Liquid gasoline does not have anywhere near the energy of TNT, or even a battery for that matter. It contains basically zero releasable energy. It needs oxygen or another oxidizer to react with to actually release any energy. TNT and batteries' energy density calculations include the oxidizer and the oxidizer is in close proximity to the fuel (molecularly so in the case of TNT). If you 10x the "energy content" of gasoline it's still rate limited by access to oxygen. If you 10x the energy density of a battery (the type with the oxidizer contained within the battery, not a fuel cell or metal air battery) you've got 10x the energy ready to be released quickly if oxidizer and fuel mix in unfortunate ways

▲ csours 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's an interesting discussion, because if you assume access to atmospheric oxygen, gasoline is MUCH more energy dense.

    TNT.....:  4 kJ/gram and  7 MJ/liter
 
    Gasoline: 43 kJ/gram and 33 MJ/liter

▲

saltcured 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The previous point is fair though. What is the energy density of gasoline in a stoichiometric mixture with its oxidizer and not already detonated? That's where TNT beats it by a long shot. The mixture with any chance of being stored would be some relatively low pressure gas.

Edit: Or, a fair closed-system comparison to a battery would need to include a liquid oxygen tank or similar so you have the two components stored but can control the delivery...

	▲	ux266478 28 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		In the context of the conversation, it doesn't actually refute the point though, which is that explosive danger is contingent on a much broader set of relations than simple energy density. Gasoline just demonstrates the disconnect. Tacking on additional conditions to make high-density batteries dangerous is exactly what the engineering goal should be. As a stupid example, if we have a high density battery technology that never explodes unless, say, under magnetic forces only seen being produced by magnetars, that's a pretty safe battery.
	▲	SV_BubbleTime 10 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Air is usually quite available though.

▲

ranger_danger 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

That's a huge assumption that won't always be the case though. A gasoline tank with a small hole in it is a lot safer than a liquid-electrolyte battery with a hole in it.

▲

csours 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes, that's what makes it interesting.

Interesting discussions about energetics are best had from a distance.

	▲	K0balt 41 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I can remember several situations where “a little bit of gasoline” caused a lot of problems. It’s a relative term. You need a lot of air to make it really shine, but “a little bit of gas” goes a long way lol.

▲ 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲ lightedman 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

"Liquid gasoline does not have anywhere near the energy of TNT,"

Energy density of gasoline is approximately 44 to 45 megajoules per kilogram.

Energy density of TNT is approximately 4.184 megajoules per kilogram.

▲

K0balt 37 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

A snickers bar has nearly 5× TNT’s energy per kilogram—TNT merely has the habit of being extremely impatient about releasing it.

▲

vitally3643 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[flagged]

	▲	lightedman 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I read it all and even what is stated is mostly wrong UNTIL THE EXACT UNIT IS SPECIFIED. And I'd know because I have to work with this IN ORBIT. I've had this conversation a dozen times in meetings with military and government.

▲

3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]