, the jet fuel selected raises the isobaric pressure in the combustion chamber to a value that depends on the choice of fuel. Some type of fuel will give you a lower isobaric pressure and others will give you a higher value. But once the engine is designed and ready for flight, that fuel consideration has been settled.

      @satmohabir7175@satmohabir71752 жыл бұрын
    • @@satmohabir7175 Why do people feel the need to invent nonsense about things they have zero knowledge about? Not a single statement in this comment is correct. Combustion pressure in jets is determined by the compressor and the turbine alone. The type of fuel has no effect on this, just on how much fuel is needed to get to the desired temperature. Pressure does not increase as fuel is burned in a jet engine. It actually decrease slightly through the combustor (by 3-4%). I'm an aerospace engineer and was the TA in jet propulsion class in grad school, but if you want to check that for yourself any book on gas turbines will tell you the same.

      @ASJC27@ASJC272 жыл бұрын
  • "The plane industry is on a brink of a crisis" *again*

    @TheLastCrankers@TheLastCrankers2 жыл бұрын
    • My thoughts exactly. There's always a crisis in aviation.

      @SocratesAth@SocratesAth2 жыл бұрын
    • Has there every been a time when an aviation crisis wasn't looming?

      @danyala.1659@danyala.16592 жыл бұрын
    • @@danyala.1659 well to be fair, aviation was never a great long-term idea. Planes either use too much fuel, emit too much pollution, uses too much materials to produce, and other such stuff.

      @lardlover3730@lardlover37302 жыл бұрын
    • They deserve it.

      @levyroth@levyroth2 жыл бұрын
    • Taxpayers should bail them out

      @ChicanoOne760@ChicanoOne7602 жыл бұрын
  • "Something weird is going on in this office. The clock is going out of control. People are acting weird, saying the room feels like it's spinning... I'm not sure what goes on here, but I don't like it."

    @NakedAnt@NakedAnt2 жыл бұрын
    • Sounds like a document I would find in my Control videogame.

      @Dryloch@Dryloch2 жыл бұрын
  • As a former Aerospace engineer, this is a surprisingly good video. It reminds me of my chemistry professor in the 1970's telling us that "We are dam fools for burning such a valuable non-renewable resource like oil and it should be reserved for aviation and feedstocks". We now have viable BEV's for much of ground transportation so should heed his words.

    @brucec954@brucec95411 ай бұрын
  • Great video, would be interested to hear your take on algae as a biofuel feedstock. Obviously doesn't solve all of the problems with biofuels but seems like a really promising solution to the feedstock problem.

    @evil0sheep@evil0sheep2 жыл бұрын
  • "Converted to run on bioethanol" --> remembers last video mentioning the production of bioethanol to be an energy negative process

    @muizzy@muizzy2 жыл бұрын
    • _from corn_ is the core part of that

      @666Tomato666@666Tomato6662 жыл бұрын
    • This video did a bad job of clarifying or explaining.

      @TheReaper569@TheReaper5692 жыл бұрын
    • But unlike cars or electricity as a whole, aviation can’t truly go carbon neutral unless some major leaps in battery or hydrogen fuel tech are made. So bio-ethanol isn’t _as bad_ of an idea

      @alexsiemers7898@alexsiemers78982 жыл бұрын
    • Sure, but that just means you have to view it as an energy storage technology, rather than an energy production one. The energy density of hydrocarbon fuels might still make it the best solution (or least-bad one) for aviation.

      @TJStellmach@TJStellmach2 жыл бұрын
    • THANK YOU

      @braj6385@braj63852 жыл бұрын
  • One thing I've heard about is mixing hydrogen with Ammonia - would love to see more about that on this channel.

    @adamlytle2615@adamlytle26152 жыл бұрын
    • I think the only thing you would get is NH5 wich is unstable and would go back to just beeing NH3 and H2

      @curium9622@curium96222 жыл бұрын
    • @@curium9622 eh, I'm no chemist so I dunno. But give it a google. There are companies, including Japan's TDK, persuing this right now. So I think there's probably something there.

      @adamlytle2615@adamlytle26152 жыл бұрын
    • @@adamlytle2615 i think its about using the hydrogen from the amonia instead of generating it by electolysis

      @curium9622@curium96222 жыл бұрын
    • @@curium9622 well, ammonia is already produced by combining hydrogen and nitrogen. The feedstock hydrogen still needs to be from renewable energy powered hydrolysis for it to matter. Anyway, in the aviation context, I think the idea is that they can modify existing jet engine designs to use ammonia as fuel, or even ammonia somehow blended with additional hydrogen and it wouldn't have carbon emissions. www.popularmechanics.com/flight/airlines/a33768744/ammonia-as-jet-fuel/

      @adamlytle2615@adamlytle26152 жыл бұрын
    • @@adamlytle2615 Wärtsilä is testing ammonia as marine fuel. www.wartsila.com/media/news/30-06-2020-world-s-first-full-scale-ammonia-engine-test---an-important-step-towards-carbon-free-shipping-2737809

      @iippo86@iippo862 жыл бұрын
  • I appreciat that "bars" is being used for pressure in this video instead of those confusing units like pascal or psi

    @JuliusUnique@JuliusUnique2 жыл бұрын
  • 3:45. Longer chain hydrocarbons have higher boiling points, not lower. Thats what causes them to liquefy sooner. A lower boiling point would mean they stay gaseous for longer as the temp cools down.

    @Jay-nk6dm@Jay-nk6dm2 жыл бұрын
  • Many of the images shown when discussing hydrogen, are actually liquid oxygen carts and tanks.

    @stuyfly@stuyfly2 жыл бұрын
    • Luckily, the gas was leaking absolutely everywhere.

      @Merthalophor@Merthalophor2 жыл бұрын
    • I doubt he could had found better footage, and well liquid oxygen does behave somewhat similarly.

      @ignasanchezl@ignasanchezl2 жыл бұрын
    • Came here to say that 👍

      @branaden@branaden2 жыл бұрын
    • Great eye!

      @oadka@oadka2 жыл бұрын
  • Can we just give thanks there's no background music, so if some impatient person were to listen at 2x it didn't sound like a tweakers house party

    @juddotto3660@juddotto36602 жыл бұрын
    • But their literally is background music. I agree that their should be no background music.

      @davidwarford3087@davidwarford30872 жыл бұрын
    • @@davidwarford3087 its quiet

      @sugaristhenewwhite@sugaristhenewwhite2 жыл бұрын
    • The music is quiet enough that listening at 2x speed is very pog (personal experience)

      @Gaaaaaame@Gaaaaaame2 жыл бұрын
    • it was so inoffensive I didn't even notice Thank you editors :D

      @NorroTaku@NorroTaku2 жыл бұрын
    • later ur a heretic. Only 1.5x, pathetic

      @Gaaaaaame@Gaaaaaame2 жыл бұрын
  • Brilliant videos as always. If I may just suggest one writing tip: When you have to repeat something, like 25%, next time you can use 1/4, unless you where trying to hammer in the number for a reason, in which case, good work.

    @perafilozof@perafilozof2 жыл бұрын
  • Just Have to Say ( Outstnding ) how good is to live in this time, Great Job .

    @MrTupi1000@MrTupi10002 жыл бұрын
  • “Wake up babe, Real Engineering just uploaded”

    @FreddLe@FreddLe2 жыл бұрын
    • There is no babe, is there? 🧐

      @dannycv82@dannycv822 жыл бұрын
    • Do you wake her up with a foot pump or do you still blow with your mouth?

      @TanksInSpace_@TanksInSpace_2 жыл бұрын
    • @@dannycv82 He's talking to the Tesla

      @AbdulGoodLooks@AbdulGoodLooks2 жыл бұрын
  • Just a quick question is the 25% of carbon emissions a result of an increase of usage, or the decrease of other sources of carbon emissions?

    @zachmali4071@zachmali40712 жыл бұрын
    • Both

      @seanhubbard6033@seanhubbard60332 жыл бұрын
    • It is predominately the result of playing statistical percentage games for the sake of false virtue. There will never be ZERO emissions, not as long as humans inhabit the planet. This video is the type of nonsense that got us to where we are today. There is nothing wrong with planes using Jet A or ships using fuel oil. The biggest problems are automobiles and power generation. You can't make anything without electrical power, including all the shit they claim represents renewable energy.

      @theprofessorfate6184@theprofessorfate61842 жыл бұрын
    • Mostly a decrease of everything else. All other sectors have some clear ways of reducing or even completely eliminating their emissions, aviation does not.

      @hammerth1421@hammerth14212 жыл бұрын
    • @@theprofessorfate6184 If you have a problem with automobiles, stop being a hypocrite and stop driving. Fossil Fuels are uniquely beneficial to human life and flourishing, which is more important than some random species bugs getting replaced by others.

      @sebucwerd@sebucwerd2 жыл бұрын
    • Humans have been emitting carbon since we discovered fire. The goal is to reduce carbon emissions to a level the earth can reasonably manage without drastic changes to the climate. As such, throwing around percentages is not helpful. Aggregate numbers are what we need to track. If aviation makes up 25% of emissions, but emissions are 80% reduced overall, that’s a big win. Most energy usage by humanity can be decarbonized, some niche uses cases can’t. We need to understand if aviation can be one of those exceptions.

      @SpencerCallaghan@SpencerCallaghan2 жыл бұрын
  • Nebula and Curiosity stream is serious value. $15 for a year. Thanks Brian, some great stuff on there.

    @BobJones20001@BobJones200012 жыл бұрын
  • 10:04 - “Something weird is going on in this office. The clock is going out of control. People are acting weird, saying it feels like the room is spinning… I’m not sure what is goes on here, but I don’t like it.” Nice touch, Brian!

    @mr88cet@mr88cet2 жыл бұрын
  • This video went up 7 hours ago... 1.2k comments. I hardly ever seen so many comments in such a short time. This just shows how well the topic is being chosen. Amazing video... Again. Thanks

    @bulasev@bulasev2 жыл бұрын
    • Why 1K comments in 7 hour makes any sense? Whoever is able to consume it entirely? Or at least to absorb overall mood of the discussion? Why there is not a vote meaning particular post is a Duplicate, and later duplicates can be hidden or better, users with duplicates that are able to write but cannot read, be penalted somehow so users will be aware not to flood media with posts far far less information density than hydrogen on 100 celsius?

      @siloton@siloton2 жыл бұрын
  • 3:50 The longer chain hydrocarbons are distilled on the lower stage due to their higher boiling point, not lower..

    @lightnlies@lightnlies2 жыл бұрын
    • Thanks for this. Comprehending that part, the logic made no sense.

      @VanerTheogus@VanerTheogus2 жыл бұрын
    • He obviously meant to say some variant of "lower condensation point". It threw me too though, for a moment.

      @jasonwalker9471@jasonwalker94712 жыл бұрын
    • Yeah, I had to pause the video and think hard to make sure I wasn't having a brain fault, which I would have been more likely than Sam making a mistake.

      @falconne@falconne2 жыл бұрын
  • Just thinking out loud: If the on-going installation of wind and solar farms eventually results in significant over-supply of electricity, will there not be a way of using the surplus energy to turn plastic waste into fuel?

    @SpiritmanProductions@SpiritmanProductions2 жыл бұрын
    • You can turn CO2 and water into fuel, if you have energy to spare. You can also just sequester CO2 from the atmosphere and put the carbon in the ground somewhere. It's not worth it at the moment, energy is too expensive.

      2 жыл бұрын
    • @ Was meinst Du, wie die Länder, die in der Höhe Getreide anwachsen müssen, vom reduzierten cozwei Gehalt der Luft sehr leiden werden. Beispiel hier in Bolivien, wo die arme Bevölkerung auf den Altiplano leben muss, wegen geringer werdenden Lebensraum pro Bevölkerung. Gerade werden die Lebensmittel mit Lastwagen nach LaPaz und Umgebung eingeführt. Die Treibstoffkosten haben sich kürzlich fast verdoppelt, so dass eine lokale Lebens- mittelproduktion nun hier nötig wird. Dazu is die Menge vom Kohlendioxyd in der Luft zu wenig, weil sie ja mit der Luftdichte in der Höhe abnimmt, nicht die Konzentration(~0.04%), wohl verstanden. Sondern die Menge per cm³, die wesentlich ist für die Photosynthese! Was meinst Du ,bestimmt die Waldgrenze? Regen, nein, Temperatur, auch nicht, co2 absolute Menge ja! Co2 der Luft zu entnehmen ist das Schlimmste, dass die uns antun können, denk doch nach. Sequester Co2 is not just stupid but a crime towards the growing poor population living here, who cannot afford to pay for the growing fuel costs. A certain consequence of fossile fuel reduction.

      @arturoeugster2377@arturoeugster23772 жыл бұрын
    • Besides co2 dissolved in deeper seawater is converted into hydromethane ice by bacteria in huge amounts along the coasts.

      @arturoeugster2377@arturoeugster23772 жыл бұрын
    • Depends on logistics. If the power plant is located near a city. Alot are in remote areas.

      @silo3com@silo3com2 жыл бұрын
    • there are many companies who have or are in the process of turning trash into cleaner versions of gasoline and jet fuel. i was just watching a video on it actually. look up trash gasification and see what comes up for you

      @alexandriaj.1578@alexandriaj.1578 Жыл бұрын
  • Concrete, beef, and stainless steel have much larger impacts than aviation. Having said that, it's obviously a great idea to minimise the industry's environmental woes.

    @erythuria@erythuria2 жыл бұрын
    • Grass fed regenerative grazing for beef is carbon neutral.

      @RayleighCriterion@RayleighCriterion2 жыл бұрын
    • @@RayleighCriterion what percentage of beef farming does that represent?

      @erythuria@erythuria2 жыл бұрын
    • @@erythuria Currently very, very small, no doubt.

      @syncmonism@syncmonism Жыл бұрын
  • Wait, this isn't Wendover?? Thought it would've been because of the planes hha

    @ZalyQQ@ZalyQQ2 жыл бұрын
    • Wendover peaks around the corner.... "Real Engineering, why didn't you call me?"

      @gryph01@gryph012 жыл бұрын
  • 2:48 no matter how correct the terminology may be, i don’t like the idea of calling frozen jet fuel “wax”

    @alexsiemers7898@alexsiemers78982 жыл бұрын
    • Wax is just a solid fuel.

      @confusedwhale@confusedwhale2 жыл бұрын
    • that thought just makes me feel queasy

      @dino4812@dino48122 жыл бұрын
    • So? Just because you don’t like it isn’t enough to change the terminology.

      @smallstudiodesign@smallstudiodesign2 жыл бұрын
    • I'd be pretty uneasy if solids were forming in my fuel tanks at altitude!

      @buddyclem7328@buddyclem73282 жыл бұрын
    • Candle wax is a solid fuel as well.

      @Doombacon@Doombacon2 жыл бұрын
  • Your videos are just gold

    @odd_shoe@odd_shoe2 жыл бұрын
  • Brian, have you looked into superconductor applications in electrical propulsion aircraft? It definitely has some hurdles to get over, but looks promising

    @gotpuntedagain@gotpuntedagain2 жыл бұрын
  • I love how scrupulously you alluded the challenges with different fuels, like the splitting of water molecule wherein researchers are trying to figure out ways to incorporate solar energy and replicate photosynthesis, among others. So every consumer should take the responsibility of what they are giving off because engineers are in need of cooperation.

    @kewalvats2651@kewalvats26512 жыл бұрын
    • Or where does the energy required come from

      @entropicprinciple9276@entropicprinciple92762 жыл бұрын
    • Id assume if he went into detail about every study beeing conducted about every fuel type discussed we would be sitting here for a few days

      @sadomor6179@sadomor61792 жыл бұрын
  • You seem to really like talking about biofuels and seem to take issue with how the feed stock is created. How about a video on vertical farming or hydroponics/aeroponics to explore those as alternatives for feed stock?

    @TECHN01200@TECHN012002 жыл бұрын
    • both of those are way, way more resource intensive

      @elibullockpapa9012@elibullockpapa90122 жыл бұрын
    • That could be a solution but it comes down to the fact that we are literally burning our food supply in a future where food stability is not guaranteed. I don't think biofuels are the answer

      @boo3427@boo34272 жыл бұрын
    • @@boo3427 That not entirely true. Biofuels can be made out of wasted and unused waste like corn stocks weeds, the grass you cut, and cow shit.

      @jeffhurtson5211@jeffhurtson52112 жыл бұрын
    • Completely infeasible without fusion power. Even then you have to find a way to deal with all the heat, which is a huge problem in urbanized areas already.

      @HYDRAdude@HYDRAdude2 жыл бұрын
    • Producing complex e-fuels is *incredibly* efficient compared to this idea. And producing complex e-fuels is incredibly inefficient!

      @Yaotzin86@Yaotzin862 жыл бұрын
  • Great content keep it up

    @adamantarantar9204@adamantarantar92042 жыл бұрын
  • thank you for the information

    @user-iw6ug9uv2y@user-iw6ug9uv2y2 жыл бұрын
  • can we get a video on the YF-23

    @OmDahake@OmDahake2 жыл бұрын
    • That would actually be so good. YF-23 was legendary

      @kyleknepper4016@kyleknepper40162 жыл бұрын
    • Yf23 with thrust vectoring

      @shinchan-F-urmom@shinchan-F-urmom2 жыл бұрын
    • @@shinchan-F-urmom but would it need thrust vectoring at all? It was nearly as maneuverable as the f22, and adding thrust vectoring couldve changed its weight and flight characteristics in a negative manner.

      @user-lq2nu6cn7y@user-lq2nu6cn7y2 жыл бұрын
    • Oh yeah please!!!

      @SniperSnake50BMG@SniperSnake50BMG2 жыл бұрын
  • Ooh yes I would love to see a video on the blended wing aircraft design!

    @LettuCe_0199@LettuCe_01992 жыл бұрын
  • I was involved in the testing of 50% Biofuels in F-22's. It works, but it is expensive (and it smells bad). One other thing to consider is that to replace all of the power from Automotive/Truck Engines by 2050 with electricity we need to be adding 1 GW of Carbon Free power every 6 days!! Maybe we should bump that up to every 5 days to account for air travel?

    @thomasmiller2016@thomasmiller20162 жыл бұрын
    • Roger Pelke published an article back in Sept/2019 that showed for the world to reach net-zero CO2 emissions by 2050 would require 3 nuclear power plants being brought online every 2 days. That would be starting the day after the article was published until 2050. Along with that, fossil fuelled power plants would have to be decommissioned at roughly the same pace. Or 1500 wind turbines every day until 2050. It’s interesting to see China leads the world by a substantial amount when it comes to renewable energy but on the other hand they also burn more coal than the rest of the world combined and will do so for quite some time.

      @mako88sb@mako88sb2 жыл бұрын
  • Thanks for the excellent review of insurmountable challanges of cryogenic hydrogen tanks in aircraft.

    @voster77hh@voster77hh Жыл бұрын
  • Real Engineering: "Yeah this fuel is great because energy density, flashpoint, freezepoint-" Me: "Oh cool. Then why haven't we-" Real Engineering: "*Buuuuut it destroys the space-time continuum when breathed on, making it unsuitable for jet fuel.*" Me: "...Oh."

    @Cris-xy2gi@Cris-xy2gi2 жыл бұрын
    • Pretty sure "but" is my most used word on this channel

      @RealEngineering@RealEngineering2 жыл бұрын
    • Relatable

      @sonubhadana4501@sonubhadana45012 жыл бұрын
    • @@RealEngineering heard 'but' more times than people searching for it in porn websites

      @moeron9172@moeron91722 жыл бұрын
  • All I got from this is we are staying on kerosene for a very, very long time.

    @rxhawk75@rxhawk752 жыл бұрын
    • For the big airlines sure. Wendover did a video on how electric planes can work (kzhead.info/sun/lKxtkpereKVjn3A/bejne.html) in a way that as someone who lives in the UK never crossed my mind before. That airlines in large countries use very small aircraft to cover routes of just a couple of hundred miles or less. Not something we use in the UK but for the US, Canada, Australia etc is clearly more prevalent. Sure it looks like only a small change but I bet the environmental benefit is larger than you first think.

      @Ushio01@Ushio012 жыл бұрын
  • Metal hydrides could greatly increase the volumetric energy density of hydrogen and increase safety but there might be issues with releasing the hydrogen from its bond fast enough to keep up with the engines in traditional combustion turbojets.

    @ntorix599@ntorix5999 ай бұрын
  • @RealEngineering, please make a detailed video on "The Bouchain Power plant" - world’s most efficient combined-cycle power plant located in Bouchain, France. Also make a video on Thermal Power plants and how to increase their efficiency.

    @prathameshnavghare6682@prathameshnavghare66822 жыл бұрын
  • Perhaps we should bring back long distance passenger train travel.

    @heronimousbrapson863@heronimousbrapson8632 жыл бұрын
    • We should be yes, very under utilized, particularly in US.

      @RealEngineering@RealEngineering2 жыл бұрын
    • without government control Amtrak

      @cornbreadfedkirkpatrick9647@cornbreadfedkirkpatrick96472 жыл бұрын
    • Bring a universal carbon tax and this will happen automatically

      @Ikbeneengeit@Ikbeneengeit2 жыл бұрын
    • Hyperloop

      @rishavmanmohan@rishavmanmohan2 жыл бұрын
    • Build High Speed Rail!

      @user-de4cq6uk6l@user-de4cq6uk6l2 жыл бұрын
  • Thanks for pointing out that palm oil is a direct result of deforestation. I feel like nobody knows this, and it's in almost all of the food you buy in the supermarket if you look at the labels. I even remember seeing it in all of the "natural earth friendly" soaps at the coop 10 years ago. It should be avoided like the plague but I know that won't happen because people will always buy what is cheapest and palm oil is the cheapest. Similarly how almost everything you buy these days is made in China and they have the worst polluting factories with no environmental regulations. And yet people can't stop buying stuff from them because it's so cheap!

    @El_Chompo@El_Chompo2 жыл бұрын
    • Its absolutely infuriating! You would think that some of these companies would pay attention to the bottom line of where these things are coming from. So many cases of alternative energy that ends up being less carbon neutral than other energy sources... I often bring up China's pollution as a reason to purchase American or European products wherever possible, regardless of political motives, its imperative that we start purchasing local products.

      @gunshipproduct2@gunshipproduct22 жыл бұрын
    • IT is always like this to the point that most people can't even see it happening. 90% of all North American indigenous forests have been removed due to man and "zombie" like green areas have popped up in their place. We cut the largest trees ever known to man to build LA. These green areas that are logged and disturbed never look like or act like indigenous forests ever again missing many important species needed. My grandpa told stories of squirrels climbing from Cincinnati to Apalachicola on the tops of chestnut and ash trees and never touching the ground, now there are zero chestnut and ash trees. We clear cut all the forests down to dead dirt because it's much cheaper to build on empty ground than to integrate homes into wooded areas. But no it's ok these worry about 2-3% of all carbon burnt. What are we even trying to protect?

      @Nathan-gj8ch@Nathan-gj8ch2 жыл бұрын
    • You've got to be careful though! It's not all about the type of oil, it's where and how it's grown. If we ditch palm but do nothing to address the economics of deforestation in poorer countries it'll just make the issue worse as even more forest will be cut down to compensate for lower yields.

      @madattaktube@madattaktube2 жыл бұрын
    • It's probably the least worst of the alternatives at the moment. Coconut oil has a lower yield, there isn't enough supply of cocoa or shea butter, and butter or lard is a problem for vegans. That said, it's probably best it's used only where it's needed, mainly as a saturated fat in foods.

      @Croz89@Croz892 жыл бұрын
    • Developed nations should be sanctioning CCP due to the genocide treaties we've signed anyway, its disgusting that our governments don't have more pride

      @originalketchup7498@originalketchup74982 жыл бұрын
  • At 39,000 feet [11,900 metres] the temperature can range from range from -46° to -62° C There are other considerations such as the temperature at ground level Also the measurement methodology TAT: Total Air temperature is the actual temperature the aircraft is experiencing, due to the friction of the air. SAT: Static Air Temperature is the OAT (Outside Air Temperature) in static conditions. As a former Air-force pilot it is correct that the Military have different requirements to commercial aircraft, because of the type of aircraft, area of operations and altitude the aircraft is normally operating at. There are many hazards in handling any flammable liquid- Static Electricity is of particular danger, more so aboard Aircraft Carriers.

    @andrew_koala2974@andrew_koala29742 жыл бұрын
  • There are yeast bacterias that produces oil with fermentation, there are few companies that make cooking oil with fermentation. However we don't know how it will scale up, to produce 50 billion liters that is used in aviation on annual basis or where would we find the needed sugars to feed the yeast.

    @ristekostadinov2820@ristekostadinov28209 ай бұрын
  • "... many of them are being converted to run on bio-ethanol." Stated in context like it's a good thing after just making another video about Biofuels and their dangers.

    @Drebin2293@Drebin22932 жыл бұрын
    • u should differentiate between corn and sugarcane ethanol

      @andrejvasko9474@andrejvasko94742 жыл бұрын
    • There are also waste generated biofuels

      @jeevesy36@jeevesy362 жыл бұрын
    • In that video, I believe that a jet fuel replacement was mentioned as one of the few legitimate uses for biofuels.

      @MathematicsStudent@MathematicsStudent2 жыл бұрын
    • I'm guessing you stopped the video in a rage and didn't watch the rest, because it was addressed...

      @bimblinghill@bimblinghill2 жыл бұрын
    • @@bimblinghill Rage? No. Though when he said that line I'll admit I lost all interest, left a comment, and moved onto something else.

      @Drebin2293@Drebin22932 жыл бұрын
  • I wish the room would stop spinning.

    @natoraishido@natoraishido2 жыл бұрын
  • Bro just wanted to say you make some dope ass content 👊

    @alimeharaz3674@alimeharaz36742 жыл бұрын
  • Very helpful! Thanks.

    @generaldvw@generaldvw2 жыл бұрын
  • The volumetric density of information in this video is awesome!

    @thanegrooms@thanegrooms2 жыл бұрын
    • Higher than hydrogen :)

      @rbxless@rbxless2 жыл бұрын
  • Aerospace engineer here. This is a very balanced video. Thank you!

    @blameyourself4489@blameyourself44892 жыл бұрын
  • I wonder, could you use the heat byproduct of the engines to keep the fuel at a steady temperature? Maybe not water but some coolant that runs through the engine, with a heat exchangers near the fuel tanks and along fuel lines?

    @ripliner3964@ripliner39642 жыл бұрын
  • How do you see this combining with fuel shortages to come?

    @desironloic9721@desironloic97212 жыл бұрын
    • Ahh, there is someone else out there that gets it.

      @crimmeyd00d47@crimmeyd00d472 жыл бұрын
  • Trains could make a comeback. Especially high-speed ones.

    @medviation@medviation2 жыл бұрын
    • But what about international travel?

      @strikereureka5081@strikereureka50812 жыл бұрын
    • @@strikereureka5081 Time to bring back the ocean liners xd.

      @aristotelisentertainment279@aristotelisentertainment2792 жыл бұрын
    • @@aristotelisentertainment279 WAY too long

      @comment6864@comment68642 жыл бұрын
  • This stuff is still very interesting even though i'm not an engineer 😅

    @Duvstep910@Duvstep9102 жыл бұрын
    • People think engineering is boring, but our whole world is engineered. Think of all the engineers who needed to work for years to design each item in your house. Materials have to be specifically manufactured to purpose, then other engineers and designers use those materials to build things like microchips, batteries, etc that still OTHER engineers put into their products to sell to you. It makes you wonder how many people were at least indirectly involved in the design of things like a smartphone. All the little design features that had to be discovered over the past few centuries... from how electricity works, digital logic, the transistor, batteries and chemical properties of lithium, light emitting diodes, plastics, tempered/doped glass... hell even the aluminum in the frame wasn't discovered until 1825, and wasn't widely used until after the Hall-Héroult process was invented in 1886. The process of invention required for the things we take for granted today is... almost fractal in nature.

      @Falcrist@Falcrist2 жыл бұрын
    • @@Falcrist what’s worrying is the number of people that prefer to follow the Kardashians or love island out number people that have an interest in educational content. Social influencers will inherit the earth.

      @Zen_Power@Zen_Power2 жыл бұрын
  • Video production is out of this world 😍

    @harismalik8902@harismalik89022 жыл бұрын
  • High flash point, low vapor pressure, also with lower melting/freezing point on the same time ~= wider temperature range for liquid, hydrocarbon molecules with more branching structure or need to insert polar functional groups (e.g. amine, amide, alcohol, ether, ester ...) to the hydrocarbon backbone.

    @nzcym@nzcym2 жыл бұрын
  • 10:09 despite the freezing problem biodiesel could be used for a plane with diesel turbofan engine or boxer

    @luichinplaystation610@luichinplaystation6102 жыл бұрын
  • There is a certain amount of carbon that the worlds ecosystem can naturally absorb without adding to climate change right? If the other industries cut back we may get to a point where the air industry can continue to use fossil fuels for awhile because it’s all offset by nature?

    @fensoxx@fensoxx2 жыл бұрын
    • Theoretically anything added has some effect. Anything added will need to be offset elsewhere. It's possible the effects will become negligible at some level, but with how bad we already are, we need to hit net negative, not let planes do it because it's not that much.

      @kindlin@kindlin2 жыл бұрын
    • Thank you! Also funnily enough if we get global warming under control after some time we will HAVE TO burn carbon to prevent the earth from freezing or atmospheric oxygen levels to get too high and make fires more frequent!( Like in the carboniferous era I think oxygen was like 30 percent)

      @entropicprinciple9276@entropicprinciple92762 жыл бұрын
    • @@entropicprinciple9276 Not really. We just need to let nature do it's thing, and let forest fires burn themselves out.

      @Kyle-gw6qp@Kyle-gw6qp2 жыл бұрын
    • Cilmate is always changing even you put zero carbon in the atmosphere

      @donaldhysa4836@donaldhysa48362 жыл бұрын
    • @@Kyle-gw6qp Of course! Who doesn't like spontaneous catastrophic almost inextinguishable fires?

      @entropicprinciple9276@entropicprinciple92762 жыл бұрын
  • Good luck on containing cryo hydrogen though. It can and will leak out of any seal imperfections. Looking at a seal wrong will cause hydrogen to pour out

    @AbuctingTacos@AbuctingTacos2 жыл бұрын
  • Love the pen notes next to the "research papers" in the video. "Something weird going on here...

    @facundomasari7090@facundomasari70902 жыл бұрын
KZhead