“Hydrocarbon fuel usage should be minimized”
why?
Because Swift’s “modest proposal” needs some tweaking.
Hydrocarbons are to valuable to burn once to the sky that’s why.
Are you a geologist a petroleum one at that? I am two decades of experience in petro engineering and geo.
Hydrocarbons are the basis for , medications ,lubricants, polymers, every petrochemical too. We will need those forever we do not need to burn fuel to the sky humans have other tech that can do the same job.
Aircraft need high density energy. Liquids do that job well but humans have since the 1940s the tech to synthesize liquid aircraft fuels from virtually any carbon containing material or even extract carbon as CO2 from seawater (US Navy did this in 2006) or the air for the carbon molecule water is the hydrogen source.
Even aircraft can be electrified for regional distances. Seattle has electric seaplanes flying today. Uber Elevate is flying airtaxi in Dubai that are electric too.
Solid state aluminum cells the DOD is using in drones have 90+ wh/kg charge in 60 seconds and last 20000+ cycles and have zero rare earth’s or cobalt or lithium they are aluminium graphene cells with glass electrolytes. So Al,Si,C in them some of the most common elements on and in earth. Those cells will eventually make it to civys tech akways flows downhill from military to open market.
Simple fact is we have 8 billion humans there is not enough liquid hydrocarbons to have all living at
EU let alone USA levels of energy consumption. That would be 5000 examples vs 600 per year and would burn out every last liquid hydrocarbon in under a decade. As is we have 46 ish years at any market price for liquid hydrocarbons.