Fuel density wouldn't be such an impactful attribute if the US military and geopolitical situation and strategy were different.

Fuel density is logistically important and the US geographical position means that density is more important to the US than other nations. In other words, if we forecast that we'll be fighting foreign wars, fuel transport is an logistical problem that optimises for density.

▲

kayodelycaon 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Fuel density matters to things like cars and semi-trucks. Right now you can’t build an electric version that can fully refuel in minutes. That makes fast, long-range travel impractical in an electric vehicle.

▲

galago 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

https://insideevs.com/news/758625/byd-megawatt-charging-demo...

"It's called Megawatt charging because it delivers 1,000 kilowatts of electrical power at 1,000 volts, which is twice as powerful as the fastest chargers we have here in the United States."

▲

adrian_b 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Actually a few other HN threads have just discussed the latest Chinese electric cars that refuel in 5 minutes for a 250 miles range and which have a 500 miles range when fully charged.

That makes fast, long-range travel quite practical in an electric vehicle.

While this model greatly improves the charging speed, other electric cars introduced this year use sodium-ion batteries, which are heavier than lithium-ion batteries, but they have the advantage that in cold climates they do not lose either capacity or charging speed down to temperatures as low as minus 40 Celsius degrees, removing other limitation of electric cars.

So hydrocarbon fuels are likely to remain non-replaceable only in aircraft and spacecraft, where weight really matters.

However, hydrocarbon fuels can be synthesized from water and carbon dioxide, passing through syngas, by using solar energy, just not at a price competitive with fossil fuel.

▲

kelseyfrog 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Me searching for the electric tanks. ¯ \ _ ༼ •́ ͜ ʖ •̀ ༽ _ / ¯

Edit: I found them :D

▲

adrian_b 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I do not know if any such tanks are in production, but there where experimental electric tanks, just not with batteries, but with turbogenerators.

	▲	kelseyfrog 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Great question! Turns out there are. The U.S. Military's Abrams Tank Is Going Hybrid [1]. I'm sure we'll get some comments saying why it's a terrible idea[2]. 1. https://insideevs.com/news/784805/abrams-m1e3-hybrid-tank-vi... 2. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47484044

▲

kayodelycaon 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They didn’t make it past the drones.

▲

ThatMedicIsASpy 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

and I wonder which blown up tank would pollute the environment more

	▲	triceratops an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		If you're worried about the environment don't get into wars. If you're in a war, worry about winning. Wars of the future will make heavy use of drones. They don't run on hydrocarbons.
	▲	kelseyfrog 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I don't really think that's really high up on military priorities list. But happy to be proven wrong on that.

▲

make3 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

tanks must represent like 0.001% of fuel consumption lol Road uses like cars, trucks and buses is 47% of all oil, and clearly an enormous fraction of that can be converted to use electricity instead