Gtl or gas to liquid
What helps is a fuel that is stable at the pressures and temperatures encountered as well as having high calorific value. Liquid hydrogen does not do too well in this regard and alcohol is low in oomph.
Thirty years ago in the UK and still today in Hong Kong is a process that can contribute but needs development in parts. I refer to the catalytic rich gas process. Okay the front third was to do with naphtha, a low grade petrol going to waste. Forget about that bit for now. This feedstock was reformed into two parts hydrogen and one part carbon monoxide that was then carburetted with partially reformed naphtha to yield "town gas", a substitute for coal gas. And still is in use (search "Towngas", Hong Kong).
That if you like is the middle third. Today much industrial alcohol, esters, polyesters and some plastics comes from taking this synthesis gas and catalysing it first into alcohol and then higher hydrocarbons. This is the GTL technology, the third third, that is highly prized by Davy Technology, Johnson-Matthey (catalysts), and a host of others including every chemical and petroleum company in the world. They know that if they can get their hands on hydrogen and carbon monoxide all the rest is proven cheap technology. And a licence to print money.
Hydrogen is the easy part. From water releasing oxygen into the air. The difficult but not impossible part but requiring large amounts of energy is reducing carbon dioxide from the air catalytically into carbon monoxide. It can be done and if you need an artificial higher hydrocarbon because none is economically recoverable from natural sources then you have to pay for it. Nuclear power electricity? Perhaps. But needs must when the devil drives.
At the moment there is no need beyond keeping the research simmering away on the back burner (dreadful pun).
But for sure you can't lay a ruler on sales/travel graphs and predict away in isolation while others cientists are warning of a step function in world temperature rise, floods and horsemen riding about committing all sorts of unpleasant things.
Globalisation has fragmented rather than cemented global co-operation and in the face of USA, India, China what little old England and Aussie can do is like farting against the wind. Yet paradoxically if every country acted locally to secure its infrastructure and farm land against the inevitable floods it would be money better spent because nothing short of world wide catastrophe will convince mankind now.
But chin up! Man can produce an acceptable oil fuel at a price. Or else wait 400 million years and we shall be squashed up into oil to be burnt by whom?
I used to work for Bee Pee by the way but not as anything too bright. I have written Flight International many times offering an article but I have come to the conclusion that their journos are plain hacks and would not know their situpon from the bendy bit in the middle of their arm.
I'll leave you in peace but remember this - you heard it on pprune - gas-to-liquid technology is where the hot money in research is at, and furthermore makes a great deal of everyday stuff already. In thirty years she'll be commonplace. That's if we're still here.
James!