Electro cars are no solution of the climate problem

In fact, electro cars pollute the air more then the old cars.

Mclane wrote:

In fact, electro cars pollute the air more then the old cars.

I agree, though it is not black and white.

An electric vehicle that uses low power, say 500w, and travels at 30kph will use less energy to get from A to B than a typical internal combustion engined car. This would make sense in a world constrained by declining supplies of fossil fuels.

The electric cars produced today are not low powered, a Tesla with a big mass travels from 0-60 in 1.9 seconds, it takes a lot of energy to accelerate a big mass so quickly, combined with the inefficiency of converting fossil fuels to electricity. It makes no sense at all to make electric vehicles with similar performance to a Porsche 911.

The UK is planning to prohibit the sale of new ICE vehicles in the near future (was 2040, now 2030?). They say it is to protect the climate, I suspect it has more to do with the ever reducing ERoEI (energy returned on energy invested). There will come a point in time where it takes more energy to extract a barrel of oil than the amount of energy one can get out of a barrel of oil, at this point it makes more sense to leave it in the ground, or at least only use it for specialised uses such as making organic compounds that would otherwise be difficult and expensive to produce.

I will continue to use petrol as long as possible, my current engine is only 954cc, small enough to be environmentally friendly, and fast enough to outrun 99.99% of communists hoping to throw me in the gulag, so with any luck it will either kill me, or last me until I am too old to ride.

The battery is highly dangerous. Sitting on is like sitting on a bomb.

Manufacturing and mining the resources for the batteries (or for anything really) are highly fossil-fuel dependent as well, and there would need to be a constant supply of batteries as those wear down over time.

Theresa May wrote:

Manufacturing and mining the resources for the batteries (or for anything really) are highly fossil-fuel dependent as well, and there would need to be a constant supply of batteries as those wear down over time.

A bit of bad news: over a very long period of time (this is ABSOLUTELY NOT market trading advice!), commodities you can grow tend to fall in price, whereas commodities you dig out of the ground rise in price.

Three magical ingredients were needed for the industrial revolution - the revolution that changed us from living at subsistence level with people telling us what to do all day to the life that we lead today:

1. Coal: a dense form of energy (Britain had lots of it)

2. The steam engine: this allowed coal to be used for mechanical energy (trains, factories etc). This provide an order of magnitude more mechanical energy than wind or flowing water

Those are two that are relevant to this discussion. The third ingredient really belongs in politics - but I'll mention it in passing: Anne Boleyn. She persuaded King Henry VIII to turn Britain from a Catholic to a Protestant country (interestingly, the King himself remained secretly Catholic for the rest of his life!). This freed Britain from European control, and created a culture in which businesses could compete and thrive (under Catholic control, trade was restricted in many ways: interestingly, the EU is taking Europe back in that direction). Europe sent a massive fleet of ships to re-implement European control over Britain (link), but it wasn't successful.

Mclane wrote:

In fact, electro cars pollute the air more then the old cars.

Yes they do, nothing is free. But what climate problem are you taking about.

This is flat out insanity and deception now To tell the public that events that have occurred countless times before with no climate change attribution, is now just that, is not science, its witchcraft, NO PROOF AT ALL. Its climate ambulance chasing, nothing more

— Joe Bastardi (@BigJoeBastardi) January 4, 2018

“It would be the first time that man has ever been responsible for it [warming] in recorded history. We go back ten million years, and if you're going to actually believe what we have as the reference records, there's no linkage to CO2 and temperature. Unless of course it's one of these books, these 3d books, you gotta stand on your head and cross your eyes to look at.”

”[…] I have a problem when you tell me something that you exhale one-hundred times more than you inhale, and that plants love, and that's always been around, and it's just a very, very tiny part of the entire system, when you tell me that's the climate control knob against the sun, the oceans […] I say why is it now, when it's been much higher before with colder temperatures. You can't say that.”

The climate problem is just a symptom of an even larger problem. If we can't do anything about overpopulation then it's inevitable that the human race is doomed.

ScaredyCat wrote:

The climate problem is just a symptom of an even larger problem. If we can't do anything about overpopulation then it's inevitable that the human race is doomed.

Nonsense! Who do you want to kill first.

Genesis 1:28, KJV: "And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth."

mwyoung wrote:

ScaredyCat wrote:

The climate problem is just a symptom of an even larger problem. If we can't do anything about overpopulation then it's inevitable that the human race is doomed.

Nonsense! Who do you want to kill first.

Where did I say I wanted to kill anyone?

If every family had a maximum of two children then the problem would eventually be solved.

Quote :

Genesis 1:28, KJV: "And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth."

This is the real nonsense.

Hydrogen-car beats electro-cars.

Anton wrote:

Mclane wrote:

In fact, electro cars pollute the air more then the old cars.

I agree, though it is not black and white.

An electric vehicle that uses low power, say 500w, and travels at 30kph will use less energy to get from A to B than a typical internal combustion engined car. This would make sense in a world constrained by declining supplies of fossil fuels.

The electric cars produced today are not low powered, a Tesla with a big mass travels from 0-60 in 1.9 seconds, it takes a lot of energy to accelerate a big mass so quickly,

You are conflating energy with power. Power = Work/time or energy/time. In principal it takes the same amount of energy however “quickly” the final velocity is reached. In principal, that energy is returned to the battery as the car brakes back to zero.

Quote :

combined with the inefficiency of converting fossil fuels to electricity. It makes no sense at all to make electric vehicles with similar performance to a Porsche 911.

wrong reasoning in terms of energy usage.

Quote :

The UK is planning to prohibit the sale of new ICE vehicles in the near future (was 2040, now 2030?). They say it is to protect the climate, I suspect it has more to do with the ever reducing ERoEI (energy returned on energy invested). There will come a point in time where it takes more energy to extract a barrel of oil than the amount of energy one can get out of a barrel of oil, at this point it makes more sense to leave it in the ground, or at least only use it for specialised uses such as making organic compounds that would otherwise be difficult and expensive to produce.

I will continue to use petrol as long as possible, my current engine is only 954cc, small enough to be environmentally friendly, and fast enough to outrun 99.99% of communists hoping to throw me in the gulag, so with any luck it will either kill me, or last me until I am too old to ride.

ScaredyCat wrote:

mwyoung wrote:

ScaredyCat wrote:

The climate problem is just a symptom of an even larger problem. If we can't do anything about overpopulation then it's inevitable that the human race is doomed.

Nonsense! Who do you want to kill first.

Where did I say I wanted to kill anyone?

If every family had a maximum of two children then the problem would eventually be solved.

Quote :

Genesis 1:28, KJV: "And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth."

This is the real nonsense.

Isaiah 55:8-9
King James Version

8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord.

9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

Here is a video where Dutch professor Niels Deen explains that Iron combustion is the future. It's in Dutch but you can set English subtitles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CXFfEXwGv4

Jonathan003 wrote:

Here is a video where Dutch professor Niels Deen explains that Iron combustion is the future. It's in Dutch but you can set English subtitles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CXFfEXwGv4

Eh?

If you burn iron, you get iron oxide. Whatever the other effects of doing this, one of them is to permanently remove oxygen from our atmosphere.

Smaller point (maybe it's explained in the video), but my understanding is that iron will only burn in an atmosphere of pure oxygen. Is Niels proposing that we carry oxygen bottles in our car to burn the iron?

Here's his research profile - link. It does mention automotive application of his research - but doesn't explain why burning iron particles would be a good way of propelling a car. If it's a serious idea, then an obvious question would be: how much does a litre of powdered iron cost, and does it get dumped into the atmosphere after burning? Who wants to breathe freshly burned iron oxide?

OK - I've watched the video, and the translation subtitles were better that I expected. Here's the plan:

* your car is fuelled by a cassette of iron powder

* as it is burned, it is captured and not released into the atmosphere

* when it runs out, you go to a garage, and a robot arm removes the cassette (which now contains iron oxide powder), and then clicks in a new cassette of fresh iron powder

* the burned iron oxide is converted back into iron powder using renewable energy sources

Great plan!

Not sure it will happen.