Arctic Sea Ice : Forum

AGW in general => Policy and solutions => Topic started by: Neven on May 13, 2019, 05:30:32 PM

Title: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Neven on May 13, 2019, 05:30:32 PM
Continued from here (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,438.msg199107.html#msg199107)...
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: magnamentis on May 13, 2019, 05:32:04 PM
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,438.msg199106.html#msg199106
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Shared Humanity on May 13, 2019, 05:35:53 PM
 :o :o :o :o
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 14, 2019, 06:38:39 AM
There's been "Something In The Air" for a while...

Quoting Neven from the last post in the retired thread.
This thread can continue to be used what it was meant for originally: Whether sustainable transportation is a viable option as a Green BAU solution.

Thank you, let's see how this goes. Hopefully with less mudslinging and labeling.
 
May I start with the most fundamental issue?
Humans can't create energy.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 14, 2019, 07:50:24 AM
Adding a couple of comments I made in the old thread about Norway.

Norway's total emissions are down 3,5% since 1990.
https://www.ssb.no/en/natur-og-miljo/statistikker/nrmiljo/aar

The dent is made by EV's when checking the other numbers there, but far from enough of course.
The link posted above shows reported emissions from Norwegian economic activity, no matter where it happens in the world and includes emissions from Norwegian shipping and air transport firms outside of Norway. I think those are the best official numbers available. And that's a western nation with a fully clean grid, even better than Sweden.

Norways energy consumption is rising, clearly visible in the other set with reported domestic emissions:
https://www.ssb.no/en/natur-og-miljo/statistikker/klimagassn/aar-endelige
This is what's included in that one (unfortunately not available in English):
https://www.ssb.no/natur-og-miljo/artikler-og-publikasjoner/hvilke-utslipp-dekkes-av-statistikkene

However accurate those numbers are, they are far away from those 10-15% cuts required (per year). Not much to be fascinated about.

Also adding those images with short quotes from the Brundtland comission in 1987:
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=438.0;attach=120279;image)
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=438.0;attach=120280;image)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 16, 2019, 05:22:30 PM
Hmm, a bit early maybe but if this is a new trend it's good.

A piece by Linus Eriksson, traffic director at Skånetrafiken:
Skåne is entering a new era where the car is no longer the norm. Maybe car shame follows flying shame?
https://www.sydsvenskan.se/2019-05-15/skane-ar-pa-vag-in-i-en-ny-era-dar-bilen-inte-langre-ar-norm-foljer-bilskam-efter-flygskam (https://www.sydsvenskan.se/2019-05-15/skane-ar-pa-vag-in-i-en-ny-era-dar-bilen-inte-langre-ar-norm-foljer-bilskam-efter-flygskam)

In just a few months the travel pattern in Skåne has changed. According to Swedavia, the number of air passengers at Malmö Airport decreased by 11 per cent for the first four months of the year. During the same period, travel by public transport in Skåne increased by 1.8 million trips. The regional bus traffic around Lund and Kristianstad increased by 10 percent, the city traffic in Malmö by just over 7 percent, and the Pågatågen by 4 percent.

I think we are entering a new era. Every day, 420,000 sustainable journeys are made with Skånetrafiken, all of which buses and trains are fossil fuel-free. Regardless of what is claimed in the debate, Skåne has a large range of trains and bus services that reach far above the political level of ambition of ten double trips per weekday for resorts with at least 1 000 inhabitants. In places such as Åhus, Höganäs, Broby, Höllviken, the demand is so great that Skånetrafiken runs a bus between every 5-10 minutes.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: ASILurker on May 17, 2019, 07:08:20 AM
Relating to my recent post on the Tesla thread:
CORNELL UNIVERSITY Computer Science > Computers and Society
Ethical Implications: The ACM/IEEE-CS Software Engineering Code applied to Tesla's "Autopilot" System
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2406.msg199631.html#msg199631

There are other approaches and I think this article is a classic example of when unproven hypothetical hyperbolic academic assumptions morph into being (false) "substantiated facts of reality" impertinently projected onto a future that does not as yet exist, let alone been tested in the real world.

These kinds of summaries are intrinsically dangerous to society at large imho. The basis of this article below is extremely weak and ill considered, at least imho it is. Just because someone provides genuine academic references does not make their text or their conclusions robust or wise.

Programming Ethics in Self-Driving Cars: Ethical Dilemma
Najam Ul Hassan
University of Maryland University College
https://journal.seisense.com/index.php/jom/article/view/42/35

Quote
Conclusion
Rapid innovation in self-driving cars presents some tough ethical questions. A cursory look at the issues suggest that the assertion of Bonnefon et al. (2016) where they contend that the passenger should be saved when it comes down to it, is worth pursuing. However, a deeper look begs that the need of the hour is to take a step back and rethink the problem all over again where ‘safety of pedestrians and bikers, the livability of cities, and environmental  sustainability — all center stage’ (JafariNaimi,  2018).

The  rate  of  innovation  in  the  automotive industry indicates  that  self-driving  cars  will  (be) roaming  around  the  roadways  in  the  very  near  future.  With heightened  safety,  increased  productivity  and  diminished  congestion  among  other  scores  of  benefits,  their introduction should not only be allowed, but encouraged and facilitated.

The debate over the ethical decision should be addressed by developing “cars don’t drive into situations where that could happen and [will] drive away from potential situations where those decisions have to be made” (Mike Brown, 2016). These cars will not only positively impact the society, but will also deliver tremendous boost to the development of self-driving busses, trucks and rails.

I posit that the highlighted parts are all presumptuous assumptions as yet unproven and not even even fully understood as yet.

Quote
Welcome to the Precautionary Principle website
The mission of this website is to promote the understanding and implementation of the Precautionary Principle for the management of new and emerging risks.

The Precautionary Principle is a strategy to cope with possible risks where scientific understanding is yet incomplete, such as the risks of nano technology, genetically modified organisms and systemic insecticides.

The Precautionary Principle is defined as follows:
When human activities may lead to morally unacceptable harm that is scientifically plausible but uncertain, actions shall be taken to avoid or diminish that harm. Morally unacceptable harm refers to harm to humans or the environment that is

-    threatening to human life or health, or
-    serious and effectively irreversible, or
-    inequitable to present or future generations, or
-    imposed without adequate consideration of the human rights of those affected.


The judgement of plausibility should be grounded in scientific analysis. Analysis should be ongoing so that chosen actions are subject to review. Uncertainty may apply to, but need not be limited to, causality or the bounds of the possible harm.

Actions are interventions that are undertaken before harm occurs that seek to avoid or diminish the harm. Actions should be chosen that are proportional to the seriousness of the potential harm, with consideration of their positive and negative consequences, and with an assessment of the moral implications of both action and inaction. The choice of action should be the result of a participatory process.

Source: UNESCO COMEST report The Precautionary Principle
http://www.precautionaryprinciple.eu/
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: ASILurker on May 17, 2019, 07:35:00 AM
Been saving these things up for some time.

THE LEHIGH REVIEW
9AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES: AN ETHICAL THEORY TO GUIDE THEIR FUTURE
Michael Drury, Joseph Lucia, Vincent Caruso

The technology leading to fully autonomous vehicles is increasing exponentially with each passing year. It is both exciting to be living in such an inventive time but also worrying. Current driving practice is relatively dangerous due to the faults of humans. Humans sometimes operate vehicles without being entirely aware of their surroundings. Fully-autonomous cars would theoretically eliminate the error introduced by human capabilities. The main problem that arises in this is the lack of ethics in a computer program.

It is difficult to ascertain how a car should behave in the inevitable event of an accident. The scope of this paper is to develop a dominant governing ethical theory to determine how cars will be programmed, how blame will be administered in the event of accidents, and what laws and regulations should be implemented in the future. Prior to widespread release and acceptance into everyday life, the integration of autonomous cars must be analyzed from an ethical perspective.

https://preserve.lehigh.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1018&context=cas-lehighreview-vol-25

Quote
5 CONCLUSION

Vehicles are becoming ever more independent from the input of human beings. The creation of autonomous vehicles that are capable of operating without any decision-making from passengers results in a multitude of ethical dilemmas. Questions, such as who should be protected by the car, who is at fault for an accident, and should drivers be allowed on the road must all be answered.

These are all ethical dilemmas and the answers to these questions will vary greatly depending on the ethical theory applied to the situation. For this reason, a defined ethical theory must be provided to lawmakers and manufacturers before any regulation or products are introduced to the public. This theory will guide lawmakers in being sure that the laws they pass meet the goals they set for them. It will also allow manufacturers to understand how their product will fit into the world.


Quote
5.1 DERIVE AN ETHICAL THEORY TO APPLY

It is for this reason, that individual rights cannot be the solution to all of the issues regarding automated vehicles. Utilitarianism is also not without its faults. What is best for society is often times not what is best for the individual. This means that the individual may not make decisions that are compatible with utilitarianism. At this point, utilitarianism also breaks down. 
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: ASILurker on May 17, 2019, 07:38:39 AM
Ethical Concerns of Artificial Intelligence, Big Data and Data Analytics
Harlow, Harold. European Conference on Knowledge Management; Kidmore End : 316-323. Kidmore End: Academic Conferences International Limited. (Sep 2018) 

Research is presented in this paper from current trends and laws that address the ethical problems in Big Data and AI while recommending an ethical knowledge management strategy and direction for these activities.

https://search.proquest.com/openview/56146799514cd6f3c4e92e82079fb128/1

Smarter and more knowledgable than your average Twitter poster, yeah?
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: ASILurker on May 17, 2019, 07:43:02 AM
Artificial Intelligence: The Very Human Dangers of Dysfunctional Design and Autocratic Corporate Governance

Queen Mary School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 314/2019
50 Pages Posted: 6 May 2019
Alan J. Dignam

It concludes that despite the unfortunate deregulatory instincts of the US and UK governments with regard to technology, AI should be treated in a similar manner to pharmaceutical products by introducing public interest regulation through the medium of a state regulatory body, and that changes to the corporate governance regulation of tech companies are necessary.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3382342
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 17, 2019, 08:17:57 AM
Old crosspost from last January, about legal issues with autonomous cars, which are still largely unresolved:
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,438.msg139079.html#msg139079 (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,438.msg139079.html#msg139079)

Common predictions are pretty useless when it comes to legal matters. We might see an governmental investigation here in Sweden in March. Other than that, this is the only real study on this subject (that I've seen) and it's a year old now.
http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1061449&dswid=-2823
Quote
    Abstract [en]

    The objective of this report is to analyse the legal prerequisites for liability under criminal law regarding self-driving vehicles. This includes making visible and problematize legal constructions of responsibility in Criminal Law, and its concepts and principles that follow in relation to the knowledge developed within the field of Artificial Intelligence.

    The overall question, which focuses on the Swedish Penal Code, is how criminal liability is constructed in law and if these constructions are compatible with the development of self-driving vehicles technologies. The sub question is what or which elements constitute legal responsibility and accountability under the Road Traffic Offences Act. The project aims to contribute to a deeper understanding of the law, the power that Law exercises, and its role and function in society, but also how technology impacts on the content of Law. The theoretical inspiration has been derived mainly from legal theories that give attention to and elucidate the relationship between Law and Society, and in addition, theories and perspectives of Criminal Law. The study uses traditional legal methods developed in jurisprudence; this means applying legal sources such as preparatory works and Jurisprudence literature in the interpretation of legal provisions.

    The analysis shows that self-driving vehicles technologies are challenging Law in many ways inter alia the concept of “legal subject”. Furthermore, it reveals that general provisions as well as concepts and principles in the Swedish Penal Code and the Constitutional Law are not well adapted to the technology in question. The concept “legal subject” is based on an image of a human as an autonomous being. As such, she has the ability of good judgment and is wise and insightful. She is also assumed to be free to make her own decisions without being subordinate to others. In a broader perspective the Law defines what it is like to be a human being. In contrary, robot’s autonomy is determined where a human is situated in the "decision-loop". This study argues that the time is ripe to seriously discuss the concept "legal autonomy" particularly in relation to self-driving vehicles since the technology involved is challenging the very foundation of Law. Furthermore, that the legal concept autonomy should instead be understood as a relational concept since this approach embraces the relationship between the physical driver and the automated system of the self-driving vehicle.

The paper itself is in Swedish and not easily translated, but here's an interview with Wanna Svedberg from last year which translates well enough:
https://www.nyteknik.se/fordon/sa-kan-lagen-for-sjalvkorande-bilar-bli-6851504

Then we might also consider how we humans would treat automated vehicles in traffic. Pedestrians and bikers would probably just let the automated vehicles wait, or can we make ourselves fully autonomous as well?  ;D

https://youtu.be/qYxCX6OIvAA
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: ASILurker on May 17, 2019, 08:28:25 AM
Quote
The Modern Trolley Problem: Ethical and Economically-Sound Liability Schemes for Autonomous Vehicles
9 Case W. Res. J.L. Tech. & Internet 1 (2018)
covering Artificial Intelligence Law, Ethics, Corporate Liability, and Economics
(paywalled w abstract intro)
https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/caswestres9&div=7&id=&page=&t=1558065653

Quote
Moving Forward with Autonomous Systems: Ethical Dilemmas
    Aysen K. Taylor, Sarah Bouazzaoui
First Online: 26 June 2018
Abstract

Automation has improved transportation systems in various domains over the last several decades. Increasing autonomy in these systems has gradually reduced the role of the human operator to that of system monitor with the ultimate goal of eliminating the human from the control system entirely. Commercial aviation has benefited from automation, but it operates with the support of a broad infrastructure of safety when compared to vehicular road traffic.

While not designed to operate in a fully autonomous mode, the computer, sensor, and software technology developed for aircraft are being applied to self-driving cars with the expectation that driving will also see significant improvements in accident rates and efficiency through the elimination of human error and negligence.

A sophisticated combination of hardware sensors and computer software analyzes the environment and controls the speed and direction of the car without input from its human occupants and their opaque interactions increase the complexity of the system. This approach has potential benefits but also potential problems. Autonomous vehicles will present ethical challenges while being developed and after deployment.

The purpose of this paper is to consider the many ethical implications involved with the implementation and oversight of autonomous vehicle (AV) technology. This paper examines primary ethical dilemmas present in the use of autonomous cars including liability and moral agency.
(sorry paywalled)
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-94334-3_12


Precautionary Principle
Precautionary principles are the foundations for policy when it has to deal with weakly understood causes of potential catastrophic or irreversible events, and where protective decisions require certain and costly policy interventions that may not solve the problem that they are designed to correct.

From: Reference Module in Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences, 2013
(sign-in or paywalled)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/precautionary-principle

Quote
Ethics
J. Hanson, in Encyclopedia of the Anthropocene, 2018
Overview of the Precautionary Principle

The precautionary principle is, at its simplest, a modern restatement of the classical Hippocratic oath, “I will keep them from harm and injustice,” which is often summarized as “first, do no harm.” However, the “precautionary principle” is more than a dictum for individual actions; rather, it is intended to guide the behavior of institutions and nations. And, unlike the Hippocratic oath and its modern equivalents, it applies to both human and environmental health.

Benefits and Limitations of the Precautionary Principle
P.F. Ricci, H. Sheng, in Reference Module in Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences, 2013

Abstract
Precautionary principles are the foundations for policy when it has to deal with weakly understood causes of potential catastrophic or irreversible events, and where protective decisions require certain and costly policy interventions that may not solve the problem that they are designed to correct. These principles provide – when developed by statutes that reflect the intent of the principles – a legal justification for acting, even though scientific causation is either incomplete or perhaps unavailable. The dilemma that the those principles create is that the ethical choice underpinning precautionary principles, better safe than sorry, can be costly because an action designed to avoid potential damage can be counterproductive for society by creating other hazards that are incorrectly analyzed.


Ethics, Communities, and Climate Resilience

Kerry W. Bowman, ... Yousef M. Manialawy, in Resilience, 2018
15.3 Ethics, the Precautionary Principle, and the Need for Climate Resilience

In an environmental context, the precautionary principle can be defined as such: when an identified threat of serious or irreversible damage to the environment or human health exists, a lack of full scientific knowledge about the situation should not be used to delay remedial steps if the balance of potential costs and benefits justifies action (Resnik, 2003). It goes beyond the notion of prevention, which seeks solely to minimize the impact of identified risks. The adoption of the principle in the medical field (Goldstein, 2001) emerged later.

Although it now has far greater resonance in health care, the principle often remains ignored by decision-makers as reason for climate change mitigation or adaptation. This is ironic considering that the precautionary principle was originally created in the mid-1970s as part of Germany’s environmental protection policy (Gignon et al., 2013).
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: ASILurker on May 17, 2019, 08:48:59 AM
I have been saving these things up. I can't recall anyone else who has raised these issues and risks the last 6 mths plus, nor the unknowns involved versus the automatic Assumptions that are generally just accepted without any scepticism or scientific/academic validity at all as to the so-called "obvious benefits" of autonomous vehicles to society overall and long term.

Maybe they are the best things since sliced bread - I have yet to see any credible scientific experiments, nor in depth analysis, nor a valid statistical analysis of a real world situation in which autonomous vehicles are operating together in a geographical area for real - proving such "safety claims" to be the most highly likely case.

Anyway, fwiw, here's another example of raising genuine issues with a reasonable well balanced natural/scientific scepticism that's psychologically healthy. (vs the typical guff found on social media aka Twitterati/Teslaarti pseudo experts, sharemarket shills, trolls and hacks) 

Quote
Self-Driving Cars: Ethical Responsibilities of Design Engineers
Author Jason Borenstein ; Joseph Herkert ; Keith Miller
 Published in: IEEE Technology and Society Magazine ( Volume: 36 , Issue: 2 , June 2017 )

Abstract:
In the wake of the exposure of Volkswagen's diesel engine test-rigging, a Bloomberg Business journalist described the company as "driven by engineering-crazed executives" and The New York Times ran a story noting how with today's complex computer systems in automobiles, there are numerous opportunities for misdeeds both by automakers and hackers.

With the advent of so-called autonomous or self-driving cars, such issues may become even more pervasive and problematic. From a legal perspective, a key focal point is who would be at fault if and when an accident occurs. Much also has been written about the ethical complexities posed by self-driving cars.

In accordance with Moore's Law, "[a]s technological revolutions increase their social impact, ethical problems increase". Yet relatively little has been said about the ethical responsibilities of the designers of self-driving cars.

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7947308
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 17, 2019, 09:52:33 AM
Apart from legal and ethical issues, a more imminent unsustainable issue with EV's and even more so in an eventual autonomous future, is that the distance travelled will most likely increase. Maybe even double with self-driving cars. Resource use will probably increase unless we buy fewer EV's.

At least we have statistics from Norway on distance travelled by cars.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: BeeKnees on May 17, 2019, 10:32:56 AM
Apart from legal and ethical issues, a more imminent unsustainable issue with EV's and even more so in an eventual autonomous future, is that the distance travelled will most likely increase. Maybe even double with self-driving cars. Resource use will probably increase unless we buy fewer EV's.

At least we have statistics from Norway on distance travelled by cars.

Not sure this tells us very much about an autonomous future tbh as there are no autonomous cars in the chart.

The chart is also slightly misleading in portraying EV as the cause for increased travel when it is the combined use of all vehicles that is to blame.   It doesnt tell us the cause, which could just as easily be improved roads or a population increase (8% in the last 7 years) leading to more drivers rather than the energy source of the vehicle.   
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: ASILurker on May 17, 2019, 10:38:42 AM
snipped

(edit) Nah, changed my mind, I'm not interested in this kind of stuff.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: BeeKnees on May 17, 2019, 10:45:45 AM

And where exactly does it show: "The chart is also slightly misleading in portraying EV as the cause for increased travel" ?


It's a simple point that can be shown simply by swapping the order of the different entries in the chart.  If hybrids were placed top then they would appear to be the driver for increased use.

The OP appeared to be suggesting that EV is the driver for increased mileage, this isnt supported by the chart when other factors are considered.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: ASILurker on May 17, 2019, 11:08:05 AM
Related - as NeilT and others keep saying Tesla is a Technology Company

US tech industry regulations are ‘no longer subject to democratic checks & balances’ – Macron
Published time: 16 May, 2019

 France’s President Emmanuel Macron has taken a jab at Washington by saying that its policies relating to the tech industry are at the hands of corporations. A quite surprising statement for one of America’s closest allies.

The French leader said that US policies, in fact, fall short of being a paragon of democracy – at least when it comes to regulating the field of modern technology – as big business has seemingly too much of a say in formulating Washington’s approaches in this sphere.

“The United States is a formidable continent but they have a model which is completely steered by big private sector players and which is no longer subject to democratic checks and balances,” Macron said at a question and answer session at a technology forum in Paris, where he championed the idea of protecting European companies from being devoured by foreign, and particularly US, corporate giants.

The French president did not stop at that and added that such a laissez-faire approach has led to a situation, in which America does not in fact have a government that is capable of guaranteeing its citizens’ privacy rights at the face of corporate privacy intrusion

https://www.rt.com/news/459534-macron-us-regulation-no-democratic/
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 17, 2019, 11:14:44 AM
Sigh, here we go:
The source for the posted graph (reply #13), also clearly visible in it, is Robbie Andrew;
http://folk.uio.no/roberan/RobbieAndrew.shtml (http://folk.uio.no/roberan/RobbieAndrew.shtml)
and SSB in Norway:
https://www.ssb.no/en/ (https://www.ssb.no/en/)

The source for increased travel by autonomous vehicles is Anna Pernestål:
https://www.kth.se/profile/annapern (https://www.kth.se/profile/annapern)
https://www.kth.se/en/itm/nyheter/anna-pernestal-mer-trafik-med-sjalvkorande-bilar-1.888420 (https://www.kth.se/en/itm/nyheter/anna-pernestal-mer-trafik-med-sjalvkorande-bilar-1.888420)
Quote
Almost all simulations point to a high risk of increased traffic with the arrival of autonomous vehicles, says Anna Pernestål in an interview about the research being conducted at ITRL.

The above people and organizations may be accused of beeing overly positive but neither are well known for deliberately misleading.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: BeeKnees on May 17, 2019, 11:35:30 AM
Sigh, here we go:
The source for the posted graph (reply #13), also clearly visible in it, is Robbie Andrew;
http://folk.uio.no/roberan/RobbieAndrew.shtml (http://folk.uio.no/roberan/RobbieAndrew.shtml)
and SSB in Norway:
https://www.ssb.no/en/ (https://www.ssb.no/en/)

The source for increased travel by autonomous vehicles is Anna Pernestål:
https://www.kth.se/profile/annapern (https://www.kth.se/profile/annapern)
https://www.kth.se/en/itm/nyheter/anna-pernestal-mer-trafik-med-sjalvkorande-bilar-1.888420 (https://www.kth.se/en/itm/nyheter/anna-pernestal-mer-trafik-med-sjalvkorande-bilar-1.888420)
Quote
Almost all simulations point to a high risk of increased traffic with the arrival of autonomous vehicles, says Anna Pernestål in an interview about the research being conducted at ITRL.

The above people and organizations may be accused of beeing overly positive but neither are well known for deliberately misleading.

I haven't accused anyone of being deliberately misleading. 

The chart however has no relevance to whether autonomous vehicles will or will not lead to increased traffic \ more miles travelled.  I would argue that the most likely cause for the current increased miles travelled in Norway is driven by population and therefore an increase in the number of drivers on the road.

Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 17, 2019, 11:48:45 AM
Only the chart made by Robbie Andrew. Spot the red and the green parts, I really tried to make myself understandable even though I'm not a native English speaker.
Apart from legal and ethical issues, a more imminent unsustainable issue with EV's and even more so in an eventual autonomous future, is that the distance travelled will most likely increase. Maybe even double with self-driving cars. Resource use will probably increase unless we buy fewer EV's.

At least we have statistics from Norway on distance travelled by cars.

Not sure this tells us very much about an autonomous future tbh as there are no autonomous cars in the chart.

The chart is also slightly misleading<snip>

There were never meant to be any autonomous cars in the graph since it's statistics from SSB in Norway and we only have one (operator required) 'autonomous' truck on a public road in the World, in Jönköping (that's Sweden...).
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: BeeKnees on May 17, 2019, 12:00:25 PM
It's fine,
Only the chart made by Robbie Andrew. Spot the red and the green parts, I really tried to make myself understandable even though I'm not a native English speaker.

Quote
a more imminent unsustainable issue with EV's and even more so in an eventual autonomous future, is that the distance travelled will most likely increase.

I took this to mean that you believe EVs are already causing an increase in miles travelled and that the chart was supporting this.


I'm unsure on the autonomous side, the evidence is very mixed and even your link says they have insufficient information to be sure.

Quote
But she also points out that the data being used to run the simulations is still scarce.
– It is difficult to provide accurate data since autonomous vehicles are not very common yet, she says.

 


 

Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 17, 2019, 12:45:52 PM
BeeKnees, the graph states what it depicts, an increase in distance travelled by cars with the EV's on top. What's really important here is that this is the most successful western mitigation nation on planet Earth, with a 100% clean grid and lot's of EV's.

Unfortunately the EV's are not helping Norway much, more statistics available in reply #4 above.
Now, if one of Swedens experts on this (albeit very positive, which is a very common feature among Swedes) writes that almost all simulations point to a high risk of increased traffic with the arrival of autonomous vehicles, I certainly listen to that. Even though we don't have statistics over autonomous vehicles yet. But we can model and anticipate. A short quote from the article:
Quote
One question is who is responsible, for example in the case of accidents. The number of accidents is expected to decrease significantly compared to manually driven cars, but accidents will occur, not least when the vehicles share space and roads with people. The legislation must be developed here. Another challenge is the increasing traffic that many research studies show. With increased traffic, cities and communities would be even more dominated by motorized vehicles than today.

More miles driven also means that more energy is needed for transport. Although the cars are converted to electric power, it is a development that goes against the sustainability goals.

With the potential and the challenges that exist with self-driving vehicles, it is important that society, while the technology is still evolving, tries to understand both the consequences and possibilities of the technology, so that we use it in a smart way.

To understand the effects of self-driving vehicles, we use different simulation models on ITRL . Entering the model will feed those who drive with the self-driving vehicles, where the passengers go on and off, what it costs and how fast they drive. The model can then be used to test different scenarios. Giving the right input to the models is difficult because self-driving vehicles are not yet available. In order to deal with this, we in my research team have chosen to use the values ​​and estimates made by many different experts and researchers, and weigh these together. By combining results from 26 simulation studies that have been done in different parts of the world, we have created an overall picture of how self-driving vehicles will affect us and our societies.

@Lurk, thank you.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: BeeKnees on May 17, 2019, 03:24:26 PM
The subsequent text in the article is telling.

Quote
However, the uncertainty is great.

The studies show that the only thing that can counteract an increase in traffic is car sharing. In these scenarios, fewer people own their own car and instead share taxis with others who are about to travel at the same time and have the same route. The journey takes a little longer for the traveler, but in return there will be less traffic on the roads. Shared taxis can also feed passengers to and from trains and express buses, and then traffic decreases even more.

The simulation studies also show that there may be fewer cars, if self-driving taxis can replace private cars. A self-driving taxi can replace about 10 passenger cars, and a shared self-driving taxi can replace 14 passenger cars. Then fewer parking spaces are needed, but space will be needed to pick up and drop passengers.

It's a big question that cannot yet be answered.  If the switch to autonomous leads to a switch in car ownership and blurs the line to public transport then it has the potential to change the whole dynamic.


Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 17, 2019, 04:40:42 PM
Thanks, I've already read it. Luckily Norways statistics are available to us all, so you don't have to argue with your personal if's and but's about the present.

This thread is more like (and always was supposed to be since 2013);
EV's or not, we still must change our way of life and our footprint. This is still where we all are.

EV's will save us from changing our present lifestyle, is more like the other new thread.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Shared Humanity on May 17, 2019, 04:42:00 PM
The idea that autonomous cars will somehow help us reach the 40% reduction in CO2 by 2030 is laughable. This is not to say that EV's and autonomous vehicles are not worthwhile pursuits but these efforts are a distraction from what is truly necessary.

Fossil fuels were the means used to shrink the planet, making far distant places easily and quickly accessible. This allowed for the globalization of our economic efforts and an explosion of pleasure travel. To get where we need to go, we must recognize that this easy accessibility to distant places is a luxury we cannot afford. To be carbon neutral by 2050, localization is crucial.

To understand the far ranging impact of such a transition, it is necessary to consider examples of what must change.

Example: If China is still manufacturing and shipping globally 60% of the socks everyone on the planet wears, we are screwed.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 17, 2019, 04:53:51 PM
Yes it's an enormous task SH. It would be better if we started thinking in terms of energy, instead of just whining about fossil fuels. Like these bullet points by Nate Hagens.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Shared Humanity on May 17, 2019, 04:59:35 PM
There are 1.2 billion light duty vehicles on the planet. Only a tiny fraction are EV's.

We will be adding another 100 million vehicles each year. Only a small proportion will be EV's.

The average age of a light duty vehicle in the U.S. is 11.7 years.

https://wolfstreet.com/2018/08/21/average-age-of-cars-trucks-vehicles-by-household-income-vehicle-type/

Transportation accounts for 28% of U.S. GHG emissions.

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fast-facts-transportation-greenhouse-gas-emissions

Do the math. EV's should be aggressively pursued but will simply not have the impact needed to avoid catastrophe.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Shared Humanity on May 17, 2019, 05:03:11 PM
Yes it's an enormous task SH. It would be better if we started thinking in terms of energy, instead of just whining about fossil fuels. Like these bullet points by Nate Hagens.

I like this. Goes to the heart of what we need to be discussing. What does a world that consumes far less energy look like? Equally important, where should we be expending this smaller energy budget?

My vote is for..

1. food production, transport and processing
2. Water processing

What else?
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Shared Humanity on May 17, 2019, 05:04:47 PM
All production needs to be located as close as possible to consumption.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: zizek on May 17, 2019, 05:52:52 PM

It's important to consider the implications of (autonomous) ride-sharing companies attempting to monopolize transportation. On a personal level, Why would you take an autonomous car to the train, when you can just take the car to your destination? It would only make sense if the train was significantly cheaper/free compared to a direct trip with a car. But it's highly unlikely public transport will become cheaper when it's hemorrhaging ridership to rideshare companies:

Uber and Lyft are siphoning riders from public transit, study finds
Researchers say ride-hailing hurts bus and rail ridership, increases traffic congestion

https://www.autoblog.com/2019/01/23/uber-lyft-public-transit-study/


Now, what do companies like Uber or Lyft or Tesla want? Do they want hybrid transportation infrastructure? No, of course not. They want you to use their product. They don't want to lose fares to subsidized transport. Is this already happening? Yes, of course....

Texas town ditches its bus service for ride-sharing app Via
https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/12/17109708/via-arlington-texas-rideshare-app-replaces-bus

How one Ontario town used Uber to solve its public transit crisis

Quote
Like every other public transit system, Innisfil Transit has a fancy logo, flat-rate fares and plenty of folks who use it to get around town. What it doesn’t have, however, are buses or trains, unionized drivers, transit stops, fixed schedules or any of the other expensive and complicated burdens of conventional transit systems.
https://www.macleans.ca/society/how-one-ontario-town-used-uber-to-solve-its-public-transit-crisis/





It should be common sense that autonomous cars will not decrease emissions, but rather increase them substantially (using a robust public transportation system as the base case). Putting a single person into a huge hunk of metal that drives them autonomously to Applebees will not solve climate change.
The transition towards full autonomous car transportation would require public transportation to be dismantled in tandem. Not only that, it would be the greatest endorsement of suburban sprawl, as every McMansion would have their own personal computerized chauffeur. Anecdotally, the biggest obstacle people have living in the suburbs is the commuting nightmare.  And autonomous cars eliminates that nightmare, even if it increases congestion and commute times. The luxury of being taken to work while watching netflix by yourself is profound in our perverted society..

If autonomous cars becomes the evolution of car transportation, it will be one of the fatal flaws that leads to climate change catastrophe.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Ken Feldman on May 17, 2019, 05:58:16 PM
Peak ICE is here.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Peak-Gasoline-Vehicles-Is-Already-Here.html (https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Peak-Gasoline-Vehicles-Is-Already-Here.html)

Quote
However, as Liam Denning points out for Bloomberg Opinion, even as it will take time for EV sales to surpass their fossil fuel counterparts, the more important metric may be when EVs capture more of the growth in sales. If EVs begin to seize all or most of the growth going forward, the position of major automakers – and the oil market – will quickly run into trouble. It only takes change at the margins to create significant disruption.

That may already be underway. Last year, EVs took home all of the growth in the auto market, a trend that is likely to continue, even if some short-term fluctuation is possible. In other words, the peak of the internal combustion engine may already be here. Independent researcher and journalist Gregor Macdonald has been beating this drum for quite a while, noting that gasoline and diesel vehicle sales in China have already hit a peak as well.

As the internal combustion engine sees sales plateau at a time when EV sales are soaring, automakers and Big Finance will turn to the growth opportunity.

Quote
This story may apply more broadly to the energy transition, not just to transportation. Fossil fuels dominate, and clean energy is still relatively small. But the lumbering giant is beginning to crumble. The 170 companies in the Russell 3000 Energy Index are down 12 percent since the start of 2017, according to Matthew Winkler of Bloomberg News. The decline comes even as broader equity markets have climbed substantially. The Russell 3000 gained 27 percent over the same period.

More importantly, clean energy stocks have done even better. The 89 publicly-traded companies that earn at least 10 percent of their revenues from clean energy, as identified by BloombergNEF, have seen their stocks rise by 50 percent since the beginning of 2017, Winkler points out.

In other words, if you invested in an oil or gas company in 2017, you likely have seen negative returns since then. If, instead, you chose to put your money in a clean energy company, you are likely pleased with that decision today.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: magnamentis on May 17, 2019, 07:43:24 PM
The idea that autonomous cars will somehow help us reach the 40% reduction in CO2 by 2030 is laughable. This is not to say that EV's and autonomous vehicles are not worthwhile pursuits but these efforts are a distraction from what is truly necessary.

Fossil fuels were the means used to shrink the planet, making far distant places easily and quickly accessible. This allowed for the globalization of our economic efforts and an explosion of pleasure travel. To get where we need to go, we must recognize that this easy accessibility to distant places is a luxury we cannot afford. To be carbon neutral by 2050, localization is crucial.

To understand the far ranging impact of such a transition, it is necessary to consider examples of what must change.

Example: If China is still manufacturing and shipping globally 60% of the socks everyone on the planet wears, we are screwed.

one starting point would be to prohibit any marine traffic on a motor if the winds are blowing at or above 2 beaufort.

marine travel is one of the only way of travel that's possible at 90% with wind-power and nowadays we can not only use sails but wind turbines (vertical ones) to produce electricity, charge batteries and even bridge parts of the remaining 10%.

further i doubt that smaller sail-vessels with less capacity, given the savings on fuel (money) would be that much less profitable and even if so, that would be a small price for a huge contribution into a good direction.

what we can feed from renewables nowadays is land-travel and marine-travel and with a reasonable marine-travel infrastructure and taking away some need for speed and further in the age of the internet and sat-com, we could get rid of 80% of air-travel if we only wanted (or had to)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: ASILurker on May 18, 2019, 02:33:24 AM
.... but these efforts are a distraction from what is truly necessary.

Yep. In a nutshell.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 21, 2019, 09:54:32 AM
<snip>
Norways energy consumption is rising, clearly visible in the other set with reported domestic emissions:
https://www.ssb.no/en/natur-og-miljo/statistikker/klimagassn/aar-endelige
<snip>
If someone had a look at the link above and was joyful over Norways 9.5% drop in road traffic emissions between 2016-2017, I forgot to add that 46% of biofuels was palm oil...
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: BeeKnees on May 21, 2019, 10:40:13 AM
<snip>
Norways energy consumption is rising, clearly visible in the other set with reported domestic emissions:
https://www.ssb.no/en/natur-og-miljo/statistikker/klimagassn/aar-endelige
<snip>
If someone had a look at the link above and was joyful over Norways 9.5% drop in road traffic emissions between 2016-2017, I forgot to add that 46% of biofuels was palm oil...

Good job 2017/18 it reduced by 70% and that the Norwegian government have banned it's purchase from 2020.

https://www.regnskog.no/en/news/palmoil-in-biodiesel-sees-massive-drop-in-norway

but it's still only a start and a long way short of what is needed globally. 

Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: BeeKnees on May 21, 2019, 11:16:48 AM
The transition towards full autonomous car transportation would require public transportation to be dismantled in tandem. Not only that, it would be the greatest endorsement of suburban sprawl, as every McMansion would have their own personal computerized chauffeur. Anecdotally, the biggest obstacle people have living in the suburbs is the commuting nightmare.  And autonomous cars eliminates that nightmare, even if it increases congestion and commute times. The luxury of being taken to work while watching netflix by yourself is profound in our perverted society..

I agree with this, public transportation systems as we know them are probably on their way out.  Big, heavy buses carrying half a dozen people for significant parts of their journey to locations the public have to travel to is probably not the way forward.  One reason why a bus is so big is to maximise the number of passengers a single driver can move from a-b. 

Remove the need for a driver and the transition in town suggests that smaller and more personalised transport in cities is the most likely way forwards.  A  half a dozen autonomous vehicles tracing routes around cities may have no bigger footprint on the road than the bus and you can claim they have traveled 6 times more distance, but whether these smaller more staggered vehicles cause more congestion really depends on how the road infrastructure evolves.   

I see it as all to play for and I hope the pod systems currently being developed have a place in our future and it's not just private companies using autonomous cars.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 21, 2019, 12:54:08 PM
<snip>
Norways energy consumption is rising, clearly visible in the other set with reported domestic emissions:
https://www.ssb.no/en/natur-og-miljo/statistikker/klimagassn/aar-endelige
<snip>
If someone had a look at the link above and was joyful over Norways 9.5% drop in road traffic emissions between 2016-2017, I forgot to add that 46% of biofuels was palm oil...

Good job 2017/18 it reduced by 70% and that the Norwegian government have banned it's purchase from 2020.

https://www.regnskog.no/en/news/palmoil-in-biodiesel-sees-massive-drop-in-norway

but it's still only a start and a long way short of what is needed globally.
Yes, but the use of palm oil tripled during 2017 even though Stortinget ran over the government back then...
https://www.nrk.no/norge/stortinget-overkjorer-regjeringen-om-palmeolje-pa-biltanken-1.13543188 (https://www.nrk.no/norge/stortinget-overkjorer-regjeringen-om-palmeolje-pa-biltanken-1.13543188)
https://www.nrk.no/norge/mer-palmeolje-i-norsk-biodiesel-enn-noensinne-1.14035882 (https://www.nrk.no/norge/mer-palmeolje-i-norsk-biodiesel-enn-noensinne-1.14035882)

And yes, since then we've had huge discussions in Scandinavia about palm oil, Norway obviously used more rape seed in 2018 and biofuels are as sustainable as any car, which leads back to the main point of my post about Norways total emissions which hardly dropped at all.

Edit; adding fuel sales. Behold the mitigation...
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: rboyd on May 21, 2019, 10:26:13 PM
Norway is like one of those plutocrats that gives some of their fortune to good causes (EV's)  - offsetting only a little of the damage that they do continuing to amassing their fortune (selling lots of oil and gas).

Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 22, 2019, 06:44:20 AM
Norway and Sweden are similar. Norway with a 100% clean grid will be interesting to follow in this thread because they are still failing in reducing their total emissions.
Unfortunately, statistics by SSB (and SCB in Sweden) will always lag future promises and dreams.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 22, 2019, 05:18:04 PM
The German auto industry is imploding.  So for sure that means it’s party time on this “Death to Cars” thread, amiright?  And any kind of government help should be verboten, of course!

Quote
ValueAnalyst (@ValueAnalyst1)
5/22/19, 6:33 AM
"The German automotive association expects the industry to make a substantial request for aid by the end of May"
finans.dk/indsigt/ECE113…
https://twitter.com/valueanalyst1/status/1131145978881433600

Tysk bilindustri bønfalder Berlin: »Giv os statsstøtte« - Indsigt - Forside
https://finans.dk/indsigt/ECE11350923/tysk-bilindustri-boenfalder-berlin-giv-os-statsstoette/?ctxref=ext

Via Google translate:
Quote
The automotive industry in Germany is under pressure almost unprecedented.

The pressure is so great that by the end of May, the automotive association Verband der Automobilindustrie (VDA) expects the automotive industry to make a substantial request for state aid.

Without cash assistance from the state, the consequence can be job losses, and since the automotive industry is the largest private employer in Europe's largest economy, the message should be expected to be taken seriously in Berlin.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: gerontocrat on May 22, 2019, 06:27:33 PM
The German auto industry is imploding.  So for sure that means it’s party time on this “Death to Cars” thread, amiright?  And any kind of government help should be verboten, of course!

Quote
"The German automotive association expects the industry to make a substantial request for aid by the end of May"
If the World's car-makers, including Germany can't make a buck on sales of 86 million vehicles it is by pure mismanagement.

https://www.best-selling-cars.com/global/2018-full-year-international-worldwide-car-sales-and-global-market-analysis/
Quote

2018 (Full Year) International: Worldwide Car Sales and Global Market Analysis
February 23, 2019 by Henk Bekker in Global, International

In 2018, around 86 million cars were sold in the top 54 world markets. SUVs were popular worldwide and electric car sales grew by 75%.

SUVs accounted for more than a third of all new cars sold worldwide in 2018
Global car and light commercial vehicle sales in 2018 contracted by 0.5% to 86 million vehicles. The Volkswagen Group, Toyota and Renault-Nissan were the largest carmakers and manufacturing groups in the world in 2018.

According to Jato, 2018 marked a somewhat challenging year for the global car market, as sales fell for the first time since 2009. However, worldwide car sales remained near record levels.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 22, 2019, 07:22:49 PM
Quote
Michael McDonough (@M_McDonough) 5/22/19, 8:22 AM
Global vehicle sales are declining at the fastest pace since the Financial Crisis:
https://twitter.com/m_mcdonough/status/1131173590949351424

Quote
Michael McDonough (@M_McDonough) 5/22/19, 12:30 PM
Global vehicle sales growth (broken down by region):
https://twitter.com/m_mcdonough/status/1131236021172154371

Graphs below.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 22, 2019, 07:31:09 PM
Quote
ValueAnalyst (@ValueAnalyst1)5/22/19, 10:26 AM
Jan07: "GM's global sales declined by less than 1% in 2006 as strong growth in Asia largely offset a slump in the U.S. auto market"

Two years after this article, $GM was bankrupt.

   GM US sales sank 7% in Q1, & inventories are near record.

ICE Death Watch ...
https://twitter.com/valueanalyst1/status/1131204689087860737

——
Quote
ValueAnalyst (@ValueAnalyst1) 5/22/19, 6:42 AM
IMO, the German automakers chose not to “trim the fat” and instead kept hundreds of thousands of employees EVEN AS THEY KNEW THIS DAY WOULD COME, so that they can use the workforce as leverage for government aid.

In other words, the executives used employees for ransom: profits. ...
https://twitter.com/valueanalyst1/status/1131148214063775746

——-
Quote
ValueAnalyst (@ValueAnalyst1) 5/22/19, 9:34 AM
ICE 2019 = BlackBerry 2012
https://twitter.com/valueanalyst1/status/1131191579623022592
Graph of Sales (Not stock price) below.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Neven on May 22, 2019, 09:58:23 PM
So for sure that means it’s party time on this “Death to Cars” thread, amiright?  And any kind of government help should be verboten, of course!

But it won't be, and guess who's paying to bail out concentrated wealth?
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 23, 2019, 06:02:38 AM
https://twitter.com/wenstephenson/status/1130800573849231360
Idle thought: Is it possible, just maybe, that one reason our democracy is in crisis (and we’ve failed to respond) is that too many people think tweeting = activism (or one’s take on a tv show = political engagement)? We’re tweeting while democracy & the planet burn (he tweets).
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 23, 2019, 07:49:35 AM
This will fit the topic of this thread as well:

Slideshare by Glen Peters.
https://www.slideshare.net/GlenPeters_CICERO/were-so-fucking-late (https://www.slideshare.net/GlenPeters_CICERO/were-so-fucking-late)
Adding four selected images below.

(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2205.0;attach=120857;image)
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2205.0;attach=120858;image)
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2205.0;attach=120859;image)
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2205.0;attach=120860;image)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 23, 2019, 08:34:04 AM
Norways Ministry of Finance don't believe in zero emissions.
https://www.statsbudsjettet.no/Statsbudsjettet-2019/Dokumenter1/Budsjettdokumenter/Nasjonalbudsjettet-2019/Meld-St-1-/3-Den-okonomiske-politikken-/37-Klimapolitikken-/ (https://www.statsbudsjettet.no/Statsbudsjettet-2019/Dokumenter1/Budsjettdokumenter/Nasjonalbudsjettet-2019/Meld-St-1-/3-Den-okonomiske-politikken-/37-Klimapolitikken-/)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 23, 2019, 02:36:28 PM
Quote
According to Jato, 2018 marked a somewhat challenging year for the global car market, as sales fell for the first time since 2009. However, worldwide car sales remained near record levels.

Growth in sales of EVs made up for much of the bigger drop in ICE vehicle sales.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 23, 2019, 03:29:37 PM
Which won't help total emissions much.

In Sweden we have a climate barometer for total road traffic emissions, updated monthly:
https://www.trafikverket.se/for-dig-i-branschen/miljo---for-dig-i-branschen/energi-och-klimat/Klimatbarometer/ (https://www.trafikverket.se/for-dig-i-branschen/miljo---for-dig-i-branschen/energi-och-klimat/Klimatbarometer/)

Quote
The climate barometer shows how much carbon dioxide is emitted from road traffic - from all Sweden's cars, trucks, buses, motorcycles and work machines. The barometer is updated monthly.

The climate barometer indicates the sum of all carbon dioxide emissions for all fuels - gasoline and diesel, but also ethanol, biodiesel (FAME and HVO), natural gas and biogas. The calculation covers all emissions, both from the manufacture and distribution of a fuel and from the combustion of it in an engine. The barometer gives a more complete picture and allows for a closer follow-up than has been possible before. Data on fuel deliveries receives the Swedish Transport Administration from Statistics Sweden every month. In addition to road traffic, work machines, work tools and leisure boats are also covered.

Quote
The index now stands at 98, ie two per cent lower than the 1990 emissions. During the last 12 months, emissions have increased by 1.9 per cent. This can be compared with the necessary reduction rate of about 8 per cent per year to reach the climate target for the transport sector in 2030.

Edit; forgot to add this article which explains why emissions went up last year and what they think we should do (~90% 'clean' grid here):
https://www.trafikverket.se/om-oss/nyheter/Nationellt/2019-02/okad-lastbilstrafik-orsakade-utslappsokning/ (https://www.trafikverket.se/om-oss/nyheter/Nationellt/2019-02/okad-lastbilstrafik-orsakade-utslappsokning/)
Quote
- We need to increase the pace if we are to meet the climate target. In addition to stricter policy instruments for more energy-efficient vehicles and an increased share of renewable energy, this is about more public transport, walking and cycling in densely built-up areas. On the freight side, it is about longer, heavier and, in the long run, fewer trucks and more goods by rail and shipping, ”says Marie Hagberg, department manager for transport quality at the Swedish Transport Administration.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 23, 2019, 05:35:54 PM
Quote
Growth in sales of EVs made up for much of the bigger drop in ICE vehicle sales.
Quote
Which won't help total emissions much.

And which leads to my honest question:  since a failed German auto industry is probably the most likely event which would cause a near-term reduction in car sales, particularly ICE car sales in Europe, are you cheering for their demise, or not?
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: magnamentis on May 23, 2019, 05:58:51 PM
as certain as tesla is going down the river mid- long term (as an independent manufacturer) not one german manufacturer will follow suit.

i know i'm repeating myself because reasoning is apparently useless but i come back an remind you once tesla is either gone, merged, purchased or bankrupt (which i don't hope) and german automakers will have risen to new highs with a mix of:

- Hydrogen ICEs
- Fuel Cell EVs
- Hybrids Evs for a few decades
- An Increasing fleet of EVs and sooner or later they will come up with new breakthrough tech ;)
- and last but not least and unfortunately ICE vehicles for a few years to make the bridge.

the reluctance to buy new cars is also due to a developing economic crisis on the horizon
that many can see emerge (in fact the last crises has never really been overcome but camouflaged)

in short, there won't be a demis of german automakers as little as there will be human extinction
by climate change as such (perhaps through side effects of GW and SLR but not directly by warming)


Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: SteveMDFP on May 23, 2019, 06:13:11 PM
...
i know i'm repeating myself because reasoning is apparently useless but i come back an remind you once tesla is either gone, merged, purchased or bankrupt (which i don't hope) and german automakers will have risen to new highs with a mix of:

- Oxygen ICEs
...

Do you mean hydrogen?  There's already oxygen in the air, it's not a fuel.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: magnamentis on May 23, 2019, 06:21:58 PM
...
i know i'm repeating myself because reasoning is apparently useless but i come back an remind you once tesla is either gone, merged, purchased or bankrupt (which i don't hope) and german automakers will have risen to new highs with a mix of:

- Oxygen ICEs
...

Do you mean hydrogen?  There's already oxygen in the air, it's not a fuel.

sorry, gonna correct it, lapsus, thanks for hinting  :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 23, 2019, 06:46:27 PM
...
in short, there won't be a demis of german automakers ...

I’d say the inability to survive without government assistance is a failure of the highest order.

"The German automotive association expects the industry to make a substantial request for aid by the end of May"
Quote
The automotive industry in Germany is under pressure almost unprecedented.

The pressure is so great that by the end of May, the automotive association Verband der Automobilindustrie (VDA) expects the automotive industry to make a substantial request for state aid.

Without cash assistance from the state, the consequence can be job losses, and since the automotive industry is the largest private employer in Europe's largest economy, the message should be expected to be taken seriously in Berlin.

https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2687.msg200548.html#msg200548
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: magnamentis on May 23, 2019, 08:13:36 PM
...
in short, there won't be a demis of german automakers ...

I’d say the inability to survive without government assistance is a failure of the highest order.

"The German automotive association expects the industry to make a substantial request for aid by the end of May"
Quote
The automotive industry in Germany is under pressure almost unprecedented.

The pressure is so great that by the end of May, the automotive association Verband der Automobilindustrie (VDA) expects the automotive industry to make a substantial request for state aid.

Without cash assistance from the state, the consequence can be job losses, and since the automotive industry is the largest private employer in Europe's largest economy, the message should be expected to be taken seriously in Berlin.

https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2687.msg200548.html#msg200548

asking for aid = whining with billions of recent profits in the pocket, does not mean that the help is NEEDED, it's just WELCOME, why not take it if someone is ready to give, be it to increase power or keep power or being afraid to lose jobs.

it's an old game that is played and neven would say that concentrated wealth knows very well to concentrated further at the cost of the sheep that follow to pack over the cliff.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Neven on May 23, 2019, 09:27:23 PM
Why cheer for no change?
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Neven on May 23, 2019, 09:57:31 PM
it's an old game that is played and neven would say that concentrated wealth knows very well to concentrated further at the cost of the sheep that follow to pack over the cliff.

What concentrated wealth knows how to do, is motivate people with flexible morals to come up with schemes such as this one, by rewarding them for helping concentrated wealth grow and become more concentrated. So, by putting a cap on how much people can own, you put a big damper on that dynamic. Only when that dynamic becomes less powerful, do you have a chance of successfully implementing solutions.

That's something I'd cheer for, because I actually want problems to be solved, and not greenified.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: magnamentis on May 24, 2019, 12:04:39 AM
Why cheer for no change?

no cheering at all, naming facts as far as i can assess them is not cheering. if i say who wins the war it does not mean i like wars or the winner ;)

as to the post after the quoted one, you should know by now that i'm as with you as one can get on that point.

shedding light to things from different angles and trying to be as objective as possible is not the same like flexible morals if you meant me with that.

last but not least once groups with non-flexible views oppose each other the outcome has been at least as disastrous, it is how past and current wars are fueled, including all the religious confrontation about things where there is 90% agreement. they all think they have purchased the truth.

hope you see what i'm heading at, good night
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 24, 2019, 05:22:36 AM
Quote
Growth in sales of EVs made up for much of the bigger drop in ICE vehicle sales.
Which won't help total emissions much.

In Sweden we have a climate barometer for total road traffic emissions, updated monthly:
https://www.trafikverket.se/for-dig-i-branschen/miljo---for-dig-i-branschen/energi-och-klimat/Klimatbarometer/ (https://www.trafikverket.se/for-dig-i-branschen/miljo---for-dig-i-branschen/energi-och-klimat/Klimatbarometer/)

Quote
The climate barometer shows how much carbon dioxide is emitted from road traffic - from all Sweden's cars, trucks, buses, motorcycles and work machines. The barometer is updated monthly.

The climate barometer indicates the sum of all carbon dioxide emissions for all fuels - gasoline and diesel, but also ethanol, biodiesel (FAME and HVO), natural gas and biogas. The calculation covers all emissions, both from the manufacture and distribution of a fuel and from the combustion of it in an engine. The barometer gives a more complete picture and allows for a closer follow-up than has been possible before. Data on fuel deliveries receives the Swedish Transport Administration from Statistics Sweden every month. In addition to road traffic, work machines, work tools and leisure boats are also covered.

Quote
The index now stands at 98, ie two per cent lower than the 1990 emissions. During the last 12 months, emissions have increased by 1.9 per cent. This can be compared with the necessary reduction rate of about 8 per cent per year to reach the climate target for the transport sector in 2030.

Edit; forgot to add this article which explains why emissions went up last year and what they think we should do (~90% 'clean' grid here):
https://www.trafikverket.se/om-oss/nyheter/Nationellt/2019-02/okad-lastbilstrafik-orsakade-utslappsokning/ (https://www.trafikverket.se/om-oss/nyheter/Nationellt/2019-02/okad-lastbilstrafik-orsakade-utslappsokning/)
Quote
- We need to increase the pace if we are to meet the climate target. In addition to stricter policy instruments for more energy-efficient vehicles and an increased share of renewable energy, this is about more public transport, walking and cycling in densely built-up areas. On the freight side, it is about longer, heavier and, in the long run, fewer trucks and more goods by rail and shipping, ”says Marie Hagberg, department manager for transport quality at the Swedish Transport Administration.

(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2687.0;attach=120890;image)

And which leads to my honest question:  since a failed German auto industry is probably the most likely event which would cause a near-term reduction in car sales, particularly ICE car sales in Europe, are you cheering for their demise, or not?
No, I cheer over possible changes like the one I quoted above in bold and this previous comment:

Hmm, a bit early maybe but if this is a new trend it's good.

A piece by Linus Eriksson, traffic director at Skånetrafiken:
Skåne is entering a new era where the car is no longer the norm. Maybe car shame follows flying shame?
https://www.sydsvenskan.se/2019-05-15/skane-ar-pa-vag-in-i-en-ny-era-dar-bilen-inte-langre-ar-norm-foljer-bilskam-efter-flygskam (https://www.sydsvenskan.se/2019-05-15/skane-ar-pa-vag-in-i-en-ny-era-dar-bilen-inte-langre-ar-norm-foljer-bilskam-efter-flygskam)

In just a few months the travel pattern in Skåne has changed. According to Swedavia, the number of air passengers at Malmö Airport decreased by 11 per cent for the first four months of the year. During the same period, travel by public transport in Skåne increased by 1.8 million trips. The regional bus traffic around Lund and Kristianstad increased by 10 percent, the city traffic in Malmö by just over 7 percent, and the Pågatågen by 4 percent.

I think we are entering a new era. Every day, 420,000 sustainable journeys are made with Skånetrafiken, all of which buses and trains are fossil fuel-free. Regardless of what is claimed in the debate, Skåne has a large range of trains and bus services that reach far above the political level of ambition of ten double trips per weekday for resorts with at least 1 000 inhabitants. In places such as Åhus, Höganäs, Broby, Höllviken, the demand is so great that Skånetrafiken runs a bus between every 5-10 minutes.

Changes that will minimize the useless use of cars as much as possible. Is it possible that the car manufacturers and oil companies can do something else, other than further destruction to our civilization?

Insisting that a transition to a clean grid and EV's for everyone will provide some meaningful mitigation, is not working, I've presented Norways numbers above in several posts. Why? They simply and clearly show no mitigation (apart from a minor dent on road emissions (which is ~half of the reported drop of emissions), very similar to Sweden but we still don't have as many EV's and a slightly less cleaner grid. In fact, the total number of distance travelled will only increase energy consumption and put further stress on our civilization.

The real mitigation part in Sweden and Norway is heating, thanks to a warmer climate and efficiency. That is very visible in the stats. Also in the projections ahead, adding a recent one for electricity use in Sweden. Top to bottom:
Domestic
Operational
Heating
Industry
Transport
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 24, 2019, 06:04:42 AM
Here's the report I mentioned above:
https://www.energiforetagen.se/link/6e8a65b9e6d54caeb33072fddf7d7660.aspx (https://www.energiforetagen.se/link/6e8a65b9e6d54caeb33072fddf7d7660.aspx)

In Swedish of course and it might be overly positive, which this section indicates:
Quote
At the same time, we would like to point out that there are other potential electricity demand areas that are considered to have a relatively moderate impact in the flight plan scenario. It could, for example, be about greatly increased electricity consumption for comfort cooling, battery factories, greatly increased production in any electricity-intensive industrial industry or electric flights. Another example is that in the chemical industry, estimates have been made that indicate a possible additional electricity requirement of 4–22 TWh in addition to what we assume in the flight plan scenario. When you consider such long periods of time, as until 2045, it is also important to realize that Electricity use areas can be added that we cannot predict at all today. This could mean a greater use of electricity than the one on which the flight plan scenario is based.
Another example of the uncertainties in the assessment of future electricity use is the population development in Sweden. Previous analyzes have identified the difference between Statistics Sweden's lowest and highest population forecast in 2050 corresponds to an electricity usage difference of 30-40 TWh. Our scenario is based on a population development in the middle of that interval, which means that the use of the road map scenario in 2045 could be 15 TWh lower or 15 TWh higher, only with regard to population developments.

Adding another image, total electricity use, with transmission losses included.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 24, 2019, 10:15:01 AM
Outlining the risks and challenges for the US.
https://rhg.com/research/capturing-leadership-policies-for-the-us-to-advance-direct-air-capture-technology/ (https://rhg.com/research/capturing-leadership-policies-for-the-us-to-advance-direct-air-capture-technology/)

Last year, global CO2 emissions reached an all-time high. Recent scientific research indicates that global emissions need to reach net-zero between 2045 and 2055 to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius. DAC technology does not make it possible to bypass the difficult work of reducing emissions. We find that even with break-neck electrification of vehicles, buildings, and industry, unprecedented improvements in energy efficiency, completely decarbonized power generation, and carbon removal from enhanced natural sequestration, DAC technology will be essential for the US to decarbonize by midcentury. Our analysis indicates that for the US to reach net-zero emissions by 2045 (our “100by45” scenarios) between 560 and 1,850 million metric tons of CO2 will need to be removed by DAC technology and then permanently stored underground annually, depending on the availability of other carbon removal options, such as bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and natural sequestration, and the pace of electrification in the transportation, buildings, and industrial sectors.

Sounds familiar...
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 24, 2019, 01:50:03 PM
Quote
Growth in sales of EVs made up for much of the bigger drop in ICE vehicle sales.
Quote
Which won't help total emissions much.

And which leads to my honest question:  since a failed German auto industry is probably the most likely event which would cause a near-term reduction in car sales, particularly ICE car sales in Europe, are you cheering for their demise, or not?

Quote
No, I cheer over possible changes like the one I quoted above …
Quote
Changes that will minimize the useless use of cars as much as possible. Is it possible that the car manufacturers and oil companies can do something else, other than further destruction to our civilization?

Insisting that a transition to a clean grid and EV's for everyone will provide some meaningful mitigation, is not working, I've presented Norways numbers above in several posts. Why? They simply and clearly show no mitigation (apart from a minor dent on road emissions (which is ~half of the reported drop of emissions), very similar to Sweden but we still don't have as many EV's and a slightly less cleaner grid. In fact, the total number of distance travelled will only increase energy consumption and put further stress on our civilization.

Thank you for an honest reply.  But despite all the protestations, the numbers and graphs and videos, you are voting for BAU for today!  To paraphrase: ‘There aren’t many EVs on the road, and they aren’t doing much good for our overall numbers, so let’s wait until Big Oil and Big Auto agree to do something else.’

Nothing short of radical change will get us out of the oil pit we are in.  Perhaps some day, most people will live where, and in a way that, individual transportation is unnecessary.  But right now, today, 1) we need to stop burning fossil fuels, and 2) individuals still need individualized transportation.  To solve that, we need to stop making ICE cars, and we need to accelerate the transition to sustainable transport and sustainable energy.  The faster the biggest oil-dependent companies — whose profit depends on holding back that transition — die a natural (or faster) death, the faster we can move toward the transformation we require.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 24, 2019, 04:35:43 PM
No, I try to live as I speak and try to follow numbers and facts, not fiction or opinions. Also try to maintain a holistic approach and follow wether people are changing attitudes, or not.
RCP2.6 is dead and this planet will go past two degrees like nothing since almost everything we build today are built with fossil fuels. Attitudes must change since we can't create energy, so the only option left is to cut back consumption and use renewables and the electric transports we can afford, as wisely as possible.

----
If someone noticed the presentation I posted with Glen Peters earlier, it was from UFGC19 in Oslo:

https://youtu.be/WormEBkccsE

Also adding their offical t-shirt.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Shared Humanity on May 24, 2019, 08:04:57 PM
Attitudes must change since we can't create energy, so the only option left is to cut back consumption...


Clear, concise and correct.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 24, 2019, 09:05:54 PM
Attitudes must change since we can't create energy, so the only option left is to cut back consumption...


Clear, concise and correct.

I am not arguing against efficiency, but:

The sun provides more energy to the earth in one hour than the world currently uses in one year.

There plenty of energy we can gather to use to transition to today’s clean electric transportation; to get us off fossil fuels as quickly as possible, while new technology and new lifestyles are developed that need less of it.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: wili on May 24, 2019, 11:35:08 PM
Sig quoted (without citing):

"The sun provides more energy to the earth in one hour than the world currently uses in one year."

This reminds me of the glowing statements pro-hydrogen-powered car people used to make about how hydrogen--it is the most abundant element in the universe.

Entirely true, and entirely irrelevant.

We are already using a huge portion of Net Primary Production (40% according to a study a few years back, iirc), that is the energy that is available to nearly all living things through photosynthesis. How much bigger of a portion should we take, while depriving the rest of life on the planet their share?

ETA: Digging around a bit, I see more recent calculations put the number closer to 25%, but that represents a doubling over the last century. (And note that this study is 6 years old. Anyone have any more current data?)

https://www.pnas.org/content/110/25/10324

ETAA: OK, I may be going down a bit of a rabbit's hole here, but this more recent paper seems to say that adding marine to terrestrial Human Appropriation of NNP comes to 37 %, but maybe I'm missing something here?

"...25% of terrestrial NPP...
∼13% of marine NPP..."

But perhaps these should be averaged, after they have been weighted according to total NNP in each realm?

https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/115/25/6328.full.pdf
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 25, 2019, 02:01:10 AM
Here’s a ref or two:

Quote
12. What is the theoretical potential of solar energy?
Sunlight has by far the highest theoretical potential of the earth’s renewable energy sources. The solar constant (the solar flux intercepted by the earth) is 1.37 kW/m2. The cross-sectional area of the earth intercepting this flux at any instant is πr2 (where r = 6,378 km is the earth’s radius), but the surface area of the earth over which this flux is averaged over time is 4πr2. Hence, the time-and-space-averaged solar flux striking the outer atmosphere of the earth is (1.37 kW/m2) / 4 = 342.5 W/m2. In addition, enroute to the earth’s surface, about 30% of this flux is scattered, and about 19% is absorbed, by the atmosphere and clouds (Wallace 1977, pp. 320-321). Hence, the average flux striking the earth’s surface is 342.5 W/m2 · (1-0.49) = 174.7 W/m2.
The theoretical potential of solar power is the integral of this average flux over the earth’s surface area (4πr2):
(4) P = (174.7 W/m2) · (4πr2)
= (174.7 W/m2) · 4π · (6,378 km)2 · (106 m2/km2) · (10-12 TW/W)
= 89,300 TW.
This theoretical potential represents more energy striking the earth’s surface in one and a half hours (480 EJ)67 than worldwide energy consumption in the year 2001 from all sources combined (430 EJ)68.
https://www.sandia.gov/%7Ejytsao/Solar%20FAQs.pdf


How Much Room Do We Need To Supply The Entire World With Solar Electricity?
Quote
In 2009, the total global electricity consumption was 20,279,640 GWh. The sun creates more energy than that in one hour. The tricky part is collecting that energy and converting it into useful electricity with solar panels. How much area would need to be covered with solar panels in order to capture enough energy to meet global demand? Actually, it’s not as much as you’d think.

The image [below] has three red boxes showing what area would need to be covered for Germany (De), Europe (EU-25), and the entire world.
https://www.iflscience.com/environment/how-much-room-do-we-need-supply-entire-world-solar-electricity/

Not exactly a huge deprivation of energy for the planet. 
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 25, 2019, 05:00:25 AM
I've posted those too in the past and I truly wish the World could go back 10-15 years.
My personal wish would be to go back 40.

Edit; The forum was unresponsive earlier this morning and I just wanted to add one more thing:
Stabilizing at any given temperature requires radical emission reductions and NET's.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: sidd on May 25, 2019, 09:24:34 AM
NPP compared to total solar energy illuminating the earth is not too useful. At best photosynthesis is 10% efficient even in rapacious crop like sugarcane. 5% is a high estimate for most photosynthesis. Then there is a huge amount of attrition as you move up the trophic chain to the top that humans harvest.

I accept in a very loose sense that humans "use" about a third of NPP, but a lot of that is after NPP is eaten by many creatures up the food chain. The amount that winds up been directly used by me when i eat a fish i caught or eat a chicken i raised is a very small fraction of all the photosynthesis that went in to support that animal.

Not so surprisingly fossilization of oil and coal capture a very large fraction of the NPP (the the 5% or less figure)
Probably much more that the chicken or the fish. But the carbon load from fossil is coming from sequestered NPP many megayear ago.

sidd
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 26, 2019, 05:20:13 AM
<snip>
This reminds me of the glowing statements pro-hydrogen-powered car people used to make about how hydrogen--it is the most abundant element in the universe.

Entirely true, and entirely irrelevant.
<snip>
Hydrogen got me thinking about the glowing statements presented by our steel industry. The new green companies like SSAB, LKAB and Vattenfall are making delusional promises here with HYBRIT and it's a huge area where the sun's energy is not adequate by itself.
Their two main issues:
1. It's about 20-30 years before this technology can be introduced in large-scale industrial production.
2. To produce hydrogen in an energy-efficient way, so that it becomes economically justifiable.

The real issue, apart from the 'natural' calamities the World might see by then, illustrated by this:
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 26, 2019, 09:29:07 AM
Inauguration of the Worlds first off grid hydrogen station in Mariestad on Tuesday (May 28).
https://www.svt.se/nyheter/vetenskap/folj-med-till-varldens-forsta-sjalvforsorjande-vatgasmack (https://www.svt.se/nyheter/vetenskap/folj-med-till-varldens-forsta-sjalvforsorjande-vatgasmack)
Video at the link, unfortunately in Swedish.

Looks nice, until you start looking at the numbers and realize how many that would be needed.
Document links at the botttom.

Edit; forgot to add the obvious, the winter months here doesn't provide much energy.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: b_lumenkraft on May 26, 2019, 08:41:10 PM
This one is making its rounds on Twitter and it is hilarious.

In French, étron means 'shit'. Audi literally called their car Audi shit!
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 26, 2019, 10:20:14 PM
This one is making its rounds on Twitter and it is hilarious.

In French, étron means 'shit'. Audi literally called their car Audi shit!

Elon Musk termed it a “Bold move.”  ;D

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1132222516217253888
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: rboyd on May 26, 2019, 11:00:57 PM
The Electric Vehicle Revolution Will Come from China — not the US

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019/05/the-electric-vehicle-revolution-will-come-from-china-not-the-us.html (https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019/05/the-electric-vehicle-revolution-will-come-from-china-not-the-us.html)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: gerontocrat on May 27, 2019, 12:52:18 PM
Electric car development trashing the main automakers?
Quote
Fiat-Renault Mega-Merger Is Born of Desperation
By Chris Bryant
Politics and the cost of developing electric vehicles have pushed two of Europe's biggest carmakers together.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion

Other reports take a more +ve spin on this possible merger.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Shared Humanity on May 27, 2019, 02:49:21 PM
This one is making its rounds on Twitter and it is hilarious.

In French, étron means 'shit'. Audi literally called their car Audi shit!


In the 1970's GM was struggling to understand why its most popular car in the U.S. was not selling well in Central and South America until they realized that Nova meant No Go in Spanish.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: b_lumenkraft on May 27, 2019, 02:56:34 PM
Yeah, and Mitsubishi had its Pajero which means jerk in Spanish.

You would think they learned from things like that and just google it, but nope!

Their inability to adapt on every level will cost them everything, soonish.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 27, 2019, 03:52:34 PM
Inability to adapt on every level will cost.

V1 by JimD:
Quote
« Reply #53 on: January 09, 2014, 05:23:05 AM »
Several of the last handful of comments hit exactly on why I started this thread.

Many people just do not have a good understanding of the scope and scale of the global vehicle fleet.  The idea that we can switch to electric vehicles and solve our fossil fuel consumption problem (especially in any meaningful time frame) is mistaken.  Just like the idea of hydrogen cars won't fix it either.

The infrastructure change over time is far too long and, as pointed out, where you get your electricity matters as if it is from a coal plant you are better off driving a gas vehicle.

BAU with our current fleet will not work.  Green-BAU with an electric fleet will not happen in time and would not have much chance of making a difference to the end result.
<snip>

V2 by JimD:
Quote
« Reply #3392 on: February 26, 2018, 04:38:48 PM »
<snip>
The fundamental reason I started this thread years ago was to point out that the answer is 'no cars'.  EV technology is fine and the collective we will advance it a long ways over the next few decades.  But it will not save us - thus my atheism.  A world of a couple of billion ev's just justify's extending the standard infrastructure and human footprint.  EV's as they are being approached, especially by Musk - luxury, are another form of BAU and a denial of our desperate situation.

We must change our way of life and our footprint.
<snip>

V3 by Neven:
Quote
« Reply #6723 on: May 13, 2019, 05:31:14 PM »
<snip>
Anyway, maybe a split is a good idea. I don't like how this thread has become the one with the most replies on the entire forum. So, here's an Electric cars thread for discussing the latest in EV technology and infrastructure. This thread can continue to be used what it was meant for originally: Whether sustainable transportation is a viable option as a Green BAU solution.
<snip>
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 29, 2019, 08:25:11 AM
On topic.

What can we learn from consumption-based carbon footprints at different spatial scales?
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab2212 (https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab2212)

Quote
Background: Current climate change mitigation policies, including the Paris Agreement, are based on territorial greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting. This neglects the understanding of GHG emissions embodied in trade. As a solution, consumption-based accounting (CBA) that reveals the lifecycle emissions, including transboundary flows, is gaining support as a complementary information tool. CBA is particularly relevant in cities that tend to outsource a large part of their production-based emissions to their hinterlands. While CBA has so far been used relatively little in practical policymaking, it has been used widely by scientists.

Methods and Design: The purpose of this systematic review, which covers more than 100 studies, is to reflect the policy implications of consumption-based carbon footprint (CBCF) studies at different spatial scales. The review was conducted by reading through the discussion sections of the reviewed studies and systematically collecting the given policy suggestions for different spatial scales. We used both numerical and qualitative methods to organize and interpret the findings of the review.

Review Results and Discussion: The motivation for the review was to investigate whether the unique consumption perspective of CBA leads to similarly unique policy features. We found that various carbon pricing policies are the most widely supported policy instrument in the relevant literature. However, overall, there is a shortage of discussion on policy instruments, since the policy discussions focus on policy outcomes, such as behavioral change or technological solutions. In addition, some policy recommendations are conflicting. Particularly, urban density and compact city policies are supported by some studies and questioned by others. To clarify the issue, we examined how the results regarding the relationship between urban development and the CBCF vary. The review provides a concise starting point for policymakers and future research by summarizing the timely policy implications.

The challenges in one image, Fig3 below. Also adding the three tables.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on May 31, 2019, 07:40:19 AM
A question in another thread reminded me of Meadows bathtub analogy.

First an old quote by Donella and then Dennis version from last year in three images.
http://donellameadows.org/archives/on-bathtubs-carbon-dioxide-and-disrespect/ (http://donellameadows.org/archives/on-bathtubs-carbon-dioxide-and-disrespect/)
Quote
–August 23, 1990–
...
The real issues here, the underlying fears that trigger our anger, are that on the one hand a bunch of environmental alarmists will force unnecessary changes in our fossil-fuel-powered way of doing things, and that on the other hand a bunch of technological conservatives with heavy stakes in fossil-fuel industries will drive the climate and the earth’s ecosystems into overheated chaos.

Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Ken Feldman on May 31, 2019, 06:36:28 PM
The IEA is now projecting that there will be 250 million EVs on the road in 2030 (up from 125 million last year).

https://cleantechnica.com/2019/05/30/iea-predicts-250-million-evs-on-the-road-by-2030/ (https://cleantechnica.com/2019/05/30/iea-predicts-250-million-evs-on-the-road-by-2030/)

Quote
What a difference a year makes. Last year, the International Energy Agency annual report predicted there would be 125 million EVs on the road worldwide by 2030. Its new 2019 report is out and it has doubled that prediction to 250 million electric vehicles by 2030, assuming the 25 nations that are part of the Clean Energy Ministerial EV30@30 program honor their commitments.

electric car sales If they do, that will mean 43 million new EVs are sold in 2030. If the more conservative “new policies” scenario prevails, 23 million EVs will be sold in 2030 and the total worldwide will reach 130 million.

Quote
Considering there were about 5 million electric cars on the road at the end of last year, this year’s prediction anticipates a dramatic increase in the number of EVs that will be sold worldwide over the next 10 years. The IEA report excludes sales of electrified two- and three-wheeled vehicles.

Quote
The current rate of cost reduction for battery storage systems is likely to continue over the next 10 years and will be strongly linked to the growth of electromobility. “It is expected that by 2025, batteries will increasingly use cathode chemistries that are less dependent on cobalt, such as NMC 811, NMC 622 or NMC 532 cathodes in the NMC family, or advanced NCA batteries,” the report adds.

The output from battery manufacturing plants will increase considerably from annual production of about 8 GWh today to an around 20 GWh in 2023, further driving down prices for EV batteries.

“Other technology developments are also expected to contribute to cost reductions,” the IEA claims. “These include the possibility to redesign vehicle manufacturing platforms using simpler and innovative design architecture that capitalize on the compact dimensions of electric motors ….. The use of big data to customize battery size to travel needs and avoid over sizing the batteries [will be] especially relevant for heavy duty vehicles.”

Quote
In general, IEA predictions tend to be on the conservative side, so the size of the EV market in 2030 could be significantly larger than suggested by this year’s report. After all, the IEA’s own forecast doubled in just the past 12 months. Absent the US forcing the world to start driving coal burning vehicles, for EV advocates the future is bright indeed.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Ken Feldman on May 31, 2019, 06:44:03 PM

RCP2.6 is dead and this planet will go past two degrees like nothing since almost everything we build today are built with fossil fuels. Attitudes must change since we can't create energy, so the only option left is to cut back consumption and use renewables and the electric transports we can afford, as wisely as possible.


Unless you know what's going to happen in the future, you can't say that.  Here's a good article on the RCPs in plain language.

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/01/rcp-85-the-climate-change-disaster-scenario/579700/ (https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/01/rcp-85-the-climate-change-disaster-scenario/579700/)

Quote
There are a few reasons it’s hard to say which RCP comes closest to our reality. First, most of the RCPs tell roughly the same story about global emissions until about 2025 or 2030. Second, the RCPs describe emissions across the entire sweep of the 21st century—and the century mostly hasn’t happened yet. Trying to pick the most likely RCP in 2018 is a bit like trying to predict the precise depth of late-night snowfall at 4:32 a.m.

Given the pace of change in renewable energy deployment, the projections of EVs to outsell ICEs by the mid-2020s and the probability of richer countries deploying negative emissions technologies such as direct air capture of CO2, RCP 2.6 is still possible.  In fact, it's more likely than RCP 8.5.

Quote
The RCP 8.5 scenario may also become less likely in years to come, even if major polluters like the United States, China, and India never pass muscular climate policy. RCP 8.5 says that the global coal industry will eventually become seven times bigger than it is today. “It’s tough to claim that … that is a business-as-usual world,” Hausfather says. “It’s certainly a possible world, but we also live in a world today where solar is increasingly cheaper than coal.”
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Ken Feldman on May 31, 2019, 07:02:56 PM
And here's a study indicating that 1.5 C is still achievable by replacing exisiting fossil fuel infrastructure with renewables at the end of it's useful life.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-07999-w (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-07999-w)

Quote
Current fossil fuel infrastructure does not yet commit us to 1.5 °C warming

Christopher J. Smith, Piers M. Forster, Myles Allen, Jan Fuglestvedt, Richard J. Millar, Joeri Rogelj & Kirsten Zickfeld

Nature Communications 10, Article number: 101 (2019)  |  Download Citation

Abstract

Committed warming describes how much future warming can be expected from historical emissions due to inertia in the climate system. It is usually defined in terms of the level of warming above the present for an abrupt halt of emissions. Owing to socioeconomic constraints, this situation is unlikely, so we focus on the committed warming from present-day fossil fuel assets. Here we show that if carbon-intensive infrastructure is phased out at the end of its design lifetime from the end of 2018, there is a 64% chance that peak global mean temperature rise remains below 1.5 °C. Delaying mitigation until 2030 considerably reduces the likelihood that 1.5 °C would be attainable even if the rate of fossil fuel retirement was accelerated. Although the challenges laid out by the Paris Agreement are daunting, we indicate 1.5 °C remains possible and is attainable with ambitious and immediate emission reduction across all sectors.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on June 01, 2019, 09:15:46 AM

RCP2.6 is dead and this planet will go past two degrees like nothing since almost everything we build today are built with fossil fuels. Attitudes must change since we can't create energy, so the only option left is to cut back consumption and use renewables and the electric transports we can afford, as wisely as possible.


Unless you know what's going to happen in the future, you can't say that. <snip>
I don't need the future, just IMAGE.  ;D

Edit; and Ken, all your four posts in this thread are off topic.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on June 04, 2019, 08:29:26 AM
A follow up to the above and also a crosspost emanating from a comment on SR15 and scientific reticence. A trip down memory lane:

Hansen on scientific reticence and sea level rise. (2007)
https://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abs/ha01210n.html (https://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abs/ha01210n.html)

Van Vuuren from 2007 (a paper preceeding the RCP2.6 one from 2011...).
Stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations at low levels: an assessment of reduction strategies and costs
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10584-006-9172-9 (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10584-006-9172-9)

Adding Fig. 3:  Global CO 2 -eq. emissions (all sources) for the B2 baseline emission and pathways to stabilization at a concentration of 650, 550 and 450 ppm CO 2 -eq.

Edit; also adding Fig. 12 from the Van Vuuren 2011 paper. Emissions for the IMAGE (IM) alternative RCP scenarios.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on June 04, 2019, 10:25:15 AM
Crossposting this comment by zizek from the Tesla thread:
<snip>
Musk's email to Employees dated May 16 2019
Quote
That is a lot of money, but actually only gives us approximately ten months at the first-quarter burn rate to achieve breakeven. It's vital that we respect the faith investors have shown in Tesla, but it will require great effort to do so.

That is why, going forward, all expenses of any kind anywhere in the world, including parts, salary, travel expenses, rent, literally every payment that leaves our bank account must be reviewed, confirmed as critical and the top of every page of outgoing payments signed by our CFO.

I will personally review and sign every 10th page.

Please examine closely every expense where responsibility is, or probably should be, assigned to your group. If in doubt, assume it is on your plate, so that we don't have anything slip through the cracks.

This will take at least a few weeks to get right. Please don't worry if it isn't correct at first.

This is hardcore, but it is the only way for Tesla to become financially sustainable and succeed in our goal of helping make the world environmentally sustainable.

Thanks again for your excellent work,

Elon
That part in bold is the real problem.

The World will not become environmentally sustainable, when the goal is to get rid of fossil fuel emissions while continuing current economic growth and resource depletion, which will increase our footprint.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on June 04, 2019, 05:14:57 PM
How the Trade War could induce China to mess up lithium batteries and other sustainable hitech:
https://aheadoftheherd.com/Newsletter/2019/How-China-wins-trade-war.htm
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Shared Humanity on June 04, 2019, 06:30:02 PM

This is hardcore, but it is the only way for Tesla to become financially sustainable and succeed in our goal of helping make the world environmentally sustainable.


I have felt for some time that Tesla is headed for bankruptcy. Would never consider investing in their stock. Having said this, the hard work that has been done will not be wasted as the assets will be purchased and EV's will still be produced.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Ken Feldman on June 04, 2019, 08:38:05 PM
Are we at peak auto demand?

https://cleantechnica.com/2019/06/04/wall-street-issues-peak-car-warning/ (https://cleantechnica.com/2019/06/04/wall-street-issues-peak-car-warning/)

Quote
Wall Street Issues “Peak Car” Warning

June 4th, 2019 by Steve Hanley

The production and sale of automobiles has been one of the bedrock industries of the global economy for generations, but sadly nothing lasts forever. Recently, a number of Wall Street cognoscenti have begun warning that the world has reached “peak car.” The implications for national economies are staggering.

“The pain is just beginning,” Masataka Kunugimoto, an analyst for Nomura, “We now expect global auto demand to be down 3%,” YOY in 2019 he told clients recently, according to a report by Business Insider. He has plenty of company among his peers in the world of finance.

“The industry is right now staring down the barrel of what we think is going to be a significant downturn,” John Murphy from Bank of America told a conference last week. The decline of sales in China “is a real surprise,” he added.

Michelle Meyer and Anna Zhou, also from Bank of America, agree. “In our view, the peak in auto sales is clear. A core view of John Murphy, our auto equity analyst, is that the auto cycle has peaked. And he expects further slowdown. He sees new auto sales heading lower largely due to a tidal wave of used vehicles which “depresses the prices of used vehicles.”

Their colleague Ethan Harris feels the same way. “There is a negative narrative developing in the auto sector as inventories climb amid softening demand. Inventory for light trucks and SUVs has been climbing to uncomfortably high levels.” Uh oh. Those are the very vehicles US manufacturers rely on to maintain their profitability. You think Tesla is in trouble? Look around. The situation in the broader industry is much worse.

For instance, the Society of Motor Manufacturers & Traders in the UK reported recently that total car production in the UK was down 45% compared to last year in April. Commercial vehicle exports collapsed a staggering 89%. Part of that is attributable to the financial turmoil created by the Brexit brouhaha and part can be traced to a surge in new car sales in advance of new rules for measuring auto emissions. But no matter what reasons are trotted out to explain the decline, the news is bad and getting worse.

Quote
BoA continues, “When sales weaken, it will lead to weaker consumer spending. Motor vehicle production is already on course to be a drag this year, slicing 0.14pp [percentage points] from 1Q GDP growth. We expect it to cut nearly 0.2pp to annual growth this year. Relative to last year, that is a reversal of 0.4pp.”

The decline won’t be total. Cars won’t go the way of the horse and cart, claims Business Insider. More likely the aftermath of “peak car” will look like the television business — a long, slow decline that takes years to play out. “It doesn’t feel great but it is manageable,” Bank of America’s research team says.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 04, 2019, 09:08:53 PM
Quote
Automotive News (@Automotive_News) 6/3/19, 5:29 PM
FINAL TALLY: U.S. light-vehicle sales in May -0.3% to 1,587,335 united
May #SAAR: 17.4M units, second highest of '19
https://twitter.com/automotive_news/status/1135659916629336064

SAAR:  Seasonally-Adjusted Annual Rate
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on June 06, 2019, 06:53:12 AM
Knowing how and knowing when: unpacking public understanding of atmospheric CO2 accumulation
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10584-019-02423-8 (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10584-019-02423-8)

One image split in two (snipped out the top and bottom parts) says it all (although current numbers are higher).
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on June 06, 2019, 07:06:17 AM
And how does the above, (including replies 79, 80, 85, 86) match with this?

Terawatt-scale photovoltaics: Transform global energy
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/364/6443/836 (https://science.sciencemag.org/content/364/6443/836)
Quote
Solar energy has the potential to play a central role in the future global energy system because of the scale of the solar resource, its predictability, and its ubiquitous nature. Global installed solar photovoltaic (PV) capacity exceeded 500 GW at the end of 2018, and an estimated additional 500 GW of PV capacity is projected to be installed by 2022–2023, bringing us into the era of TW-scale PV. Given the speed of change in the PV industry, both in terms of continued dramatic cost decreases and manufacturing-scale increases, the growth toward TW-scale PV has caught many observers, including many of us (1), by surprise. Two years ago, we focused on the challenges of achieving 3 to 10 TW of PV by 2030. Here, we envision a future with ∼10 TW of PV by 2030 and 30 to 70 TW by 2050, providing a majority of global energy. PV would be not just a key contributor to electricity generation but also a central contributor to all segments of the global energy system. We discuss ramifications and challenges for complementary technologies (e.g., energy storage, power to gas/liquid fuels/chemicals, grid integration, and multiple sector electrification) and summarize what is needed in research in PV performance, reliability, manufacturing, and recycling.

Adding Fig2.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on June 07, 2019, 06:56:47 AM
Continuing from here:
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2687.msg200388.html#msg200388 (https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2687.msg200388.html#msg200388)

The preliminary numbers for 2018 are in:
https://www.ssb.no/natur-og-miljo/artikler-og-publikasjoner/klimagassutslippene-flater-ut (https://www.ssb.no/natur-og-miljo/artikler-og-publikasjoner/klimagassutslippene-flater-ut)

Quote
Preliminary figures show that 0.4 per cent more greenhouse gases were emitted in 2018 than the year before. The increase is due to a smaller share of biofuels in road traffic and more consumption of fossil fuels for other modes of transport.

Emissions of greenhouse gases in Norway amounted to almost 53 million tonnes of CO2 equivalents in 2018, which means about 200,000 tonnes of CO 2 equivalents more, than in 2017.

Higher consumption

Emissions from aviation, shipping, fishing, power tools etc. increased by more than 6 per cent compared with 2017. In total, this group accounts for 7.5 million tonnes of CO 2 equivalents. The increase is due to rising consumption of plant diesel, marine gas oils and jet paraffin. According to the statistics Petroleum products , sales of plant diesel, marine gas oils and jet paraffin increased by 8 per cent, 7 per cent and 4 per cent respectively in 2018.

More emissions from road traffic

Road traffic accounted for 9 million tonnes of CO 2 equivalent emissions, which represents an increase of almost 3 per cent from 2017. According to the statistics on petroleum products, sales of petrol and auto diesel were down in the period. The sales figures include biofuels, and the increase in CO 2 emissions is due to a significant reduction in the proportion of biofuels in the fuel mixture. The decline in the share of biofuels is mainly due to a sharp reduction in imported palm oil.

Decrease in oil and gas, heating and energy supply

Emissions of greenhouse gases from oil and gas extraction decreased by over 1% from 2017 to 14.5 million tonnes of CO 2 equivalents. The production of oil and gas on the Norwegian shelf also showed a decline according to norskpetroleum.no . There was also a decline in heating in other industries and households, as well as energy supply.

Ending this with the same comment, behold the mitigation...
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Bob Wallace on June 13, 2019, 08:08:48 AM
Getting back to cars...

It's now looking like we're on the cusp of a major transition away from ICEVs.  We seem to be very close (less than five years) from driverless taxi service.  When that happens most people are going to find it cheaper to phone for a ride than to own a car and cheaper to share rides with others.

If you assume that one robotaxi could, on average, serve three people per day the cost of "owning" drops from 100% to somewhere between 33% and 50%.  33% + profits to the actual owner.  The cost of energy per mile drops a similar amount.  The cost of insurance drops even more because self-driving cars will have far fewer crashes than human driven cars.  Being willing to share a ride with others, something we do every day on planes, trains, buses and subways, will create another drop in cost per mile to ride.

The hassles of car maintenance, registration, fueling/charging, and parking disappear.

Some of the first to abandon car ownership will be the people with the slimmest financial resources.  First time they need a couple new tires, a battery, a water pump,  or whatever and they don't have the cash or credit to pay they're likely to call for a ride.  They'll ride to where they want to go in a comfortable, reliable car for less than what they would have spent for fuel.  Their clunker won't get fixed.

People with not a lot of extra cash will realize that if they didn't own a car but phoned for a robo they could pay down some debt, remodel their kitchen, take a nice vacation each year.  Over a few years and especially as their ICEVs start to require more repairs they'll dump their gasmobiles.

Older folks for who driving is no longer easy will phone in.  Parents will quit buying cars for their kids to drive to school.  Younger people will not bother buying a car if they can phone for a cheap ride when other cheap transportation wouldn't work.

Over just a few years the market for ICEVs and cars in general is likely to shrink.  Many currently profitable car manufacturers probably couldn't survive a permanent 20% drop in sales.  In order to survive their first move is likely to be to raise the asking price for their cars, further shrinking the market.

The new car market is likely to quickly become EVs and EV robotaxis, mostly robotaxis.  Dealerships and repair shops will close.  Gas stations will close.  It will be more difficult to repair and fuel an ICEV if you do own one.  And that will push more people into robotaxis.

I'm seeing a spectacular ICEV crash.  The timing now largely depends on how rapidly we can open battery factories and create the material flows to supply them.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sleepy on June 13, 2019, 09:20:53 AM
Getting back to cars...
<snip>

No, maybe the Electric cars thread would be better Bob:
Where do we discuss what’s happening with the traditional auto manufacturers and whether they are succeeding with their transition to EVs... or facing bankruptcy?

You can discuss that here as well, as it's part of the same dynamic.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: SteveMDFP on June 13, 2019, 04:48:03 PM
Getting back to cars...
 
If you assume that one robotaxi could, on average, serve three people per day the cost of "owning" drops from 100% to somewhere between 33% and 50%.  33% + profits to the actual owner.  The cost of energy per mile drops a similar amount.  The cost of insurance drops even more because self-driving cars will have far fewer crashes than human driven cars.   

Robotaxi's won't all necessarily be battery-electric, so this may be an appropriate place for this discussion.

Three people per day?  I'd think 8 would be a conservative estimate.  They'll operate 24/7, except for charging and maintenance.  Some ride-sharing fares would happen among the price-conscious.
 Virtually any sane person who wants to go out for drinks would ditch their car for the outing. Such an option might become the norm for sending the kids to and from school. 

Some think self-driving tech will never work, but I agree with your description here.  AI doesn't have to be that good to be better than all the bad human drivers out there.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on June 13, 2019, 05:30:23 PM
I think so too, SteveMDFP, but what I am afraid of is week after week of 800 Americans killed by cars and no reporting, and one American killed by a robocar and "WE INTERRUPT THIS PROGRAM - A ROBOCAR KILLED A MOTHER OF THREE IN DES MOINES".
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Bob Wallace on June 14, 2019, 01:14:32 AM
Quote
Three people per day?  I'd think 8 would be a conservative estimate.

If it works at 3 then it will be even better at 8.   ;)

I suspect a lot of cars will get used for the morning/afternoon commute.  That's going to put a lot of car close to workplaces during the day and back into residential areas after the workday.  The need for the daily commute is likely to require many more cars than the number needed during the day to run errands and in the evening to run errands. 

I have no idea how to determine the actual number and I doubt anyone else can at this point in time.  We're likely to have a few years during which people learn how robotaxis do or do not work for them.  And the taxi services are going to have to figure out how to serve their customers with as few cars as possible.  We're likely to see really inexpensive prices offered in order to move some riders out of the normal commute crush and lower the inventory needed to handle peak demand.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Bob Wallace on June 14, 2019, 01:20:42 AM
Getting back to cars...
<snip>

No, maybe the Electric cars thread would be better Bob:
Where do we discuss what’s happening with the traditional auto manufacturers and whether they are succeeding with their transition to EVs... or facing bankruptcy?

You can discuss that here as well, as it's part of the same dynamic.

Sorry if I went too far off topic.  But my post was about the survival of traditional ICEV manufactures.  I think the ones that are around 20 years from now will be the ones who probably take a trip through bankruptcy courts in order to shed most of their factories, debts, and obligations to employees and emerge as robotaxi companies that manufacture their own taxis.

A few smaller companies such as Volvo might make a quick enough move to EVs.  They're getting locked in with a self-driving company which should give them the complete package.

Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on June 22, 2019, 07:13:08 PM
Well, Madrid seems to be backing off on banning cars:
https://www.citylab.com/environment/2019/06/madrid-election-car-ban-traffic-congestion-emissions-spain/591961/
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on August 06, 2019, 10:19:29 PM
More on European banning:
https://e360.yale.edu/digest/diesel-vehicles-face-a-grim-future-in-europes-cities
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: vox_mundi on August 10, 2019, 01:04:06 AM
The Trump Administration Killed a Self-Driving Car Committee — and Didn’t Tell Members
https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/9/20791454/trump-obama-autonomous-self-driving-car-group-apple-zipcar-uber-lyft

An all-star team of transpo bigwigs had just one meeting before the DOT went radio silent

The Trump administration quietly terminated an Obama-era federal committee on automation in transportation earlier this year, the Department of Transportation confirmed to The Verge this week. What’s more, the DOT never informed some members that the advisory group didn’t exist anymore, including Captain Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger, Zipcar founder Robin Chase, Apple vice president Lisa Jackson, and even the committee’s own vice chair, The Verge has learned.

... The group was brought together “to serve as a critical resource for the Department [of Transportation] in framing federal policy for the continued development and deployment of automated transportation,” according to its landing page on the DOT’s website.

The committee held its lone meeting on January 16th, 2017, four days before Trump’s inauguration. The DOT never called the committee to meet again, and the press release detailing it was scrubbed from the DOT’s website sometime around April of this year, according to the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine.

The committee’s dissolution comes at a critical moment in the development of automated vehicles in the United States. During the two-plus years that it sat dormant, multiple companies have rolled out small commercial fleets of automated vehicles that perform a variety of tasks. Big money is pouring into some of the most visible companies in the space. And there’s been a human cost, too: one of Uber’s prototype autonomous vehicles killed a pedestrian in Arizona in 2018, and at least two people were killed while using Tesla’s Autopilot suite of driver assistance systems.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on August 10, 2019, 04:14:54 AM
^^ That's a strange development.


My recollection is that DARPA initiated the robo-vehicle movement by hosting the cross country driverless challenges held yearly from Barstow to Las Vegas. They even paid off the million dollar prize!
Self driving tanks, flame throwers, howitzers and grenade launchers were assumed to be the applications they had in mind.


Advanced autonomous robots that could be deployed against the enemy du jour could be a cost effective method of conducting the endless wars that DARPA is tasked with fighting, and it would make the selling of these wars much easier on the home front.


------------


People like to drive. Even Tesla offers a "driving game" designed to relieve the boredom when your vehicle has stripped the drivers of the joy of driving the open highway.


Is there just a whiff of irony in the above?
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: vox_mundi on August 11, 2019, 12:29:00 AM
Not to worry Terry, the military is still 'all-in' in the autonomous vehicle arena. This is just typical White House pigheadedness.When I have more time I'll post more on AI. robots and the military.

--------------------

Army Futures Command (AFC) commander Gen. John Murray briefed reporters on Thursday ... what's coming down the pipe to help soldiers win the conflicts of the future.

... There are "pretty much autonomous systems" operating in the air and on the sea already, and the commercial industry is plowing ahead on getting autonomous vehicles on highways, Murray said, but the idea of having fully autonomous vehicles drive cross-country is another issue entirely.

"If you're going completely cross-country, there are no lane markings, there are no street signs, there's no vehicles around you ... to help you identify where you are," Murray said. "That's not anything that's coming in the near-term (6 month-1 year), but as we start to look and increment out what comes next (5-10yr), I think that's probably it."

Murray said that using AI to acquire targets may reduce the possibility of deadly mistakes.

"I just remember back ... working with kids we were going to put behind the main gun of a [tank]. If you were 80% accurate using flash cards, like I learned math in high school, you went behind it,"
he said.

-------------------

Daniel Dravit: ... Ohhh him there with the five-and-a-half hat size has the makings of a bloody hero!

- The Man Who Would Be King (1975)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on August 11, 2019, 06:39:49 AM
Not to worry Terry, the military is still 'all-in' in the autonomous vehicle arena. This is just typical White House pigheadedness.When I have more time I'll post more on AI. robots and the military.

--------------------

Army Futures Command (AFC) commander Gen. John Murray briefed reporters on Thursday ... what's coming down the pipe to help soldiers win the conflicts of the future.

... There are "pretty much autonomous systems" operating in the air and on the sea already, and the commercial industry is plowing ahead on getting autonomous vehicles on highways, Murray said, but the idea of having fully autonomous vehicles drive cross-country is another issue entirely.

"If you're going completely cross-country, there are no lane markings, there are no street signs, there's no vehicles around you ... to help you identify where you are," Murray said. "That's not anything that's coming in the near-term (6 month-1 year), but as we start to look and increment out what comes next (5-10yr), I think that's probably it."

Murray said that using AI to acquire targets may reduce the possibility of deadly mistakes.

"I just remember back ... working with kids we were going to put behind the main gun of a [tank]. If you were 80% accurate using flash cards, like I learned math in high school, you went behind it," he said.

-------------------

Daniel Dravit: ... Ohhh him there with the five-and-a-half hat size has the makings of a bloody hero!

The Man Who Would Be King (1975)
Well that's certainly reassuring. :P
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: vox_mundi on August 15, 2019, 11:26:33 PM
UPS Has Been Delivering Cargo in Self-Driving Trucks for Months And No One Knew
https://gizmodo.com/ups-has-been-delivering-cargo-in-self-driving-trucks-fo-1837272680

The self-driving freight truck startup TuSimple has been carrying mail across the state of Arizona for several weeks.

UPS announced on Thursday that its venture capital arm has made a minority investment in TuSimple. The announcement also revealed that since May TuSimple autonomous trucks have been hauling UPS loads on a 115-mile route between Phoenix and Tucson.

TuSimple claims it can cut the average cost of shipping in a tractor-trailer by 30 percent.

https://youtu.be/teMXT-j6jns
Warning: Turn audio down.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 16, 2019, 03:27:09 AM
UPS Has Been Delivering Cargo in Self-Driving Trucks for Months And No One Knew
...

I wonder if the truck has been pre-programmed to be in a specific lane, regardless of other traffic.  (Like a Cadillac CT6, although with that you can change lanes manually, without disengaging the system.)  In the 3+ lanes segment, many cars were passing the truck on the right. (Around 2:15 in, or ~25+ minutes on their time-lapse.)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: vox_mundi on August 16, 2019, 09:20:33 PM
Quote
... I wonder if the truck has been pre-programmed to be in a specific lane, regardless of other traffic.

UPS monitors everything, especially speed limits. Sensors inside the truck monitor everything from whether the driver’s seat belt is buckled to how hard they’re braking, and if the truck’s doors are open or closed. All this data is compiled for UPS analysts who use it to come up with time-saving tactics.

Certain states outlaw Trucks in the left lane on Interstates. Other states require all vehicles to stay out of the left lane except to pass another vehicle. Many states’ laws say that you must stay in the right lanes if you’re driving slower than either the normal or legal rate of speed, unless you’re passing someone or making a legal left turn.

'No Trucks in the Left Lane' Laws by State
https://injury.findlaw.com/car-accidents/no-trucks-in-the-left-lane-laws-by-state.html

In Arizona:

- Must drive in right lane if driving slower than normal speed of traffic, except to pass another vehicle or turn left.
- Certain vehicles over 26,000 lbs. (or if pulling pole trailer over 6,000 lbs.) must use specific lanes if designated to do so by local authority.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 16, 2019, 09:41:27 PM
Quote
... I wonder if the truck has been pre-programmed to be in a specific lane, regardless of other traffic.
...
Certain states outlaw Trucks in the left lane on Interstates.

Unless I’m mistaken, the truck at the stretch I mentioned was in the middle of three lanes, and cars were passing it in the right (slower) lane (which I think is illegal) which indicates the truck was going slower than the flow of traffic.  A Tesla using Nav on Autopilot would have moved into the right lane in such a situation.  That’s why I wondered if the trucks are using a simple “follow this line” programming, on a fixed route and in pre-determined lanes, and does not have any traffic-flow intelligence — other than perhaps traffic-aware cruise control (i.e., don‘t run into the car ahead of you in your lane), and I’m not sure the video even showed any instances of that.  :-\
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: vox_mundi on August 16, 2019, 10:24:38 PM
Truckers can't use the left lane and and they HATE using the right (slow) lane because of traffic from onramps. Braking and speeding up are inefficient for large trucks. That leaves the middle lane. The goal is to maintain a constant 65-68 mph for the entire trip.

Sadly, many non-truckers have absolutely no concept how to use freeway ramps - onramps in particular - and frequently cut in front of truck traffic that's going 20-30 MPH faster than they are. 40 tons of 'road locomotive' does not stop on a dime.

Since the vehicle is programmed not to exceed the speed limit it's probably happy to have people passing on either side. Less chance for an accident.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 17, 2019, 02:02:16 AM
Truckers can't use the left lane and and they HATE using the right (slow) lane because of traffic from onramps. Braking and speeding up are inefficient for large trucks. That leaves the middle lane. The goal is to maintain a constant 65-68 mph for the entire trip.

Sadly, many non-truckers have absolutely no concept how to use freeway ramps - onramps in particular - and frequently cut in front of truck traffic that's going 20-30 MPH faster than they are. 40 tons of 'road locomotive' does not stop on a dime.

Since the vehicle is programmed not to exceed the speed limit it's probably happy to have people passing on either side. Less chance for an accident.

Avoiding the merging traffic makes sense.  But... I watched the video again, and the truck does slow down, multiple times, to 10 or even 15 mph below the speed limit, when cars merge in front of it.  It seems to maintain a huge following distance to whatever car is in front of it at speed  — maybe 4 or 5 semi-truck lengths — and it obeys the speed limit to the point where it’s almost always the slowest thing on the road.  Even other semis pass it. 
Quote
In Arizona:
- Must drive in right lane if driving slower than normal speed of traffic, except to pass another vehicle or turn left.

So it does ignore this law, when it stays in the middle lane while faster traffic moves by in the left and right lanes, even though it does handle merging vehicles just fine.  It’s definitely a conservative program, and I bet it is “lane locked.”  That kind of driving would never work in Los Angeles*, for example, where even Tesla’s “Mad Max” setting is not aggressive enough. ;)  But it’s an interesting experiment for trucks in what looks like a rather rural section of Arizona.

*Edit:  Actually, it’s likely this truck only has the programming to drive this one specific route.

Another edit:  A post re the Tesla electric semi (and recent performance testing thereof) in the Electric Cars thread.
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2686.msg222775.html#msg222775
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: vox_mundi on August 17, 2019, 11:50:12 PM
2 things to remember when watching that video

The video is sped up 16× so the illusion of vehicles passing it might not as very apparent in real time.

They're driving in the rain so the system was compensating while the drivers that were passing may not have.

Having lived in Arizona for 8 years and driven that route, I can attest that drivers drive stupid in the rain. Too fast for the conditions.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on August 18, 2019, 12:49:34 AM
2 things to remember when watching that video

The video is sped up 16× so the illusion of vehicles passing it might not as very apparent in real time.

They're driving in the rain so the system was compensating while the drivers that were passing may not have.

Having lived in Arizona for 8 years and driven that route, I can attest that drivers drive stupid in the rain. Too fast for the conditions.
Waiting for them to try it on a run up to Flagstaff in February. ::)
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: vox_mundi on August 18, 2019, 01:14:18 AM
I worked a year up in Flag; '97 if I recall.

36" of snow in the middle of January

I-40 backed up 20 miles, SUV's flipped on their roofs.

I think the state of AZ owns 2 snowplows.

It was a very interesting year.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on August 18, 2019, 02:03:27 AM
I worked a year up in Flag; '97 if I recall.

36" of snow in the middle of January

I-40 backed up 20 miles, SUV's flipped on their roofs.

I think the state of AZ owns 2 snowplows.

It was a very interesting year.


I managed to get snow bound in El Paso one winter.
Rigs flipped in both directions on I-10
I don't think anyone there had ever seen a snowplow. :)
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Tor Bejnar on August 18, 2019, 05:17:13 AM
When I was at university (Edit: 1970s) most of two hundred miles north of El Paso, Texas, an 8" snow fall (extremely rare for there) was followed by weeks of freezing weather (not rare), so the snow didn't melt.  The town or county put bulldozers and road-graters to work.  One road-grater cut too low and ripped out a half kilometer of pavement; so much for that experiment.  I commuted by bicycle and learned how to ride on ice.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 18, 2019, 01:40:55 PM
When I was at university (1070s) most of two hundred miles north of El Paso, Texas, an 8" snow fall (extremely rare for there) was followed by weeks of freezing weather (not rare), so the snow didn't melt.  The town or county put bulldozers and road-graters to work.  One road-grater cut too low and ripped out a half kilometer of pavement; so much for that experiment.  I commuted by bicycle and learned how to ride on ice.

 :o They let you use kilometers?  In Texas?!  ;D

In New York City, they put snow plows on garbage trucks when needed.  Those folks know the streets!  8)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: blumenkraft on August 18, 2019, 03:28:11 PM

 :o They let you use kilometers?  In Texas?!  ;D


... 8" snow ...

Just saying, but mixing metrics and imperial like that has killed one or another megaproject. ;)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: gerontocrat on August 18, 2019, 08:17:36 PM

 :o They let you use kilometers?  In Texas?!  ;D


... 8" snow ...
A very expensive satellite............... and it is true
Just saying, but mixing metrics and imperial like that has killed one or another megaproject. ;)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Tor Bejnar on August 19, 2019, 12:22:59 AM
We definitely mixed units when I was in university, but not that I intended to in my post.  If you look at a map, you'll note that going 1 meter north of northern El Paso County, puts you in New Mexico.  El Paso the city is almost synonymous with El Paso County (as best I can tell).
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on August 23, 2019, 02:14:08 AM
Ditch cars to meet climate change targets, say MPs
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49425402?intlink_from_url=&link_location=live-reporting-story
Quote
People will have to get out of their cars if the UK is to meet its climate change targets, MPs say.

The Science and Technology Select Committee says technology alone cannot solve the problem of greenhouse gas emissions from transport.

It says the government cannot achieve sufficient emissions cuts by swapping existing vehicles for cleaner versions.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: sidd on August 23, 2019, 06:43:01 AM
For those with range anxiety about all electric cars, check out the hybrids. Friend of mine just did east to west coast USA and back in a toyota prius hybrid. His words:

"Cant get the thing to do less than 55 mpg, whether its  in the Rockies or in Kansas. 11 gallon gas tank, 600 miles per fillup. Didnt even try to economize."

sidd

Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: interstitial on August 24, 2019, 02:40:55 AM
Anyone with range anxiety should investigate further and discover the better electric vehicles have plenty of range.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on August 24, 2019, 04:51:56 AM
For those with range anxiety about all electric cars, check out the hybrids. Friend of mine just did east to west coast USA and back in a toyota prius hybrid. His words:

"Cant get the thing to do less than 55 mpg, whether its  in the Rockies or in Kansas. 11 gallon gas tank, 600 miles per fillup. Didnt even try to economize."

sidd
Hybrids make sense.
Lugging a heavy battery to power a light load - not so much.
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 24, 2019, 04:16:10 PM
For those with range anxiety about all electric cars, check out the hybrids. Friend of mine just did east to west coast USA and back in a toyota prius hybrid. His words:

"Cant get the thing to do less than 55 mpg, whether its  in the Rockies or in Kansas. 11 gallon gas tank, 600 miles per fillup. Didnt even try to economize."

sidd
Hybrids make sense.
Lugging a heavy battery to power a light load - not so much.
Terry

Better than carrying around a toxic and explosive fuel, ‘just in case’? 

If range anxiety has you thinking ‘hybrid’, think some more. :) 
Those who own a plug-in hybrid and charge it meticulously so they run only on electricity will find that even a short-range EV with fast charging is more convenient.
Those who own a hybrid but burn gas anyway will find a long-range EV may suit their needs while lowering their emissions.

This Youtuber claimed for some time that a hybrid would be better for him than a pure BEV.  After buying a Volt and living with it for months, he changed his mind.
   I was WRONG about the Tesla Model 3 | Sold my Chevy Volt !

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9c4XEWqtY3o
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: sidd on August 24, 2019, 08:52:27 PM
Re: hybrids

horses for courses. Until batteries get better there is a market for hybrids, especially in west of the mississippi USA. On the freeways, charging stations are available. Off, not so much. So if you plan a cross country trip using only freeways, can be done. If you want to get out in back country, much more difficult.

Of course, one solution might be not to take that cross country trip exploring back roads. That's a hard sell ...

sidd
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: sedziobs on August 26, 2019, 08:29:22 PM
I'd hoped the earlier conversation would have attracted more comment - possibly on one of the other threads? Some may have wanted to explain how driving a Tesla had made their commute "Greener".
Terry
This seems to have been directed at me, so I'll oblige.

How does commuting to work in an EV compare with:

Working from home?
Living next to the factory, office or perhaps over the store?
Working within walking distance of work?
Working within Bike distance from work?
Working within E-Bike distance from work?
Taking an E-Bus to work?

Ride sharing?
Taking a Train Trolley or bus to work?
Taking a company bus to work?
Moving closer to work or taking a job closer to home?
Working close to a spouse's job and riding together?

Working at a remote site where you only come home once/month?
Working 4/10 as opposed to 5/8 shifts?
My situation isn't necessarily representative of most people, but it's probably typical of many in the midwest. I work in a suburban commercial area with no housing. Working within walking distance is possible (30+ minutes), but would be difficult and unsafe due to the complete lack of sidewalks. A bus service runs to a hub in the commercial area, where I could change to a bus connecting to the city center and then to another that would go to my neighborhood. It's about an hour trip one way. A bicycle/e-bike would be feasible, though lack of shoulders is an issue.

Working from home or four 10 hr days is not possible. My spouse's job moves around, but we do carpool when we can. I have to drive to job sites somewhat often, and public transport is nonexistent to the rural areas where most of those are located.

My commute is a little over 5 miles and takes about 10 minutes one way. I could get by with a bike, but I'm not prepared to do that in our icy and snowy winters on high speed roads with no shoulders in darkness. Car is the only realistic option for visiting job sites and family, so I would probably own one even if I lived at the office. I put 12-14k miles per year on it, with about 5k of that due to work trips. I got about 35 mpg with my old Civic, so I save 350-400 gallons by driving an EV. 90%+ of charging is done at home, where I have solar panels.

There are certainly better ways to make my life greener (especially veganism). And not everyone can afford a house with solar panels and an EV. But a lot of commuters who drive large expensive vehicles can afford it, and I believe EV adoption will mean lower emissions for them even without a lifestyle change. My area is very conservative, and lifestyle changes are not going to occur due to environmental concerns or collectivism. They may occur due to economics.

I would love if my area invested more in public transport, and at least built some sidewalks. But people here have no interest in spending money on anything that won't directly benefit their current lifestyle. I work in the transportation industry, and have been pushing "complete streets" and bike paths whenever possible. We have been gaining some traction with roundabouts (they're safer for cars), which can become the starting point for a bike & pedestrian friendly corridor.

In summary, EVs can provide "green" benefits in communities like mine where BAU has no end in sight. We should move away from a car-centered society, but until that happens I think switching to an EV is worthwhile.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on August 26, 2019, 10:53:18 PM
^^
A fair response and one I don't have much of an argument against.
Government simply has to get off their collective asses and provide some semblance of green infrastructure. It's easier for the various legislative bodies to earmark some thousands for EV subsidy, or to allow EVs the use of multi-passenger lanes or free parking than to provide, dare we hope for E-Buses that go where they're needed, redraw zoning restrictions to allow most to live close to where the jobs are, or invest in electrified trolleys.
As long as the law makers can wave some ZEV credits at the credulous and gain a green reputation it's unlikely that they'll do any of the things that could actually be seen as leading to a solution for at least part of the transportation problem.


I noted that California with the highest buildup of EVs in the nation (the world)?, still posted an increase in GHGs due to transportation.


I've no doubt that every EV that removes an ICE from the road will remove a measurable amount of carbon from the air. I've also no doubt that many other "schemes" would be much more effective, and might even be much less expensive.


Even Google sends company buses to pick up and return their employees. Why couldn't any municipality do likewise? - preferably using E-Buses. From there it's not a huge step to provide free buses to where people actually need to go. (My understanding is that bus fares cover only a fraction of operating expenses anyway.)
These would go far in removing much of the GHG (and smog) from our cities.
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 27, 2019, 02:06:36 AM
New infographic.
I imagine a Bus is the typical intra-city mode of travel, short distance, lots of stops along a set route; whereas a Coach is a point to point longer distance journey.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: oren on August 27, 2019, 02:21:06 AM
^^
A fair response and one I don't have much of an argument against.
...
As long as the law makers can wave some ZEV credits at the credulous and gain a green reputation it's unlikely that they'll do any of the things that could actually be seen as leading to a solution for at least part of the transportation problem.
You keep repeating the claim that EV credits somehow cause the government to avoid dealing with other aspects of transportation. I believe the claim is false, and stems from some anti-EV stance. There is no zero-sum game between EVs and E-buses, in fact these two solutions are complementary and should both be applied with full speed. The government is free to redraw zoning restrictions etc., this has zero relation to EVs. The same applies to redrawing bus routes to better serving the actual demand.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on August 27, 2019, 02:38:33 AM
Sig
I saw a similar graph that had school buses in the bottom slot, I suppose because of the full loads & route planning.
High Speed Rail (Eurostar) &/or the New Silk Road are clear winners.
The option I'm not seeing that is gaining popularity here are E-Trolleys and E-Light Rail. Hamilton, a mid sized city near by had E-Buses with catenary lines until fairly recently and Toronto, a large city has had subways and E-Trolleys for ever.
Air travel is so 20th Century. :P


High Speed Freight from China's Pacific coast to London or Calcutta will pull Europe & Asia together, but will leave the Americas out in the cold.


Brexit will make even less sense.
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on August 27, 2019, 03:06:01 AM
<snippage>
You keep repeating the claim that EV credits somehow cause the government to avoid dealing with other aspects of transportation. I believe the claim is false, and stems from some anti-EV stance. There is no zero-sum game between EVs and E-buses, in fact these two solutions are complementary and should both be applied with full speed. The government is free to redraw zoning restrictions etc., this has zero relation to EVs. The same applies to redrawing bus routes to better serving the actual demand.
The stumbling blocks as I see them are two fold.


1) Having done something "visible" to assague their green voters, the legislators are then free to follow the orders that come down from their ff donors.


2) Having spent their discretionary budget on subsidies for EVs, land and resources for charging stations & other benefits for EVs, the resources needed for those solutions that do require initial investment are depleted. Every Million given to Tesla, is a Million that could have been spent on E-Buses. Few have the resources to do both. (Some Chinese Cities may be the exceptions)


I think that in most jurisdictions the 1st I've listed is more important than the 2nd. I suspect that both are concerns everywhere.
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Shared Humanity on August 27, 2019, 10:47:45 PM
Worldwide light vehicle sales expected to continue to climb. EV sales are climbing dramatically but we will still see hundreds of millions of ICE vehicles hit the road in the next decade.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on August 27, 2019, 11:06:54 PM
Sorry
But it looks like an oil slick riding on a Tsunami.
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Shared Humanity on August 28, 2019, 03:59:17 PM
Sorry
But it looks like an oil slick riding on a Tsunami.
Terry

????
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on August 28, 2019, 05:10:47 PM
Sorry
But it looks like an oil slick riding on a Tsunami.
Terry

 ;D
Crashing on the shores of essential non-renewable mined resources.  ;)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on August 29, 2019, 12:43:44 AM
It has been an interesting read, as I haven't been on this new cars thread before.

I have a few comments.

On the transition to EV and the reduction in CO2, I note the following trend in CO2 growth per annum.

(https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/webdata/ccgg/trends/co2_data_gl_anngr.png)

The line for the 2010's average is going to be over 2ppm.  For the 2020's it will be the first time we have recorded every single year over 2ppm growth.

In short what we are doing, today, is not cutting it.

On the whole "traditional car manufacturers will be dead by 2040" subject, it is worth looking at this chart.

https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/#pastfuture

Current population at 7.7bn.  In 2040, when most developed world restrictions on the sale of FF cars kick in, there will be 9bn people on the planet.  A whole new 2.3bn people as present and future consumers of non EV vehicles. Granted the markets will transition from the current 1st world to current 3rd world countries, but it will continue.  I don't see their demise any time soon.  Although things are going to be fairly bumpy if they don't start getting their factories out of the traditional places.  Along with the attendant job losses that come with it.

I continue to contend that Tesla is a technology company.  Granted that technology is manifesting in physical product in the first instance.  But there is a future to be experienced.

Let me digress for a short while.  Who remembers the Internet in 1992?  A few of us I'm sure.  How many would have predicted what the Internet would become?  I suggest NONE of us.  This is because our lives gave us no plane of reference for the changes the Internet was going to place upon them.

So whilst there has been some interesting discussion on where the combination of EV, public EV transport and EV ride hailing will go.  There has been little actual putting the pieces together into an integrated whole.

Let us take the commute first.  So we have a combination of commute types from the suburbs to large inner cities.  Some drive to the train station and park the car, bite the cost of parking then take the train to work.  Some are lucky and can take a lift with a partner to the train station and then get the train.  Others are not so lucky, can't/won't afford the cost of the parking, on top of the  train ticket (literally up to £7,000 per year) and simply drive to work.

Autonomous driving gives them more options.  Take the car to the train station and then it goes home and charges up on the solar, which is available during the day but not at night when they get home.  It comes back for you at night.

Put this together with ride hailing and robotaxi and your car can then pick someone up on the way home (or do a series of rides), generating a bit of the train fair back.  Home time and the car does a bit of ride sharing on the way to the train station and takes you home.

So things move on.  However nothing stands still and neither will this.  Computers and vertical (as opposed to fully thinking), AI, come into play.  Now we factor EV, Autonomous driving and intelligent ride hailing into an integrated transport system.  Because we don't need drivers, the vehicles can sit at optimal points waiting for a call.

This is where the intelligent part comes in.  As the AI learns the demand, daily, and the locations of the types of rides, it can position transport where it is needed.  Potential single vehicles out of heavily travelled routes and then gradually larger vehicles (up to full sized busses), where the demand is greater.  Peak periods see all types of transport on the go, but as demand drops, the larger vehicles stop off at charging points and go quiet until needed again.

This can all be managed by very smart software which can predict demand and cope with sudden peaks by mapping in routes of vehicles already running to destinations.  There will no longer be such a thing as going to the bus stop, you will call your ride and wait at home to be picked up.

Even smarter systems may use hubs and 1 or 2 ride changes to feed smaller routes into larger routes which can be serviced by larger vehicles.

Back in the 90's I worked with a guy who said "I'd love to use public transport, just so long as it picks me up from my doorstep, takes me to my work door and brings me back to my doorstep at the end of the day"

With a smart integrated transport network and robotaxi vehicles, that is a reality waiting to happen.

This kind of transport infrastructure will drive the requirement for every type of vehicle, from single seater "buggies" to minvans, to full sized EV busses.  There is a whole market out there.

On the Tesla will die front.

I've mentioned this a few times but it bears mentioning again.  The EU vehicle manufacturing giants are pledging tens of billions of euro on "projected" vehicle manufacturing capacity.  Yet they don't have a solution for, even, getting their batteries for these vehicles in volume.  They don't have the factories to build them and are intending to build new one's.  But not at Gigafactory3 speed but at EU construction speed.  Or, in other words, 2-3 years from breaking ground to being fully operational.

Meanwhile Gigafactory3 will be fully operational by EOY 2019 and fully ramped up by end of H1 2020.  Tesla will probably start working on Gigafactory4 at the end of 2020 or early 2021.  In the EU and inside the tariff barriers.  By 2025 Tesla, from Giga2/3/4 will have the capacity to manufacture around 1.5m vehicles per year.  Also Tesla will have 4 models SX3Y, a pickup, the Semi and, probably, anther completely different range.  They will be working on HW5 for their self drive compute capability with HW4 fully delivered and in place.  Ride hailing software will be written and fully functioning.  FSD will be a reality, whether it will be allowed or not is another matter entirely, but I assume that Uber and others will have blazed that trail already.

Add to that Tesla insurance, which will be far more profitable than traditional insurance as they will not have to carry the high load of human accidents and it will probably be much more profitable than traditional insurance.

All of this will allow Tesla to drive down prices on their models to make them even more competitive with the incumbents.

With Tesla sourcing its own components and with their battery tech, I would not bet against a ~$20k budget range which has much lower mileage and very basic features.  Taking the fight to the incumbents even more.

Remember this is all by 2025.  When are the incumbents targeting this level of penetration into the EV market?  Generally, if you read their blurb, around 2030, when the earliest large barriers emerge for ICE vehicle sales in the 1st world.  (I don't count Norway, it's a rounding error on this scale).

On top of this Musk has already hinted that Tesla is looking to secure its own Lithium sources (probably cobalt too), through acquisition, probably and they already have bought battery tech to make their existing tech better.

Note I haven't even talked about solar roof's or powerwalls.  They're important in the scheme of things but inconsequential in term of Tesla survival.

Whilst all of this is going on in the next 5 years, the incumbents will be shedding workers and causing mayhem in the GDP figures of the EU (and other), economies.  Governments are going to intervene and levy costs on these manufacturers.  Already we see huge issues in France, Belgium, Spain and Germany when workforces are reduced due to lack of sales or income.  This will hit the bottom line of these manufacturers and limit their ability to compete effectively with Tesla.

To say that Tesla is going to be swallowed up as a given is a very narrow minded view of the world.  I don't see it as being certain at all.  Very possible if they really screw up, but that screw up is not coming any time soon as I see it.

I have already posted the stats on how the i-Pace, e-tron and others are not going to compete with the Model 3.  They compete with the Models S and X.  Even less will they compete with the Model Y.  Their volume, today, is low.  Very low.  Tesla is already outselling Jaguar ICE car full year sales in just over 6 months.  When Gigafactory3 gets online and going they are going to outsell Jaguar cars in 4 months or less.  Eventually they will outsell the entire market of JLR combined in about 8 months.

It is far, far, more likely that JLR will go under than Tesla will.  As it stands today.

Our world of cars is going to change.  Radically.  Over the next decade to decade and a half.  The saddest part is that it is going to make not one single dent in our world CO2 footprint.  It's just going to lower the curve a bit.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 29, 2019, 01:13:43 AM
NeilT wrote:
Quote
It is far, far, more likely that JLR will go under than Tesla will.  As it stands today.

Interesting you should say that.  ValueAnalyst just tweeted:
Quote
ValueAnalyst (@ValueAnalyst1) 8/27/19, 6:22 AM
Jaguar has one year left.
https://twitter.com/valueanalyst1/status/1166294985152577536

——-
The common thought is that more people = more workers = more commuters = more cars.
Yet, consider the effects of a Universal Basic Income — which will be needed soon, when robots and AI make so many human jobs disappear.  Opponents of a UBI insist that, given a little free money, lots of people will just sit around and do nothing.

I don’t agree with that, but if it were true, that would mean a lot fewer cars on the road....
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: sidd on August 29, 2019, 07:11:28 AM
America's Finest News Source reports that while banning cars in cities would encourage people to drive buses to work or just stay home, it would also spawn a terrifying urban dystopia cruelly ruled by the fastest walkers and require buying stupid-looking helmets.

https://www.theonion.com/pros-and-cons-of-banning-cars-in-cities-1837651518

sidd
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 29, 2019, 04:41:03 PM
America's Finest News Source reports that while banning cars in cities would encourage people to drive buses to work or just stay home, it would also spawn a terrifying urban dystopia cruelly ruled by the fastest walkers and require buying stupid-looking helmets.

https://www.theonion.com/pros-and-cons-of-banning-cars-in-cities-1837651518

sidd

Excellent analysis! ;D
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: sidd on September 09, 2019, 08:31:31 AM
The comment at

https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1150.msg227594.html#msg227594

contained a sentence that made me think:

" there is no chance society will abandon individual transport."

from the context i imagine the author means cars (of whatever persuation) on roads

Is it really true that humankind now is wedded to cars on roads? I ask this not only from the fossil carbon exhaust viewpoint, but from a larger view of human organization.

sidd
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: oren on September 09, 2019, 09:18:10 AM
Along with more traditional resources, modern lifestyle is constrained by a new resource that historical societies did not much lack I think - time. Under the perceived needs of work or business, family, friends, hobbies, recreation, many (most?) people find themselves rushing all day, all week, all year. In this situation, taking the time to use slower shared transport is often perceived as unbearable.
This doesn't mean the car is a must - individual transport can be an e-bike, a scooter, a taxi (robotaxi??). It can also be a fast shared transport - buses in express lanes, a metro rail, but these are often not in the direction the individual in question needs to go. There are some solutions of fast shared transport that picks you up and takes you where you need to go relatively quickly - minibuses controlled by an app for example.
But still, I would be surprised if society manages to wean itself off the fast individual transport.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: KiwiGriff on September 09, 2019, 09:48:36 AM
It is one thing to know  that we really need  to get of fossil fuel use.
It is another to sell that idea to the majority of  voters.
A  platform of heavily restricting or banning cars on a national level is not going to succeed at this time in most of the developed world.
Personal transport based on battery electric cars is the lest bad option we can hope for at present.

Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: oren on September 09, 2019, 10:51:36 AM
Banning would be backlashed, but adding other public/shared transportation options would be welcomed I think.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Archimid on September 09, 2019, 11:08:02 AM
What we need is the lightest possible box that can move objects from point a to point b as fast as possible and without emitting.

We absolutely need these boxes to transfer food and people that produce food and the tools to produce food or we die. The transportation device must be safe and comfortable.

We also need to produce them in mass as fast as possible. Who is going to pay for them to be produced? The people either directly or indirectly through government.

How long will it take to design such vehicle? Unknown, but we are getting closer and closer and are already there in segments of the vehicle problem.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on September 09, 2019, 06:32:57 PM
What we need is the lightest possible box that can move objects from point a to point b as fast as possible and without emitting.
<snip>

Why the need for "as fast as possible"?
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on September 09, 2019, 07:06:02 PM
What we need is the lightest possible box that can move objects from point a to point b as fast as possible and without emitting.
<snip>

Why the need for "as fast as possible"?

Probably to get it adapted by the 99 and 44/100s percent of people who will not adapt it otherwise.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Archimid on September 10, 2019, 08:11:02 PM
Why the need for "as fast as possible"?

Because time is our most valuable resource.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on September 10, 2019, 09:34:00 PM
What we need is the lightest possible box that can move objects from point a to point b as fast as possible and without emitting.

<snipped>
Big batteries are heavy.
Speed and efficiency are mutually exclusive.
Without emitting? - If emitting zero GHG is the objective are we looking for a perpetual motion device built of wood?


Every vehicle represents a compromise. Some require tons of mass to move 2 people @ 60MPH. Some require <100# to move 2 people at these speeds.
I'm not sure that traveling at 60MPH in a private vehicle is necessary - not so long ago, say during Carter's presidency, it was illegal throughout the States. We survived at 55. ::)
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: sidd on September 10, 2019, 09:55:21 PM
60 mph ?

Most freeways in the midwest are 70 away from cities, and out west the limit does up to 80. In practice that means you do 90 or more to get around a double trailer rig that might be running at 85+

sidd
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: vox_mundi on September 11, 2019, 03:47:55 AM
Quote from: Archimid
... What we need is the lightest possible box that can move objects from point a to point b as fast as possible and without emitting. ...

Think outside of the box ... Why not cable cars?

Innovation in the air: using cable cars for urban transport
https://blogs.worldbank.org/transport/innovation-air-using-cable-cars-urban-transport
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.curbed.com/platform/amp/2017/9/21/16340394/urban-gondolas-cable-cars-cities
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on September 11, 2019, 11:21:53 AM
60 mph ?

Most freeways in the midwest are 70 away from cities, and out west the limit does up to 80. In practice that means you do 90 or more to get around a double trailer rig that might be running at 85+

sidd


Yeah, you can get arrested for loitering on the 401 if you dare to poke along at 120 KPH (~75 MPH), even when the posted limit is lower. ;)


Any ideas on this apparent need for speed? Jimmy (Who?) pushed the 55 MPH limit and the world didn't come to a screeching halt. It saved plenty of fuel (and plenty of emissions), probably bankrupt a few tow operators & bone setters, but couldn't withstand Ronny's whithereding intelectual scrutiny.


(Re)lowering the speed limit would save bunches of transportation emissions without costing the State more than the price of painting new signs, (easily recovered through increased   ticket revenue). Prospective EV buyers would receive the same admiring glances from concerned tree huggers simply by driving home followed by a long line of frustrated drivers honking their encouragement. Less ff usage, fewer highway deaths, cheaper insurance - or richer insurance companies - and no need for subsidies!


It could easily save some $B to invest in E-Buses. 8)


It won't happen under the Trumpster's regime, they move in fast circles, but change may come rapidly, & speeding to an uncertain future is the last thing we need, particularly when the lights could flicker off at any moment!
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on September 11, 2019, 07:08:23 PM
Well if you want to follow that logic Terry, then why not 35mph?  My C3 does nearly 100mpg at 35mph.  Virtually no accidents would be fatal, fuel usage would plummet, traffic, around cities would probably flow a little better.

The answer is pretty obvious.  People drive more than 5 miles per day and they need to get there at a reasonable time.

But if you are going to make the case for less speed, 55 is not the target, it is a lot lower than that.

At which point you are dismissed as a nut by the very people you need to get to.

After all, if you have an EV, charge always on CO2 neutral energy, then what does it matter what speed you drive at.

Although I must admit that putting a 45mph limit on FF vehicles whilst EV's had an 80mph limit would be a Very interesting scenario.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: BeeKnees on September 11, 2019, 07:42:33 PM
What is a reasonable time?

I'm forced to drive to work after my office recently moved.  I have the choice of 18 miles each way on a motorway or 13 miles on minor roads. I take the minor roads in my Prius and get 100mpg, while the motorway is 5 minutes quicker but uses 65mpg.

Are we really that desperate for an extra 5-10 minutes over a 10-20 mile distance?
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 11, 2019, 07:48:51 PM
...
Although I must admit that putting a 45mph limit on FF vehicles whilst EV's had an 80mph limit would be a Very interesting scenario.

Quote
Does Austria have any EV incentives like tax credits or rebates and does Vienna have any too?

We do have moderate incentives. There is a €3,600 incentive that you can claim — surprisingly for me, that’s for all Model 3s, even if their base price is higher than €50,000. What also helps is the exemption of taxes for emissions, which saves me around €700 per year compared to my previous car. One of the greatest incentives is that EVs are exempted from certain speed limits that are for reducing noise and emissions. Feels great to overtake two lanes of regular ICE cars because you have a vehicle with zero emissions and engine noise!
https://cleantechnica.com/2019/08/31/the-tesla-model-3-from-a-female-perspective/
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on September 12, 2019, 06:47:03 AM
What we need is the lightest possible box that can move objects from point a to point b as fast as possible and without emitting.
<snip>

Why the need for a "box"? I assume you mean a form of enclosure, a form of being 'inside'. Why is that needed?
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: sidd on September 12, 2019, 07:08:38 AM
Ford downgraded to junk:

https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/ford/2019/09/09/moodys-ford-credit-rating-junk-status/2268425001/

sidd
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on September 12, 2019, 10:24:10 AM
What is a reasonable time?

<snip>

Are we really that desperate for an extra 5-10 minutes over a 10-20 mile distance?

Well for the normal journey, I spent years working in Edinburgh.  Driving at 70mph on the dual carriageway for the 20 miles it took me to get over the bridge, leaving at 06:45, would get me to work in 45 minutes.  Driving at 50mph would tip the scales and add 35 minutes to 1 hour to the journey because the bridge would be blocked and all routes into the city would also be blocked.

Setting arbitrary speed limits that do not suit the journey don't help.  Remember we live in a democracy (mostly), where if you mess people about they vote for the other guy.  (see my comments about Trump).

Even with EV's, congestion and journey times cost more CO2 unless the EV is on 100% CO2 clean energy.  Because even sitting in a queue, an EV is burning energy for heat/cold/system power.  Granted not as much as a FF burner, but new ones of those cut the engine after a few seconds nowadays.  Creating arbitrary speed limits which cause more congestion/longer journey times, will simply negate the benefits of setting the speed limit in the first place and give those who do not want to see CO2 reduced a better argument for the masses.

There is never a one size fits all solution because we don't live in the former USSR where they sized everything to the "great plan".  You can see how that worked out.

So I'd go back to my 45mph for FF burners and 80mph for EV.  Incentives are everything.  Taking away without giving an option to retain what you have (at a price), == votes for the other side of the argument.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on September 12, 2019, 10:59:46 AM

Why the need for a "box"? I assume you mean a form of enclosure, a form of being 'inside'. Why is that needed?

Clearly you have not ridden a motorcycle in -7C conditions in freezing fog.....  Or in a snowstorm, or a rainstorm, or hail.

I have experienced all 4.  A box is a requirement for those who don't possess Polar Bear fur.

We need someone like Musk to pick up this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43l09z4yy_g) and run with it.  It needs that level of engineering ability.  After all if they can do it with a Segway they can do it with one of these.  It ticks all the boxes, EV, helps with congestion, gets around the "weather" issue of eBikes and solves the parking issue we see in cities, no need for ride sharing where that is a PITA.

Well either a Musk makeover or an open build (https://www.openmotors.co/homepage/).

As importantly it could be sold for sub $10,000, making it a secondary vehicle without the need for the long range.

The patent issue may need the purchase of the company though.  Apple were talking to them around 2016.

Essentially it is a 2 wheeled Electric "car".
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on September 12, 2019, 11:36:05 AM
<snip>
Clearly you have not ridden a motorcycle in -7C conditions in freezing fog.....  Or in a snowstorm, or a rainstorm, or hail.

I don't know why that's clear to you, but it is wrong. Apart from the snowstorm (we don't get many of those here).
At one time I was riding on an icy road inbetween cars and trucks. I lost front traction for a moment and was lucky to stabilise my motor again.

Most people want to put no more effort in than pushing some buttons and then 'fly' as fast as possible to place far away. Afraid of the elements. Afraid of physical exercise. Afraid of cold, wet, wind etc.

On a bicycle you are not cold. The face and hands can get cold, so what, that's normal in winter. There are gloves and mittens to help with that.

Don't be a weakling and hop on your bike  :P ;)

I have done the things you wrote for years on my bicycle. As a teenager. No problemo. People have been doing that since the 1940's.
Bicycles have advantages:
                 No emissions,
                 they are cheap,
                 you are outside,
                 going at a speed that you are still able to take in the surroundings,
                 it is safer,
                 it is much much lighter (I always lift mine up and down the stairs),
                 takes hardly any space,
                 less 'highway' traffic rules,
                 if you've taken the wrong turn you just turn your bike around,
                 no helmet,
                 no special clothing,
                 no noise,
                 easy and cheap to repair it yourself,
                 it is good for your health, it is exercise,
                 there are many more different models to choose from,
                 if you fall there is little chance of hurting yourself if you're an experienced cyclist,
                 there are models for females and disabled people.

I buy my beer in a crate of 24x30cl bottles from a supermarket 2 Km away. Put it on the luggage carrier of my bicycle and secure it with elastic bands ("snelbinders").

I have been cycling with 2 or 3 others on my bike, there's a steer you can sit on and the "stang", the upper connecting metal rod where you can sit on. Having fun. Crashing in the water or bushes or going downhill for fun.

When you're the first away when the traffic light turns green, you have done it yourself, it is a real accomplishment and not just being smug from pushing buttons.


edit: improved layout
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: BeeKnees on September 12, 2019, 12:40:47 PM
Well for the normal journey, I spent years working in Edinburgh.  Driving at 70mph on the dual carriageway for the 20 miles it took me to get over the bridge, leaving at 06:45, would get me to work in 45 minutes.  Driving at 50mph would tip the scales and add 35 minutes to 1 hour to the journey because the bridge would be blocked and all routes into the city would also be blocked.
The point here is that leaving 5-10 earlier would probably have got you to work in 55min. 

tbh I agree with you that the carbon cost of the journey is more important than the speed, although my hybrid loves a stop-start journey and all cars use proportionately much more energy at high speeds than at an ideal cruising speed.
Perhaps it would be interesting to see an emission limit over x miles range rather than a speed limit as a way of encouraging  more EV and lighter vehicles. 
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on September 12, 2019, 12:50:44 PM
What is the most efficient speed for a car?
If it is just parked and running there is no efficient running at all, but people say that high speed is inefficient.
I would guess it is a Laffer Curve?
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on September 12, 2019, 12:54:13 PM

I don't know why that's clear to you, but it is wrong. Apart from the snowstorm (we don't get many of those here).
At one time I was riding on an icy road inbetween cars and trucks. I lost front traction for a moment and was lucky to stabilise my motor again.

Let me clarify that.  When your knuckles freeze as you are riding 50 miles on your motorcycle in -7C conditions, a box is not a  luxury.  When you arrive at work covered in sweat but  your office does not provide a shower, when your journey is longer than 5 miles over hilly ground, then a box with power is not a luxury.

When I was 17, I was a county class athlete at silver and bronze level, I rode my bicycle to work,  to the athletics track, up and down the hill I lived at the bottom of.  But I was never able to ride more than 5 miles in one go at any speed.

There are two reasons I don't use my motorcycle right now.  The first is that it  needs a test and I still haven't done the repair work (yes I can do that work myself), to get it on the road.  The second is that my "box" does more MPG than the bike, so the bike is about time and not emissions.

My 24 speed mountain bike?  Is not viable for any journey other than the rather expensive local hotel to work.  All other distances are outside my 5 mile viable ride distance for my time to work.

I spent a year using my bike exclusively on Jersey.  Rather than take my car and sit it in a car park in Jersey all week.  But the 250  mile journey to the port (and back again), every week, was a car job.

I've cycled in many places.  Had my bike stolen in Zurich, from the streets, cycled in Munich, Frankfurt and Amsterdam.

But you see these days I have an enlarged heart, it presses on my lung and it makes cycling rather unpleasant.  Despite all the other things not going for it in time, distance, weather, office facilities.  So it's not quite about not being bothered or not putting in an effort.

Some of us are, today, actually physically unsuited to your solution to driving a car.

Saying people are "not trying" because cycling suits your location, work situation and physical health, does not always sit well.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: oren on September 12, 2019, 01:04:31 PM
Instead of playing woth speed limits and other workaround incentives, the best solution as always is price the carbon properly (both gasoline and the natgas and coal dor electricity), and let people make their own decisions. A proper price will push many to bikes, e-bikes, lower speeds, smaller cars, hybrids, EVs and what have you not.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on September 12, 2019, 01:05:05 PM
What is the most efficient speed for a car?
If it is just parked and running there is no efficient running at all, but people say that high speed is inefficient.
I would guess it is a Laffer Curve?

As was found in the fuel crisis, some cars are actually more efficient at 70mph in cruise, than at 50mph.

There are cars, today, with 6 manual gears, which struggle below 40mph and have to be dropped a gear.  Reducing efficiency.  Also a car with that gearing, designed to cruise at 70mph or more (many EU countries have over 80mph as a speed limit), will consume more fuel climbing a hill at 50mph than at 70mph where the engine is struggling less.

Then it depends radically on CD.  If the CD is low, then the differential between 50mph and 70mph is far lower.  High CD and the impact is very high.  MPV's (or minivans), tend to suffer from that a lot as do Semi's, hence the Tesla efforts to reduce CD.

There are so many variable here, from underinflated tyres which create more rolling resistance to CD, to gearing, to the engine power (smaller engines with less torque will burn more fuel under stress), the type of countryside, the amount of stop/start.  How aggressively you drive.  If I'm in a hurry in a city environment with stop start and <50mph speed limits, I use significantly more fuel than if I'm on a motorway cruising at 70mph.  I use the power of the vehicle, drive "firmly" manage traffic lights with power and, generally, drop my long distance MPG by about 30 in the small car.  The difference is less in my larger car as it's CD is higher.

There is a reason why urban MPG figures are lower than extra urban.

All of that having been said, with most modern vehicles, around 55mph will always elicit better fuel consumption, on a freely moving road, than 70mph.

However if you have 500 miles to drive, or 1,000 miles to drive, then 55mph is no fun.  I'm used to driving long distance.  When I was at RTP Raleigh, I decided to drive to DC for the day and back again, as I was unlikely to be there again and I wanted to visit.  50mph sucks.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: oren on September 12, 2019, 01:09:38 PM
BTW my car's stop/start function usually doesn't kick in when AC is on, which here is half the year. Quite disappointing.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on September 12, 2019, 03:39:46 PM
You don't need to do 50 mph. -7C is very doable on a bicycle.
You don't need to shower. I have three siblings and we all showered once per week on Fridays. My mom and dad as well. And no fancy products and odours. This was in the 70's, not so long ago and a shower is an enormous luxury. Warmed potable water raining on you. Potable water down the drain.

I see the things you think you need and can only say that please, try to view it through the 'lenses' of someone from the 70's. Or 50's. Or all those millenia before.

Have you forgotten public transport? Shared transport?
Are you putting that option perhaps unconsciously away? Just asking :)


edit: corrected number of siblings
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on September 12, 2019, 04:52:21 PM
nanning:
Maybe he himself doesn't need to shower, but his boss needs him to?
Nowadays, a boss can ruin your life by firing you for smelling, and without a reference you don't get another job.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Neven on September 12, 2019, 04:59:57 PM
After all, if you have an EV, charge always on CO2 neutral energy, then what does it matter what speed you drive at.

It matters, because all fossil fuel energy hasn't been replaced by CO2 neutral energy yet. I know you hate to hear this, but you can't just make your lifestyle 'green' and continue business as usual.

Energy needs to be conserved. That's the first and most important step. And so no, cars with 100 kWh batteries going 130 km/h on the Autobahn aren't a solution.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on September 12, 2019, 05:20:01 PM
They're not all monsters that are not with you Neven.  However many of them demand the right to consume as the cost of compliance with society.

Getting the consumption onto the right footing (clean energy), is the first challenge.  Stopping consumption is political and I see absolutely no way you can win that one.

Good luck with it though.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Neven on September 12, 2019, 06:53:38 PM
You're just saying that as an excuse for not really wanting to change your own behaviour. That's your main reason for being on this forum.

Who is talking about stopping consumption? I'm talking about making consumption more efficient, and reducing excessive consumption. I will venture to say that a Model S is excessive consumption in itself, especially given the fact that Tesla is not going to build the EV equivalent of the Ford Model T or Volkswagen Beetle for the masses (which was always the excuse for building luxury cars first).

This is something that can be debated, but not whether driving 130 km/h in a 100 kWh Model S is excessive consumption. Maybe it won't be when there is limitless CO2-free energy, but right now it is.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 12, 2019, 07:07:57 PM
After all, if you have an EV, charge always on CO2 neutral energy, then what does it matter what speed you drive at.

It matters, because all fossil fuel energy hasn't been replaced by CO2 neutral energy yet. I know you hate to hear this, but you can't just make your lifestyle 'green' and continue business as usual.

Energy needs to be conserved. That's the first and most important step. And so no, cars with 100 kWh batteries going 130 km/h on the Autobahn aren't a solution.

It is a solution, if it gets more people — particularly the ones who don’t give a whit about global warming — out of their ICE cars and into EVs, sooner.  It’s not hypocritical to use some fossil fuel energy to enable the transition to a cleaner, sustainable future.  We can’t run the entire solar panel manufacturing process on renewables just yet.  Going green, for whatever reason is given, helps:  a fast EV istill generates less CO2 than a slow ICE vehicle. 

If I create my own electricity, I’m harming no one if I drive fast (safely).  Would you limit emergency vehicle speed, too?  Guy in the back of the ambulance is flat-lining, but can’t get him to the hospital quickly because that wastes energy?  And no oxygen for him, because fossil fuels are used to make the supply?

Quote
...a Model S is excessive consumption in itself, especially given the fact that Tesla is not going to build the EV equivalent of the Ford Model T or Volkswagen Beetle for the masses (which was always the excuse for building luxury cars first).

Musk has mentioned several times that a $25k Tesla will be available in 3-5 years.  The millions of vehicles his pay package demands if he is to make any money himself will doubtless involve even cheaper vehicles after that.  It’s NOT about luxury — that’s just where you have to start, when you begin with nothing. (As opposed to the big established automakers.)  You need high-price, lower volume cars at first.  Then, you can build higher-volume, lower-price cars next.  Musk wrote that 10 years ago.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on September 12, 2019, 08:40:35 PM
I was no fan of Carter's 55 MPH max speeds at the time they were initiated, but it didn't take long to adjust.
Different speed limits for different vehicles on the same roadway is a recipe for more accidents, this is why "limited access highways" are in existence.
Nevada had no speed limits in unincorporated areas until Carter's 55 MPH limits were forced onto the State. It saved a lot of lives and damage. Much more than the rather draconian drunk driving laws that followed.
Long distance driving in a personal vehicle has never made sense. What's needed is easy access to and from the HS train once your destination city has been reached. Once you're in an urban city the needs of bicyclists, pedestrians and kids playing has to be taken into consideration & high speeds are simply not safe.
Anyone that can afford a Tesla can afford a "city car", it has no need for speed, but may be required to keep a couple of people out of the weather & tote a load of groceries to the house. If such was available I might be interested even if Freeway driving was not an option.
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Neven on September 12, 2019, 10:39:03 PM
It is a solution, if it gets more people — particularly the ones who don’t give a whit about global warming — out of their ICE cars and into EVs, sooner.  It’s not hypocritical to use some fossil fuel energy to enable the transition to a cleaner, sustainable future.  We can’t run the entire solar panel manufacturing process on renewables just yet.  Going green, for whatever reason is given, helps:  a fast EV istill generates less CO2 than a slow ICE vehicle.

It is not a solution if it doesn't solve fast enough. Five slower EVs with smaller batteries generate a lot less CO2 than a fast EV. Perpetuating the culture that has caused AGW, isn't going to solve AGW. If you take the people from Extinction Rebellion seriously (and why shouldn't you?), even five slower EVs are still too much.

Quote
If I create my own electricity, I’m harming no one if I drive fast (safely).  Would you limit emergency vehicle speed, too?  Guy in the back of the ambulance is flat-lining, but can’t get him to the hospital quickly because that wastes energy?  And no oxygen for him, because fossil fuels are used to make the supply?

We're not talking about emergencies, but about regular (rich) people who don't want to change. And because they don't want to change, absolutely nothing must change

Quote
Musk has mentioned several times that a $25k Tesla will be available in 3-5 years.

Yes, we know Musk's timelines. 'We will build that car for everybody really soon now. But first we build the Model Y and then the Pickup and then we shoot off another Roadster 3.0 into space, and then another SUV, and then maybe perhaps, a 20K car that is still full of perceived and programmed obsolecence, because...

Well, the culture that caused AGW must not ever change! All we need to do, is make CO2 free energy limitless. It's just as simple as that. And we'll do it in time, of course. Like we always have.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on September 12, 2019, 11:01:47 PM
You're just saying that as an excuse for not really wanting to change your own behaviour. That's your main reason for being on this forum.

Well then, not much to say to that is there.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 13, 2019, 01:38:09 AM
Quote
It is not a solution if it doesn't solve fast enough.

Name another car company making more BEVs than Tesla. 
You can’t, because Tesla is the global leader.

Quote
We will build that car for everybody really soon now.

Name another car company which will make more BEVs than Tesla over the next few years. 
None has the battery capacity to do it.

Edit: added data image below.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on September 13, 2019, 02:16:35 PM
Well, I hope the car was electric  :D
https://365tomorrows.com/2019/09/13/car-talk/
Quote
Why am I here at home at three o’clock in the afternoon? That suspicious bastard Franklin didn’t believe me when I told him that my car had kidnapped me and taken me to Old Orchard Beach. He fired me, so I don’t have a job anymore.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Neven on September 13, 2019, 08:17:19 PM
To return to the thing I took issue with, instead of whether Tesla is offering a solution or not:

Quote
This is something that can be debated (ed: whether Tesla is a solution), but not whether driving 130 km/h in a 100 kWh Model S is excessive consumption. Maybe it won't be when there is limitless CO2-free energy, but right now it is.

Speed limits need to be reduced as much as possible, regardless of whether cars are ICEVs or EVs. Because we need to save energy, so renewables can have a chance at covering energy needs.

The whole idea of 'I'm driving a Tesla now, so I can do whatever I want, having bought off the guilt' is pathetic, pathological even. No one who is serious about AGW, acknowledging the science and everything, thinks like that.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 13, 2019, 08:47:26 PM
...
The whole idea of 'I'm driving a Tesla now, so I can do whatever I want, having bought off the guilt' is pathetic, pathological even. No one who is serious about AGW, acknowledging the science and everything, thinks like that.

Correct.  And most Tesla owners Do Not think like that.  So trying to guilt them into driving ultra-sedately when all around them are ICE cars which do not... makes no sense.

To your point about needing more low-priced EVs:  China makes some.  But there are videos of them struggling to get up small hills at anything more than a walking pace.  I don’t think even you would want to buy one. ;)

When someone finally offers a really good but cheap and mass-volume EV, it will sell like crazy.  But no one:  not the OEMs, not Tesla, not any startup, has found a financially viable way to accomplish that yet.  (Even though TSLAQ has been saying for years that Tesla is practically a not-for-profit company. ;))  Maybe by 2023, enough EV manufacturing infrastructure will be in place for that to happen.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on September 13, 2019, 09:41:23 PM
How climate change trade woes have affected the Frankfurt Motor Show
https://www.driven.co.nz/news/news/how-climate-change-trade-woes-have-affected-the-frankfurt-motor-show/
Quote
Environmental groups such as Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth Germany and Germany’s ADFC bicycle club are organizing a march to the exhibition center on Saturday to call for what they view as more environmentally friendly transportation policies. They want more space allotted to bicycles and pedestrians and more use of renewable energy instead of gasoline and diesel.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Neven on September 14, 2019, 07:02:35 AM
Correct.  And most Tesla owners Do Not think like that.  So trying to guilt them into driving ultra-sedately when all around them are ICE cars which do not... makes no sense.

This is what I was reacting against:

Quote
After all, if you have an EV, charge always on CO2 neutral energy, then what does it matter what speed you drive at.

I live in Austria. At first, I thought it was funny that temporary speed limits, aimed at improving air quality, didn't apply to EVs. But now I think it's just stupid, because most fine particles come from tyres.

But either way, speed limits need to be set as low as possible, for instance 80-90 km/h near cities, 100-110 km/h elsewhere.

Maybe some day, when there is limitless CO2-neutral energy, you can make speed limitless again. But right now, it matters, even if you drive an EV.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: blumenkraft on September 14, 2019, 08:32:17 AM
Personally, i would make it 30km/h innercity (because everything above 30 is madness when there are kids around), 70 km/h outercity (because wild animals realize your speed below 80 only), and 90 km/h on Autobahn/highway (because everything above 90 makes the drag unreasonable).

And i would make it strict, as in 'if you go faster you get your driver license nulled'.

Additionally, i would regulate the maximum amount of recourses used for a car. I would basically ban supercars. Those are madness by default.

I do think there should be perks for EVs, but loosen the speed limit should not be one.

My hometown offers free parking everywhere for EVs. That's a nice perk IMHO.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: oren on September 14, 2019, 08:45:29 AM
I would do the same. But wishing doesn't make it happen. So I support EVs, even the big bad ones, as an incremental improvement on ICE, knowing full well that this is a very partial and slow solution to a problem that needs full and fast solutions, a problem that will eat us and our children. But partial and slow is still better than no solution at all. The famous incremental approach. Of course changing the system, reducing consumption and banning fossil fuels as crimes against humanity (they really are) would be better, but the support for this is not there.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: blumenkraft on September 14, 2019, 08:56:57 AM
A slow transition is ought to come. Nothing special has to be done for it. Just watch renewables become cheaper and cheaper and let the market do its thing.

But we don't have the time for a slow transition. The time for incrementalism is over. Incrementalism is exactly what mankind did wrong in the last 30 years.

It's either revolution or demise.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on September 14, 2019, 05:04:27 PM
Incrementalism is exactly what mankind did wrong in the last 30 years.

Actually since Reagan, so more like 40 years.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: oren on September 14, 2019, 05:37:29 PM
Quote
It's either revolution or demise.
I do agree. But I predict demise, as there isn't support for a revolution.
In the meantime, I would rather have incremental improvements and then demise, rather than do nothing and demise.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on September 14, 2019, 07:36:28 PM
Quote
It's either revolution or demise.
I do agree. But I predict demise, as there isn't support for a revolution.
In the meantime, I would rather have incremental improvements and then demise, rather than do nothing and demise.
If "incremental improvements" made even incremental improvements to the situation I'd be a huge fan.
That said, the "incremental improvements' we've made have allowed us to increase our emissions more rapidly decade over decade.


If we accept that AGW ends with disaster, then we need to do something other than continue with  "incremental improvements".
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on September 14, 2019, 08:15:39 PM
<snipped>

I live in Austria. At first, I thought it was funny that temporary speed limits, aimed at improving air quality, didn't apply to EVs. But now I think it's just stupid, because most fine particles come from tyres.

But either way, speed limits need to be set as low as possible, for instance 80-90 km/h near cities, 100-110 km/h elsewhere.

Maybe some day, when there is limitless CO2-neutral energy, you can make speed limitless again. But right now, it matters, even if you drive an EV.
I think your speed limits are still far too high. Carter's 55 MPH (88.5 KPH) Maximum didn't ruin anything worth preserving - and that limit could be cropped even further.

Wasting energy and damaging public roads isn't anyone's right. 8)
Save a fast lane for Express E-Buses, Ambulances and Cop Cars, then slow everything else down to a crawl. It might be more efficient to install speed limiting governors as opposed to aggressive speeding citations.

There's no reason to race to our fate.
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on September 15, 2019, 05:03:25 AM
^^
I agree with Neven (microplastics from tyres) and TerryM.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 15, 2019, 02:28:25 PM
What about the billions of dollars lost in productivity, with lower speed limits?  Long haul deliveries that can’t be completed in their usual time, leading to shortages of materials, medicine, food — or that now require additional trucks on the road to keep up deliveries per time period?  Worse quality of life for the people spending more of their time commuting?  Longer “rush hours.”  Making higher-pollution flying a more attractive alternative than driving, for more trips.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: blumenkraft on September 15, 2019, 03:07:33 PM
Sigmetnow, it's rare, but i have to disagree on this one. You wouldn't dramatically lower the average speed with a speed limit. But you would cut off the unhealthy spikes.

It has been tested a gazillion times on German Autobahn. You let a Porsche and a Smart drive from Hamburg to Munich. The Porsche would travel as fast as possible while the Smart goes at constantly lowish speed. The Porsche will be there 15-30 Minutes earlier only for this 8h trip.

From a traffic flow perspective, a speed limit has proven to lower the rate of congestions, so you even upper the average speed in the conurbation.

So no, there would be no productivity loss.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on September 15, 2019, 03:33:00 PM
What about the billions of dollars lost in productivity, with lower speed limits?  Long haul deliveries that can’t be completed in their usual time, leading to shortages of materials, medicine, food — or that now require additional trucks on the road to keep up deliveries per time period?  Worse quality of life for the people spending more of their time commuting?  Longer “rush hours.”  Making higher-pollution flying a more attractive alternative than driving, for more trips.
From 1974 through 1987/78, 55 MPH was the Maximum Speed Limit throughout the USA. "Muscle Car" production certainly suffered, but your forecast shortages of "materials, medicine & food" didn't peak during those years. Rush hours were no better than previously - though fortunately they were no worse.
Police led convoys of vehicles from LA to Las Vegas, arresting anyone who attempted to pass the lead police car that drove along at 55. Leaving LA, or any other major metropolitan region at over 55 MPH was not only difficult, you could lose your license or even your vehicle.
Perhaps those who lived in other countries, or who weren't old enough to drive in those times fear lower speed limits, but the sky didn't fall, patients did receive needed medicines, and Americans actually managed to pack on a few pounds.
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: oren on September 15, 2019, 03:38:56 PM
A country that can't raise taxes on gasoline by a few cents per gallon, because of political reasons, will lower the speed limit to 55 mph? I'll keep my fingers crossed, but I'll not hold my breath.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 15, 2019, 03:49:28 PM
Terry,
blumenkraft,

Perhaps.  But human behavior can prove to be be unexpected, and people (and cars) today are not from the 1970’s.  Also, I dare say the flying population and attitudes are different.

Terry, while I have your attention, here’s a reminder:
National Drive Electric event,  Cambridge Center Mall, September 21; 11am to 3pm! :)  8)

https://driveelectricweek.org/index.php
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on September 15, 2019, 03:50:05 PM
A country that can't raise taxes on gasoline by a few cents per gallon, because of political reasons, will lower the speed limit to 55 mph? I'll keep my fingers crossed, but I'll not hold my breath.
If we limit ourselves to changes that won't harm an American Politician's electability we limit ourselves to solutions that will assure our children inherit a hellish world.


55 MPH isn't enough, but it has been done in the recent past. If we can't push something like this through what hope is there for meaningful change?
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on September 15, 2019, 04:20:12 PM
Terry,
blumenkraft,

Perhaps.  But human behavior can prove to be be unexpected, and people (and cars) today are not from the 1970’s.  Also, I dare say the flying population and attitudes are different.

Terry, while I have your attention, here’s a reminder:
National Drive Electric event,  Cambridge Center Mall, September 21; 11am to 3pm! :) 8)
Thanks for the heads up Sig. I'll try my best to make an appearance.


None of my business, but were you in the States and driving while speeds were curtailed?
It really wasn't that long ago, and I haven't noticed any meaningful changes in attitude over the intervening period.
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 15, 2019, 04:40:02 PM

None of my business, but were you in the States and driving while speeds were curtailed?
It really wasn't that long ago, and I haven't noticed any meaningful changes in attitude over the intervening period.
Terry

Yes, although my work commute was a short one, so I did not encounter the stress that I heard about from others around me complaining about gas rationing to alternate days, etc.

In the decades since then, everything has gotten faster:  from speed limits, to the prevalence of overnight and two-day delivery, to internet connections. ;)  Even the presence of “Full Service” at gas stations has mostly disappeared in the U.S..   
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on September 15, 2019, 05:56:27 PM
 :P

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzbrjxqwpoo
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on September 15, 2019, 06:13:58 PM

None of my business, but were you in the States and driving while speeds were curtailed?
It really wasn't that long ago, and I haven't noticed any meaningful changes in attitude over the intervening period.
Terry

Yes, although my work commute was a short one, so I did not encounter the stress that I heard about from others around me complaining about gas rationing to alternate days, etc.

In the decades since then, everything has gotten faster:  from speed limits, to the prevalence of overnight and two-day delivery, to internet connections. ;)  Even the presence of “Full Service” at gas stations has mostly disappeared in the U.S..
Alternate days was a bummer for most. I was in a commune at that time & we had one guy whose only job was to make sure every vehicle stayed topped up. :D
Speed limits in many jurisdictions still aren't up to the pre-55Max years (Rural Nevada had no speed limit), and the internet wasn't on anyone's radar.
The last full service I saw was a small station in Barstow that did it for publicity in the mid 1990's. "Fill her up with Ethyl Sir?" - as they checked the tires and oil. - Good days indeed! :)
My wife makes extensive use of Amazon and their rapid deliveries. I still want to handle it before I buy it - a vanishing breed it seems. ???


Realistically lowering the speed limit to 55 isn't enough to make a serious dent in the problem. We do though need to start somewhere, and if we can't force as innocuous a change as this on our culture we're assured of losing the whole damn thing. :-\
We don't need to do this by 2025, or 2030, we need to do this before 2020.
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 15, 2019, 06:29:30 PM
Anecdote:  a friend of mine and her husband drive down to Florida to visit her mother once or twice a year, a trip she describes as just at the limit of what they can comfortably do in one day.  “If it took any longer, we’d fly.”


If the purpose of a lower highway speed limit is to save energy, my first thought of course is that driving an EV would save much more energy, at any speed, compared to the energy wasted in heat and friction between all the parts of an ICE vehicle.

But even in ICE transportation, much energy would be saved by using Driver Assistance technology — active cruise control, for instance, which maintains a chosen following distance — rather than inconstant, impatient human control.  A benefit most often cited by users of Tesla Autopilot is how much less stress they feel during a trip (even when they didn’t think driving was very stressful before), and how much more rested they are afterward, by letting the car do the driving.  Lanes restricted to emergency vehicles would not be used enough, and would just make other lanes more crowded.  But a lane with mandated ADAS, which only could go as fast as traffic allowed, might make sense.  Like with what happened with HOV lanes, drivers could select cars allowing them to use this potentially faster, less congested, and no doubt more polite option. Even if they don’t care about saving energy. 8)

And yes, this would be a step toward the days of full self driving.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on September 15, 2019, 06:43:12 PM
^^
Why not take a bus?
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 15, 2019, 07:05:11 PM
^^
Why not take a bus?
Terry

Because there’s none where I live, and buses don’t go to all destinations.

Edit:  Well, there are school buses, but stealing one of those for a personal cross-country trip would be frowned upon. ;)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on September 15, 2019, 07:48:59 PM
^^
Why not take a bus?
Terry

Because there’s none where I live, and buses don’t go to all destinations.
That sounds like something that a few dollars could change.
When Trailways was a thing they had express service between major destinations that included a card table, sandwiches and drinks, pillows, a blanket and a stewardess - all at the same price as a Greyhound.
Imagine what could be done if the government tossed in a few bucks!


Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: KiwiGriff on September 15, 2019, 08:01:22 PM
Quote
Speed limits set only five miles per hour below engineering recommendations produce a statistically significant decrease in total, fatal and injury crashes, and property-damage-only crashes, according to a group of Penn State researchers.

"If (however) you lower the speed limit by 10, 15, 25 miles per hour, or more, drivers stop paying attention," said Vikash Gayah, assistant professor of civil engineering. "We found there was an increase in fatal and injury crashes at locations with posted speed limits set 10 miles per hour or more below engineering recommendations."
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/12/181212135021.htm
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 15, 2019, 09:54:32 PM
^^
Why not take a bus?
Terry

Because there’s none where I live, and buses don’t go to all destinations.
That sounds like something that a few dollars could change.
When Trailways was a thing they had express service between major destinations that included a card table, sandwiches and drinks, pillows, a blanket and a stewardess - all at the same price as a Greyhound.
Imagine what could be done if the government tossed in a few bucks!

Terry

This is a very poor, rural area.  Much of the population lacks the money for adequate food or clothing, let alone bus tickets.  The county struggles to simply keep emergency services funded.  Even if buses were available, there would be next to no demand, and no money to support them.  Makes no sense.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: sidd on September 16, 2019, 05:18:23 AM
GM strike: 50K employees off the job at midnite

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/09/14/auto-s15.html

sidd
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on September 18, 2019, 11:26:15 AM
  Air pollution particles found on foetal side of placentas – study

Research finds black carbon breathed by mothers can cross into unborn children

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/17/air-pollution-particles-found-on-foetal-side-of-placentas-study
  by Damian Carrington


 Quotes:
Air pollution particles have been found on the foetal side of placentas, indicating that unborn babies are directly exposed to the black carbon produced by motor traffic and fuel burning.

The research is the first study to show the placental barrier can be penetrated by particles breathed in by the mother. It found thousands of the tiny particles per cubic millimetre of tissue in every placenta analysed.

Damage to foetuses has lifelong consequences and Prof Tim Nawrot at Hasselt University in Belgium, who led the study, said: “This is the most vulnerable period of life. All the organ systems are in development.

A comprehensive global review concluded that air pollution may be damaging every organ and virtually every cell in the human body. Nanoparticles have also been found to cross the blood-brain barrier and billions have been found in the hearts of young city dwellers.

-----

While the advise in the article is to avoid busy roads etc...
The best advise should be to take away the cause and not fight the effect: In other words: Don't use personal cars.

While ICE's have the toxic exhaust fumes, both the ICE and EV shed nano-particles, microplastics from tyre wear. Remember this next time you drive past a pregnant woman, past children or a school.
Please, it is an emergency!

edit: Leave your car home for a day or more and use public transport, if available (maybe you need to walk or cycle a bit to the stop).
It's a start. In rural parts you might have interesting conversations :) . Shared transport yeah
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 18, 2019, 04:45:39 PM
Quote
While ICE's have the toxic exhaust fumes, both the ICE and EV shed nano-particles, microplastics from tyre wear. Remember this next time you drive past a pregnant woman, past children or a school.
Please, it is an emergency!

edit: Leave your car home for a day or more and use public transport, if available (maybe you need to walk or cycle a bit to the stop).

So, spend more time traveling, on the side of the road, breathing in even more gas and tyre particles, even deeper than usual because of your increased heart and respiratory rate, without the benefit of a vehicle’s air filtration system?

Or does everyone walking and cycling wear gas masks?

——
Edit:  the Tesla HEPA filter system “Bioweapon Defense Mode” cleans pollutants from the surrounding  outside air, as well as providing clean-room quality air inside the vehicle.
Quote
The plot below shows the subsequent evolution in pollution levels inside the vehicle and inside the bubble. In less than two minutes, the HEPA filtration system had scrubbed the air in Model X, bringing pollution levels from an extremely dangerous 1,000 µg/m3 to levels so low as to be undetectable (below the noise floor) by our instruments, allowing us to remove our gas masks and breathe fresh air while sitting inside a bubble of pollution.
https://www.tesla.com/blog/putting-tesla-hepa-filter-and-bioweapon-defense-mode-to-the-test
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on September 18, 2019, 05:53:29 PM
We need to REMOVE THE CAUSE. Not treat the effect as something natural.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on September 18, 2019, 06:14:30 PM
Sig
If the HEPA filter does all that's claimed, why are so many complaining of the terrible odors from Tesla ACs? Shouldn't any decent air filter be capable of removing odors?
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: blumenkraft on September 18, 2019, 06:50:41 PM
Gnihihihi, anyone else thinking of Seinfeld now?
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 18, 2019, 08:45:46 PM
Sig
If the HEPA filter does all that's claimed, why are so many complaining of the terrible odors from Tesla ACs? Shouldn't any decent air filter be capable of removing odors?
Terry

Owners report solving this problem the same way that works for all other “decent” cars:  parking the car and setting the heat on full for an hour or two to eliminate mold and bacteria that accumulates in any humid system (not necessarily in the filter).
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 18, 2019, 08:55:17 PM
We need to REMOVE THE CAUSE. Not treat the effect as something natural.

Because I drive fewer miles than average, I only need to replace my car tires every 5 years so.  How often do you replace your bike tires?  I need to buy new walking shoes every year or two because the soles wear out.  Let’s count those causes, too!

The Tesla HEPA system might just be removing more pollutants from the environment than the car emits.  We can’t afford the time for “natural” solutions to fix the situation we’ve gotten ourselves into — if they even can.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on September 18, 2019, 10:58:14 PM
Sig
If the HEPA filter does all that's claimed, why are so many complaining of the terrible odors from Tesla ACs? Shouldn't any decent air filter be capable of removing odors?
Terry

Owners report solving this problem the same way that works for all other “decent” cars:  parking the car and setting the heat on full for an hour or two to eliminate mold and bacteria that accumulates in any humid system (not necessarily in the filter).


How strange. I do did drive an excessive number of miles, some I'm sure in "decent"? cars, and I never encountered a similar problem. You don't suppose the engineers could have missed something as rudimentary as providing adequate drainage for the condensate that builds on all AC evaporators do you?


Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: sidd on September 18, 2019, 11:00:14 PM
The tire/asphalt dust issue is an externality, just like CO2 from the exhaust.  Typically externalities are addressed by penalties and taxation. Unfortunately, the car lobbies have captured the regulators.

So as usual, the rich will fix the problem for themselves, will breathe clean and filtered air, the poor will suffer and die.

sidd
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on September 18, 2019, 11:46:52 PM
^^
Pass the Oxygen Jeeves. Yes, the one in the silver chalice. Then scuttle back to your hovel, and make sure you seal the airlock behind you.
Damn servant class these days - they act as if it was their air!
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: blumenkraft on September 19, 2019, 09:28:12 AM
Obvious clip to follow this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXNOyknNwlQ
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: vox_mundi on October 01, 2019, 07:12:16 PM
UPS Gets FAA Nod for Widespread Drone Deliveries
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ups-gets-faa-nod-for-widespread-drone-deliveries-11569939601
http://www.uasmagazine.com/articles/2072/ups-flight-forward-gains-faa-approval-to-launch-drone-airline
https://techxplore.com/news/2019-10-ups-drone-airline.html

UPS subsidiary UPS Flight Forward Inc. today announced it has received the U.S. government’s first full Part 135 Standard certification to operate a drone airline. United Parcel Service Inc. said it received the first-of-its-kind federal approval to start setting up a fleet of unmanned aircraft to deliver health supplies and eventually consumer packages potentially throughout the U.S.

The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) awarded UPS Flight Forward a Part 135 Standard certification on Friday. The UPS subsidiary immediately launched the first drone delivery flight by any company under Part 135 Standard at WakeMed’s hospital campus in Raleigh, N.C. That flight, using a Matternet M2 quadcopter, was flown under a government exemption allowing for a beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) operation, also a first in the U.S. for a regular revenue-generating delivery.

The FAA’s Part 135 Standard certification has no limits on the size or scope of operations. It is the highest level of certification, one that no other company has attained. UPS Flight Forward’s certificate permits the company to fly an unlimited number of drones with an unlimited number of remote operators in command. This enables UPS to scale its operations to meet customer demand. Part 135 Standard also permits the drone and cargo to exceed 55 pounds and fly at night, previous restrictions governing earlier UPS flights.

Even before getting the airline designation, UPS Flight Forward, as the subsidiary is called, has operated more than 1,000 flights at Wake Forest University's medical center in Raleigh, North Carolina.

Going forward, UPS Flight Forward says it has a long-term plan with several milestones:

- Expansion of the UPS Flight Forward delivery service to new hospitals and medical campuses around the country;
- Rapid build-out of ground-based, detect-and-avoid technologies to verify drone safety while enabling future service expansion;
- Construction of a centralized operations control center;
- Regular and frequent BVLOS drone flights;
- Partnerships with additional drone manufacturers to build new drones with varying cargo capacities; and
- Adding new services outside of the healthcare industry, including the transport of special commodities and other regulated goods.

UPS believes the earliest commercially viable uses of drones will be for same-day deliveries, for augmenting truck-borne deliveries in rural areas, and for larger drones that could carry cargo of up to a ton from one rural area to another. Price said the latter idea is still years away.

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61Z9j5u-dgL._SX425_.jpg)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 11, 2019, 09:06:09 PM
Quote
Spectrum News NY1 (@NY1) 10/10/19, 6:30 AM
A traffic warning sign on Vanderbilt Ave. in #Brooklyn has been flashing anti-car messages over the past month. A company contracted by @MTA who operates it says the lock is changed and the sign is reprogrammed every day but it keeps getting hacked. 
https://twitter.com/ny1/status/1182241941385334784
Image below.  Video clip of the sign in action at the link.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on November 16, 2019, 12:57:37 PM
^^
In your face! Thanks Sig, I love it :)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: sedziobs on November 17, 2019, 04:27:37 AM
Quote
SimCity is often deployed in an educational context, integrated in some higher-ed and K-12 curricula. And it’s by far the most visible “face” of urban planning. Copies of SimCity were preloaded on computers bound for India during the One Laptop Per Child program, a techno-optimistic initiative to solve rural education deficits by giving every child a computer. An educational version of SimCity called SimCityEDU leads children through a series of challenges like planning school bus routes, “increasing jobs,” or reducing air pollution. 

But only certain kinds of cities are possible in SimCity and its successors. The city of your dreams must be car-centric, modernist, and usually grid-based. Vehicles in SimCity conveniently don’t emit pollution, or even need parking: When cars reach their destinations they simply disappear.

The disappearing cars of the simulated city are a way to make the game more accessible by preventing eternal gridlock. But they also elide many of the most heated debates in real-life urban planning. Parking spaces are battlegrounds, and drivers fight for them against more bike or pedestrian-friendly infrastructure. Students playing the base game or the educational version of SimCity are presented with an environment where cars are neutral, unproblematic, and essential, rather than a deliberate policy choice.

Other elements of SimCity are more troubling. Worker sims have no permanent homes. They cycle endlessly between whatever businesses or dwellings have available slots. Homeless sims are created when a house becomes “abandoned” due to falling property values. These sims lose their identity, gender, and “citizenship” within the game. They wander aimlessly between public spaces and abandoned buildings, eating garbage on their way. They cannot be helped, only removed through stringent trash collection and bus depots out of town. Race, social mobility, real estate speculation, and community aren’t simulated at all. Omissions like this aren’t just matters of design. Their absence from the game is a statement of its own.
currentaffairs.org/2019/10/education-gamification (https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/10/education-gamification)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: vox_mundi on November 23, 2019, 05:54:40 PM
Here’s an important issue that isn’t talked about all that much: How first responders should interact with self-driving cars.

https://youtu.be/7G0a1PRAtaM

“To put the car in manual mode, you must call Waymo.”???
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 23, 2019, 08:06:12 PM
Here’s an important issue that isn’t talked about all that much: How first responders should interact with self-driving cars.

...

“To put the car in manual mode, you must call Waymo.”???

I’ve seen an ad for a car (can’t remember which one) where the car was deactivated remotely after a request by law enforcement, in a case of theft and a high-speed chase.  This should certainly be a required feature to protect against rogue or damaged self-driving cars, as well.  Although you may be out of luck if the car is in a tunnel or otherwise out of radio contact.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: vox_mundi on November 23, 2019, 10:05:18 PM
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/tesla-autopilot-police-speeding-sleeping-driver-california-steering-wheel-a8665811.html%3famp

https://www.google.com/amp/s/jalopnik.com/googles-waymo-asked-people-to-test-its-semi-autonomous-1838068842/amp
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on November 24, 2019, 11:29:51 AM
How long before your car locks it's doors & transports its passengers to the nearest (privatized) jail? Will we be informed when this "feature" is activated - probably by an over the air software "upgrade".
Terry






Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on November 24, 2019, 04:14:02 PM
Good thinking there Terry :)
Self driving cars are robots without Asimov's laws.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: vox_mundi on November 24, 2019, 05:18:36 PM
Quote
How long before your car locks it's doors & transports its passengers to the nearest (privatized) jail? Will we be informed when this "feature" is activated - probably by an over the air software "upgrade". 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Vrxyr1CjiSM
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on November 25, 2019, 12:29:40 AM

Thanks nanning.

Having cars that may be compelled to imprison they're occupants, and deliver them to an alternative location may bring up a Law that AFAIK Asimov never addressed.


Law (n) - A Robot must always obey its operator except when it's controlled by X.


Who, or what is the mysterious 'X'


Is 'X' the head of the UN?


Is 'X' the head of the national government that 'O' the Operator resides in, is a citizen of, that the AI vehicle is operating in, that the vehicle was manufactured in, that the vehicle was originally sold in. that the vehicle was most recently sold in, that the manufacturer incorporated in;
that the lessor is (one of the above with), that the lessee is (one of the above with), that the cab company (when applicable - is one of the above), that the loan holder (when applicable - is one of the above)?


Is 'X' the head of the local, regional, state, or federal security force?


Is 'X' a General in times of declared or undeclared war?


Is 'X' a coalition of friends and relatives acting on behalf of the operator?


Is 'X' a parent or responsible adult acting on behalf of an under-age operator or passenger?


Is 'X' a truant officer concerned about the education of an operator or passenger?


Is 'X' a fire compliance officer concerned with the safety of the community?


Could some of 'X's prerogatives be purchased by retailers, restaurants or innkeepers?


Would an 'X' be required to leave evidence of his interference?


How would multiple micro managing "Xs" resolve their conflicting mandates in a timely manner?


Who is financially or criminally responsible for mini 'X's decisions?


Must every owner, operator, passenger be informed of 'X's actions before, during, or after the intervention.


I think I could ask these questions until Musk's Flying RoasterRoadster becomes a commodity, and still not scratch the surface of the questions that need be addressed before an autonomous, but connected, vehicle is allowed to wander about in the wild, where it might interact with civilians who have never even been asked if they consent to AIs in their midst.


Musk's OTA alteration of charging protocol during hurricanes and fires demonstrate that 'X' is presently in his hands for the majority of the semi-autonomous fleet. The braking systems were also altered OTA. These are hands legally required to have twitter messages vetted by a member of the bar, but his ability to interact with vehicles as they are being driven is unchecked.


Uber, Waymo and every other purveyor of even semi-autonomous vehicles has retained at the very least a portion of 'X's powers. Again let me emphasize that this is with no oversight from representative government officials, little understanding or consent from the owner/operators, and absolutely no consent by or even a conversation with the public.


Two Democratic Senators demanded last week that Tesla end it's assisted driving program until such time as their questions had been addressed. After the next election the Democrats are expected to at the least gain some Federal power. Possibly with Democrats in charge this laissez-faire period will be brought to an end, some of the Senators questions will be answered, and possibly even some of my questions will be considered.


It's not acceptable to have a unelected, unappointed, unvetted persons having the master control over vehicles that I, and mine are forced to interact with.


Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on November 25, 2019, 09:53:39 AM
Who should decide who and when autonomous vehicles kill?


Should a car always protect its occupants, or might the lives of children in a crosswalk take precedence?
Should killing the fewest take president over saving the operators family?
Will a prospective purchaser buy a vehicle that will commit Hari Kari with him inside, rather than killing a deer, a cow, a child, or a cop.
Should an owner be allowed to alter these settings? Without AI he'd be making these decisions.


Can an autonomous vehicle speed if the operator is in a hurry - even if others lives will be put at risk?
Will people buy vehicles that won't allow them to violate speeding laws?
In the interest of the greater good should a vehicle report it's driver for violations?
Are there certain crimes that an AI vehicle must report, other times when it must participate in directed criminal behavior?


If fully autonomous vehicles were ready for us today, how many decades will it be before we are ready for them?
We've yet to have a discussion about how AIs can be integrated into our societys.
Will rules that work in Europe be forced onto AIs in India? In Qatar?
Will each vehicle moving between jurisdictions require software compatibility for each region? Hardware and sensor compatibility too?
Should manufacturers be making these decisions? Owners, Cab Companies,or Passengers. What rights do others using the road have, who will be their advocate? Can one city ban autonomous vehicles, even as another bans self driving on her streets. What of the rights of those who have invested in either technology?


When I drove my Japanese manufactured Toyota into Ontario there were no problems until new registration was required. At that time hardware needed to be upgraded from Nevada specifications to Ontario specs.
Will time frames such as these, where vehicles from various regions are allowed to mix for months work for AI vehicles, or will each require an upgradechanges that take effect immediately on crossing the line. These changes are potentially far greater than the headlight controls and brakes upgrades that Ontario required.


Senators are already demanding that systems approaching autonomy be pulled from the nation's roads. Europe apparently has already acted, citing safety concerns rather than misrepresentations.


I think a pause is called for, at least until regulations are in place.
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 27, 2019, 05:14:47 PM
Cars rule! :o >:(

After Getting Doored, Cops Tell Cyclist Lying In The Street To Expect A Summons
https://gothamist.com/news/video-after-getting-doored-cops-tell-cyclist-lying-street-expect-summons
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 27, 2019, 08:49:22 PM
Car-free housing development in Arizona
Quote
A new housing development has broken ground in Tempe, Arizona, which won’t allow residents’ personal cars to be driven or parked on site, Curbedreports [via the Wall Street Journal]. It will be finished next year. Or, as Culdesac puts it, “1,000 residents, 0 private cars.”

Culdesac Tempe, a 1,000-person rental development, will instead use the space that would have been set aside for residents’ parking for retail, a food hall, green space, and other features.

The development is next to a light rail that connects to downtown and Arizona State University, and the developer was able to negotiate its way out of the required parking spots by prioritizing other, more green-friendly transportation options like ride shares, scooters and bikes.

If the development is successful, Culdesac will be looking to bring the concept to other US cities.
https://electrek.co/2019/11/27/egeb-epa-deregulation-chemical-plant-explosion-port-neches/
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on November 28, 2019, 11:08:05 AM
Car-free housing development in Arizona
Quote
A new housing development has broken ground in Tempe, Arizona, which won’t allow residents’ personal cars to be driven or parked on site, Curbedreports [via the Wall Street Journal]. It will be finished next year. Or, as Culdesac puts it, “1,000 residents, 0 private cars.”

Culdesac Tempe, a 1,000-person rental development, will instead use the space that would have been set aside for residents’ parking for retail, a food hall, green space, and other features.

The development is next to a light rail that connects to downtown and Arizona State University, and the developer was able to negotiate its way out of the required parking spots by prioritizing other, more green-friendly transportation options like ride shares, scooters and bikes.

If the development is successful, Culdesac will be looking to bring the concept to other US cities.
https://electrek.co/2019/11/27/egeb-epa-deregulation-chemical-plant-explosion-port-neches/


There was a similar, but slightly larger development in California ~50 yrs ago. Had a private lake & was well stocked with golf carts. Largely inhabited by retirees eager to leave school taxes behind them. The homes were privately owned, not leased & they must have used Norco's fire and police services. They were tied to Norco's sewer & water system but somehow avoided the majority of their municipal restrictions and regulations.


It was surrounded by pine trees which blocked the view & had gated access from a county highway ~ a mile to the west. I was in there once, though I can't imagine why. Very small homes on tiny lots, but well sited around the lake and nicely landscaped. A smallish pub and general store were the only businesses other than a real estate office. I suppose everyone was retired or commuted to LA.


Parking was in the unpaved, unsheltered desert & a second fence and gate kept the vehicles well back from the homes. Golf carts were used as private transportation from there.


They finally extended I-60 north of Corona and the development was paved over by 4 lanes of traffic & an interchange. No idea what they did with the lake.


I don't recall the name, but it wasn't "Paradise". ???
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: gerontocrat on November 29, 2019, 06:56:26 PM
So who pays the price for the ICE auto makers failing to get a grip on moving to EVs?

The workers, of course. But, being Germany, the workers can't be just thrown onto the street.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/nov/29/daimler-to-axe-at-least-10000-jobs-worldwide
Daimler to axe at least 10,000 jobs worldwide
Mercedes-Benz owner aims to slash €1bn from wage bill in drive towards to electric cars

Quote
Daimler has announced plans to cut at least 10,000 jobs worldwide in the latest sign of stress in the German automotive industry as it invests billions in electric cars.

Daimler, which owns Mercedes-Benz and also makes lorries, vans and buses, said on Friday it planned to cut thousands of jobs by the end of 2022, but later made it clear the toll would be higher.

“The total number worldwide will be in the five-digits,” the personnel chief, Wilfried Porth, told journalists. The company will cut one in 10 of its managers worldwide.

Mercedes-Benz, the maker of premium and luxury cars, outlined plans to save €1bn in staff costs this month, and union bosses suggested 1,100 jobs could go.

Daimler’s move is the latest sign of the massive disruption facing the German car industry as it makes the historic move away from producing cars with internal combustion engines towards battery electric vehicles. At the same time, profitable diesel sales have slumped after emissions cheating scandals, and the runaway growth of sales in China has stopped.

Battery electric cars are crucial to meet EU regulations coming into force in January that promise to impose fines potentially running into billions of euros on carmakers which do not reduce average carbon dioxide emissions below 95g per kilometre.

Volkswagen’s Audi on Tuesday said it would cut up to 9,500 jobs at its German factories by 2025 to save €6bn. In March, the Volkswagen brand said it planned to make 7,000 job cuts, to save €5.9bn and allow it to hire more staff to work on digital technology. BMW reportedly plans to cut as many as 6,000 jobs in Germany by 2022.

Daimler, made profits of €7.6bn last year,
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 29, 2019, 08:00:59 PM
So who pays the price for the ICE auto makers failing to get a grip on moving to EVs?

The workers, of course. But, being Germany, the workers can't be just thrown onto the street.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/nov/29/daimler-to-axe-at-least-10000-jobs-worldwide
Daimler to axe at least 10,000 jobs worldwide
Mercedes-Benz owner aims to slash €1bn from wage bill in drive towards to electric cars

...

I usually post these things under Electric Cars as part of the transition to EVs (with Neven’s blessing).
But here’s more:

Quote
Tom Randall (@tsrandall) 11/14/19, 10:33 AM
Daimler's new CEO is cutting $1.4 billion in jobs and capping investment as he warns of a painful transition to electric and autonomous cars. Even 20 new hybrid or electric models in the next 2 years only puts them "within reach" of new EU pollution limits   bloomberg.com/news/articles/…

ValueAnalyst (@ValueAnalyst1) 11/14/19, 10:48 AM
Daimler may go bust before Giga Berlin reaches scale.
https://twitter.com/valueanalyst1/status/1195005546438500365

“Mercedes-Benz parent Daimler has discreetly warned financial analysts that CO2 compliance costs and market headwinds for next year would be much larger than previously thought and asked them to reduce their earnings estimates for the automaker by billions of euros.”
Daimler dampens profit expectations ahead of new CEO's investor presentation
    Automotive News:  https://t.co/oup58yOeCC

Quote
ValueAnalyst (@ValueAnalyst1) 5/19/19, 3:01 PM
U.S. Sales of @MercedesBenz crashing across the board.

"We are going to see models go away within the next 12 months," said one dealer who attended the closed-door meeting and asked not to be identified. "Within the next 90 days, we might see some of those announcements."
@Daimler
https://twitter.com/valueanalyst1/status/1130186857684381697
Data at the link.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on November 30, 2019, 10:08:05 AM
Europe 'Takes one for the boys', while America turns its back on her commitments.


Do the unemployed blame America, the EU, their government, or immigrants competing for work?
Some French reacted badly to modest fuel tax increases. Can Germany afford enough circuses to placate her idled workers?


I don't see any way for this to end well. - and this is the beginning, not the end.
It's both too little too late, and too much too soon.
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 11, 2019, 03:55:55 PM
Australia fires. And the transportation you require when the air is so bad you can’t breathe.

From disbelief to dread: the dismal new routine of life in Sydney's smoke haze
Quote
Facebook chatter shifts from amused sightings of masks to suggestions of where to buy them, to resignation: they don’t work anyway. They might help your mood, but they’ll do nothing to stop the microscopic particles entering your lungs, unless they’re rated P2 and have super suction around the face. Despite this, I can’t help covering my mouth and nose for the few steps to and from the car. I haven’t taken a train or bus in weeks; too much walking involved. ...
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/dec/07/from-disbelief-to-dread-the-dismal-new-routine-of-life-in-sydneys-smoke-haze
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on December 12, 2019, 04:23:23 AM
Cars, cars and more cars is the problem.


Take the bus, be part of the solution.
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: vox_mundi on December 13, 2019, 03:44:22 AM
A Self-Driving Freight Truck Just Drove Across the Country to Deliver Butter
https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/infrastructure/a30196644/self-driving-truck-cross-country/

Plus.ai, an artificial intelligence startup in Cupertino, California, has engineered an autonomous driving system for commercial freight trucks. This week, it made the world's first cross-country trip of its kind to deliver butter to a small town in Pennsylvania.

While this isn't the first time an autonomous truck has made a cross-country trip, it's likely the first time a commercial freight truck has made a real delivery like this.

(https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/images/screen-shot-2019-12-10-at-7-18-37-pm-1576083748.png)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on December 13, 2019, 06:29:42 AM
A Self-Driving Freight Truck Just Drove Across the Country to Deliver Butter
<snip>

I find this extreme insanity.
And it is presented as something good  :'(
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 13, 2019, 10:12:16 PM
A Self-Driving Freight Truck Just Drove Across the Country to Deliver Butter
<snip>

I find this extreme insanity.
And it is presented as something good  :'(

Autonomous trucks will be safer than human-driven ones.  They can keep 12 eyes on the road at all times, without distractions, sleepiness, personal problems, indigestion, or anger at other drivers. 
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: vox_mundi on December 13, 2019, 10:45:21 PM
I think what he's getting at is that a water demanding industry like dairy farming doesn't make sense in California, a state prone to drought. While Pennsylvania has plenty of pastures and water - a good place to make butter. Why ship it 3000 miles.

It's like selling ice to an Eskimo.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on December 14, 2019, 03:24:12 AM
Insane?
Driverless Trucking is symbolic of the state of the State. A rudderless Behemoth careening cross country, heedless of crushed traffic cones and the crushed lives that once depended on a scanty stipend sent to sustain the driver's long suffering siblings.



If the fast living hipster hackers in Quakertown Pa. couldn't import their farm fresh frozen products from rural backwaters like California, they'd soon be reduced to dipping their lobster tails in melted margarine!


Without the patronage of wealthy Quakertownians, the isolated, backward communities nestled in the hoots and hollers of California's coastal range would have only the sale of locally crafted hemp origami dream catchers to supplement their uniquely Psychedelic Economy.
What we're witnessing is just one result of wild dreams that escaped through the entwined cords of cannabis spun logic. Dreams that only appear real when reality goes up in smoke.


Future driverless routes will bring traditional Silicon Valley Moonshine to the cellars of upscale Appalachian eateries. Imported Arizona Maple Cider will sate the State of Maine's appetite for this alcoholic aperitif & Nevada's wild trout could be exported as far as Fairbanks Famous Frozen Casinos - "Where one night can seem like months"


None of the above would be viable if the driver, and his greedy family, didn't demand payment.


Importing mountains of melting butter may seem a slippery slope to some, but Pennsylvania's Prolific Programmers require more than artificial butter flavoring on their popcorn if we expect them to lead us to World Domination in the new fields of Artifice Investing, Cloud storage of Vaporware, to prevent evaporation should the view ever clear, and the Persecution of Pedo Guy "Cave Divers", just because we can.


Insane indeed!
This represents an apex of irrational exuberance in an industry whose primary pedagog became a creepy old guy before his hair plugs had even turned grey.
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 14, 2019, 02:32:59 PM
Difficulties obtaining timely truck transport during this peak holiday demand period resulted in Land O’ Lakes turning to Uber Freight and autonomous trucking to assure deliveries to customers who depend on the company for their supply.
Quote
Land O’Lakes needs to deliver *a lot* of butter this time of year.

It’s critical that Land O’Lakes reliably and efficiently delivers butter this holiday season -- many cooking and baking traditions depend on it.
https://www.landolakesinc.com/Press/News/a-high-tech-butter-delivery

And Land O’ Lakes says there is more to come in how it uses technology to transform its logistics, such as Uber Freight. Here’s video of a case study from Uber Freight highlighting Land O’ Lakes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGg0cTzVM6g
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 14, 2019, 03:15:31 PM
More on Uber Freight (reposted from January 2019):

Logistical solution for the truck driver shortage?  Uber Freight has an app for that — which lowers costs, as well.
Their thirty thousand drivers can each pick routes most efficient for them and which get them back home when they want.  Minority populations are particularly well-served.  25% of Uber freight loads are booked within 30 minutes, compared to days using traditional booking methods.

Uber Freight is already lowering trucking costs after just 20 months
Jim Cramer and Lior Ron, the head of Uber Freight, address inflation in the trucking industry and how Uber's tech-forward approach is cutting logistics costs.  Video.
https://www.cnbc.com/video/2019/01/11/uber-freight-chief-lowering-trucking-costs-after-just-20-months.html
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: vox_mundi on December 18, 2019, 11:46:08 PM
Light-Duty Autonomous Vehicles Get the Green Light in California
https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/18/21028288/self-driving-cars-light-duty-trucks-california-dmv

(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/wp2i3gmxXBTD8H3QaDLgEkhzEWw=/0x0:3840x2564/1220x813/filters:focal(1613x975:2227x1589):format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/65932157/Nuro___Road.0.jpg)

Autonomous, light-duty trucks can now be used for commercial purposes on public roads in California. The state’s Department of Motor Vehicles announced the proposal Tuesday, which outlines a permitting process for companies wishing to test or deploy driverless trucks for commercial use.

The new rule, which was first proposed in April 2019, only applies to autonomous vehicles weighing less than 10,001 pounds. That means only Class 1 and 2 trucks — which include minivans, pickup trucks, utility vans, and step vans — can receive permits for testing and commercial deliveries under the rule.

All vehicles in Class 3 through 8 that weigh more than 10,001 pounds — which include walk-in delivery trucks, semi trucks, buses, and heavy-duty construction vehicles — are not allowed under this permitting system.

... There are currently 65 companies permitted and over 670 autonomous vehicles that are licensed with the DMV, officials say. Waymo is the only company with a permit to test fully driverless vehicles — which means vehicles without human safety drivers behind the steering wheel — on public roads. (AutoX, a Chinese company, recently applied for a driverless permit, but has yet to be approved.)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: vox_mundi on December 23, 2019, 08:18:29 PM
Engineers Show How an Autonomous, Drifting DeLorean Can Improve Driver Safety

https://youtu.be/3x3SqeSdrAE

Most automated vehicles on the road have been designed to handle simpler cases of driving, such as staying in a lane or maintaining the right distance from other cars.

"We're trying to develop automated vehicles that can handle emergency maneuvers or slippery surfaces like ice or snow," Gerdes said. "We'd like to develop automated vehicles that can use all of the friction between the tire and the road to get the car out of harm's way. We want the car to be able to avoid any accident that's avoidable within the laws of physics."

Training an autonomous car to drift is a surprisingly good method for testing a car's ability to drive evasively. Under typical conditions, a driver points the car where they want to go and uses the accelerator and brake pedals to control the speed. When drifting, whether intentionally or not, this goes out the window.

"Suddenly the car is pointed in a very different direction than where it's going. Your steering wheel controls the speed, the throttle affects the rotation, and the brakes can impact how quickly you change directions," Goh said. "You have to understand how to use these familiar inputs in a very different way to control the car, and most drivers just aren't very good at handling the car when it becomes this unstable."
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on December 24, 2019, 08:16:29 AM
(69 people will fit in 1 or 2 busses)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qa3-aF8rqc
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on December 24, 2019, 01:02:01 PM
^^
Say two comfortable local buses with restrooms, or one cross country bus to 'Vegas with restrooms, two stewardess, a card table, open bar and cold sandwiches. Reclining seats with a blanket and throw pillow for those inclined to sleep it off rather than continue the party.


Big Oil's propaganda has convinced us that we'll be happier isolated in a box with 4 wheels. Our only contact with others consisting of blaring horns, flashing headlights or raised fingers. We complain of aggressive drivers, road rage, driver fatigue & the horrors of our daily commute, and never ever consider that perhaps traveling by car is an anachronism that didn't work too well even back in the mid 20th century.


We don't need newer, better cars. We simply need fewer cars. If we're serious about AWG we need to promote a rapid end to personal vehicle ownership and usage. Stop subsidizing roads, vehicles and fuel. Spend the savings on Buses and Bikes.


E-Buses, Light Rail, & HSR are the answer when the question is "how can we lower our transportation footprint".


If you don't appreciate the company of others have yourself checked for agoraphobia, it's curable.


Terry





Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Archimid on December 24, 2019, 01:28:56 PM
Engineers Show How an Autonomous, Drifting DeLorean Can Improve Driver Safety

Impressive! I remember not too long ago watching the DARPA grand challenge with amazement. If the rate of improvement continues (it will accelerate) human drivers will be illegal sooner than anyone thinks.

Coupled with long-lasting, low maintenance, low fuel cost and low entry cost EVs, the ICE world could be replaced inside a decade.

Fast enough? It depends on the Arctic.

To those seemingly concerned with driver labor, climate change will reduce labor even more if we don't stop it. Also, as we make the transition to saving ourselves from climate change, many more sectors will disappear, taking jobs and entire industries with them. Also, new ones will emerge. That is the way the world works.

I'm not sure what you all are complaining about. What is next, poor oil drillers will lose their jobs? Or what about the millions of people employed in the meat industry? Give me a break.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on December 24, 2019, 04:15:02 PM
You're so right Terry. Thanks for that.

Rejoining in close proximity as a social species will have additional benefits.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on December 24, 2019, 06:29:04 PM
We are a social animal. Anything that separates us from this separates us from our humanity.


Fearing 'others' isn't enlightened, and technology that encourages isolation is deeply flawed.
We don't need to walk a mile in another's shoes, just sit next to him on a bus. :)
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on December 24, 2019, 08:39:45 PM
:)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Tor Bejnar on December 24, 2019, 10:48:35 PM
Quote
We don't need to walk a mile in another's shoes, just sit next to him on a bus. :)
Most of us need to walk a couple km in our own shoes (daily), preferably next to another person, and practice the art of listening to each other.  (But this is OT for this thread, I suppose.)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 25, 2019, 09:25:46 PM
Increasing numbers of homeless people in California are living in their vehicles amid the ongoing housing crisis.
But now advocacy groups have opened up "safe parking lots" designed to let the homeless sleep in their cars without fear of being removed.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/12/23/us/homeless-living-in-vehicles-los-angeles/index.html
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: crandles on January 06, 2020, 01:21:04 PM
Driverless already in action in Moscow (and CES Las Vegas) by Yandex.

Quote
With all that in mind, I wasn't expecting there to be no driver at all.
...
"The robot drivers which we are developing, they cannot get distracted," Yulia Shveyko, head of media relations for Yandex driverless cars, tells me.

The fleet is already used by Yandex's rideshare service in Moscow.

"So we have passengers who are using our app to order rides. They're going to the university, post office, grocery store, and it's completely integrated into their typical routines," she adds.

"And what we've seen is that within a very quick time period, once they feel safe it starts to feel very normal."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-51003224

Quote
It entered the driverless car game in 2016, and got its vehicle on public roads in December 2017.

Seems quick getting to that stage. What is all this decades away nonsense?
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 06, 2020, 06:43:16 PM
Smarter cars can better prevent injury to pedestrians and cyclists.

Tesla will protect bicyclists from "dooring" in future OTA update, notes Elon Musk
https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-side-camera-anti-dooring-bicyclist-safety/
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on January 07, 2020, 01:46:45 PM

Seems quick getting to that stage. What is all this decades away nonsense?

Russia has a lower risk threshold. Therefore they move faster.

Every time I look at my country I see that the big hulking bruiser that overshadowed progeess has been replaced with a little girl in a pink frilly dress, pigtails and chewing bubblegum.

Changed days.

But there are still countries with that big hulking bruiser and they are, eventually, going to lead the world.  Essentially because they are not afraid to risk the change.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: BeeKnees on January 07, 2020, 02:35:00 PM

Seems quick getting to that stage. What is all this decades away nonsense?

Russia has a lower risk threshold. Therefore they move faster.

Every time I look at my country I see that the big hulking bruiser that overshadowed progeess has been replaced with a little girl in a pink frilly dress, pigtails and chewing bubblegum.

Changed days.

But there are still countries with that big hulking bruiser and they are, eventually, going to lead the world.  Essentially because they are not afraid to risk the change.

I know what you mean
That Harley Quinn is one mean women 
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: vox_mundi on January 09, 2020, 06:07:13 PM
New Trump Autonomous Vehicle Plan Lets Industry Regulate Itself. (... What Could Possibly Go Wrong?)
https://techxplore.com/news/2020-01-autonomous-vehicle-industry.html

The Trump administration on Wednesday unveiled its most recent round of guidelines for autonomous vehicle makers that still rely on the industry to police itself despite calls for specific regulations.

Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao announced the proposed guidelines in a speech at the CES gadget show in Las Vegas, saying in prepared remarks that "AV 4.0" will ensure U.S. leadership in developing new technologies.

But the guidelines will likely fall short of expectations of auto safety advocates and the National Transportation Safety Board. In November, the NTSB, which investigates crashes and makes safety recommendations, condemned a lack of state and federal regulation for testing autonomous vehicles.

The NTSB said Chao's department failed to lead in regulating the new technology and put autonomous vehicle advancement ahead of saving lives.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: GeoffBeacon on February 06, 2020, 11:44:36 PM
In IPCC SR15, there is a discussion of the Shared Socio-Economic Pathways (SSPs), which create estimates of greenhouse gas emissions from different assumptions about the way we might change aspects of our lives.

These estimates of emissions can be tested with climate models to see how the climate goals of the Paris Agreement might be be met.

SR15 says
Quote
outright reductions in travel demand (e.g., as a result of integrated transport, land-use and urban planning), figure much less prominently.

Does this mean the authors of the SSPs have not dared ask us to give up our cars?

Cars have carbon footprints that soon exceed remaining carbon budgets (http://www.brusselsblog.co.uk/carbon-emissions-in-the-lifetimes-of-cars/).

Surely this means:

Quote
We can have cars to drive or a planet to live in.

But not both.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 07, 2020, 12:22:38 AM
...
Quote
We can have cars to drive or a planet to live in.

But not both.

What if... we recycled ICE cars into EVs?  (And reduced the total number of cars overall, via car sharing, robotaxis, improved public transportation, etc.)... until more population centers are designed and built to minimize transportation needs?
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on February 07, 2020, 06:01:41 AM
^^
Desperately clinging to last straws ;)
Please try to imagine a future without private cars. Can you?

That's interesting GeoffBeacon, thanks.
"have not dared" is very likely: ESLD (erring on side of least drama, economical/governing/keep-dreams-alive)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 07, 2020, 01:06:18 PM
^^
Desperately clinging to last straws ;)
Please try to imagine a future without private cars. Can you?
...

Yes.  Yes, I can.  And I did:
Quote
What if... we recycled ICE cars into EVs?  (And reduced the total number of cars overall, via car sharing, robotaxis, improved public transportation, etc.)... until more population centers are designed and built to minimize transportation needs?
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on February 07, 2020, 02:33:10 PM
Why imagine it?  We had that and we rejected it.  It is called progress.

In a society where travel by foot is normal, a horse or a bike is luxury transport.

In a society where travel by bike is normal, travel by car is luxury transport.

In a society where travel by car is normal, large expensive cars are considered a luxury.

Public transport is for the metropolitan areas. Due to the rapidly increasing cost of humans to drive public transport, it is not economically viable for less dense communities.

Then there is the location issue.  As was said by a colleague of mine back in the 90's.  I have no issue with taking the bus so long as it picks me up from my door and returns me to my door having dropped me off at my workplace door and picked me up from it.

Then we have weather, protection, or lack of it, at stopping points.

Just exactly how far are we talking about here for limits? Half a mile to a bus stop which has no shelter? What do the passengers do when it is pouring with rain, or snow, on that walk?  And that wait?

We used to live in a world of discomfort, but we do not do that so much any more.

The autonomous vehicle solution is a great start, but it is not going to replace the family car.  Our societies have reorganised themselves around the reality of pervasive personal transport. Shopping is larger and out of town on remote trading estates.  Simply the family shop will become difficult.  Do you hold the vehicle in the car park and pay for it or release it and hope that when you exit the shop there will be sufficient capacity left to get you home with your frozen goods.  Yes you can book ahead, but will a vehicle be available?

Anyone with a family that has lived without a car (I have), is well aware of the difficulties it involves.

It is all very well saying "imagine what it would be like".  But you have to imagine it all and solve it all.  Otherwise your vision will wind up in file 13 along with all those other ideas that were not fully thought through.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on February 07, 2020, 04:50:32 PM
Quote from: NeilT
Why imagine it?  We had that and we rejected it.  It is called progress.

Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: GeoffBeacon on February 07, 2020, 06:57:05 PM

NeilT

Quote
Our societies have reorganised themselves around the reality of pervasive personal transport.

Environment Commissioner Ripa di Meana got the sack for commissioning a report which showed that car-free living is very much cheaper (http://"http://www.brusselsblog.co.uk/car-free-living-and-happy-degrowth/"). It's obviously much pleasanter.

If we do the sums (http://www.brusselsblog.co.uk/carbon-emissions-in-the-lifetimes-of-cars/), we really are left with the choice

Cars to drive or planet to live in.

Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: gerontocrat on February 07, 2020, 07:10:56 PM
I attach a graph with data only up to 2013 suggesting that in the USA car ownership is being increasingly rejected by the young.

Various reasons are given - screwed by student loans, high insurance costs, high maintenance costs, high cost of housing.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/09/the-dubious-future-of-the-american-car-business-in-14-charts/279422/
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: GeoffBeacon on February 07, 2020, 08:11:38 PM
gerontocrat, that's good.

If they reject cars, they should be able to live in decent cities, towns and villages that are suited to them.

That is cities, towns and villages without cars.

They are so much cheaper and pleasanter and don't screw the climate.

For and economist-friendly note, see The parable of the smoking carriages. (http://www.brusselsblog.co.uk/the-parable-of-the-smoking-carriages/)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on February 07, 2020, 09:32:47 PM
Subsidizing free busses (E-Busses), cheap Light Rail and modern HSR - as opposed to paying the rich to buy expensive EV's is such an obvious move in the right direction that I'm astonished that there is any opposition.


We subsidize bridges rather than helping the wealthy purchase sailing yachts because everyone can walk across the damn bridge. Well, everyone can hop on a free bus, if you persist in demanding door to door service then I must insist that you pick up the tab.


If you insist on living far from the madding crowd, then I insist that you finance your own transportation rather than whining that what works in my city isn't suited to your more bucolic estate.


Millions have learned to live with their neighbors & close to their shops & jobs. If we're not forced to pay for your prefered lifestyle we may be able to provide free mass transportation for those masses that would gladly share a seat with a stranger.


The private automobile was an aberration that brought us to our knees. It had a short and inglorious history. Rather than reinventing the car we need to leave them in the smog filled miasma of our recent past.
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: oren on February 07, 2020, 09:47:20 PM
I attach a graph with data only up to 2013 suggesting that in the USA car ownership is being increasingly rejected by the young.

Various reasons are given - screwed by student loans, high insurance costs, high maintenance costs, high cost of housing.
I bet you one of the reasons is the low cost and availability of Uber service.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on February 09, 2020, 11:04:51 PM
I bet you one of the reasons is the low cost and availability of Uber service.

Well I haven't checked the young person stats for France, but where I live there is no UBER, I have already mentioned the almost total lack of busses and if you want a taxi, you have to phone up and book it between 8am and 5pm.  Outside those times you can walk or cycle.  The nearest town of any size is 27km so it might take a while.

If you want to be taken seriously by the population at large, you have to be realistic.

I know plenty of people who have no driving license, so no need for a personal car.

Every Single One of them lives in a large city.

Every city non driver I have met, that has moved to the country, has taken their driving test and bought a car within 6 months of moving to the country.

As for the 17 to 24 group not buying cars? When I was 17, nobody could afford cars so they generally rode second hand motorcycles.

The changes since then, in the UK, have turned commuter bikes into incredibly expensive vehicles.  The kids still can't afford cars and now can't afford bikes.

With insurance for a Nissan note, for a 17 year old, ranging from from £1,200 to £2,500, it has effectively closed the vehicle market to them until they are around 25.

Stats may look good on paper, but there is always a story behind them.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: gerontocrat on February 11, 2020, 06:24:17 PM
Out of the frying pan into the fire.....

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/feb/11/how-london-got-rid-of-private-cars-and-grew-more-congested-than-ever
How London got rid of private cars – and grew more congested than ever

Britain’s biggest city has almost ground to a halt, thanks to the rise of Uber, delivery drivers – and cycle lanes. Can anything be done to end the gridlock and pollution?
Quote
“London has achieved the impossible by eradicating the private car – and still having desperate traffic congestion,” says Prof Tony Travers, the director of LSE London, a research centre at the London School of Economics that explores the city’s economic and social concerns. “People keep saying we need to get the cars off the road. In central London, there aren’t any.”

According to Peter Ackroyd’s book London: The Biography, vehicles in the city moved at approximately 12mph in late Victorian times, before mass car ownership, when the streets were “filled with the ceaseless incessant stream of horse-drawn, motor-driven and steam-propelled traffic”. By 2018, the average speed on A roads in the City and Westminster was about 8mph. So why is traffic moving more slowly than ever?

On-line shopping creating congestion
In a previous job at TfL, he tried to curb the numbers of delivery vehicles coming into London before the Olympics, when fears of gridlock were at their height. “I was looking at Amazon, then I realised there were a hundred and one people delivering to my own building every second. Just trying to get 11 floors and 2,500 people working for TfL to change their behaviour was hard enough.”

“Regent Street had 36 different operators doing recycling. Each person was doing the right thing, but add them all up together …”
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: kassy on February 11, 2020, 08:13:32 PM
So maybe it it just one of those things we cannot or should not ´free market´?

Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: TerryM on February 12, 2020, 02:56:56 AM
^^
Ramen!!


The invisible hand of the market needs to be backed by the iron fist of a determined government.
Time to take the gloves off.
Terry
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on February 12, 2020, 04:01:13 PM
Yes the USSR had SO much success with that.  Why shouldn't we emulate them?
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: blumenkraft on February 12, 2020, 04:25:14 PM
Oh, good old red scare. I haven't seen that one in a long time...
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on February 12, 2020, 04:44:52 PM
No that's not a Red scare.  That's reality.  The Command economy underperformed, left the people without food, let alone other basics and finally fell apart after Gorbachev started to introduce free market economic concepts.

If people want to make a case for this kind of economy, then they have to be honest enough to admit that whilst what we have is far from perfect, there Significant downsides to going the other way.

We see this every day. In the UK the "government has said" and that is the end of it...  Yep, people stopped buying cars and held onto the cars they have.  Driving companies to real difficulties.

The government said, the people did.  Just not what the government said.

You can lead or you can command.  If you try to do both all you do is confuse people.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: blumenkraft on February 12, 2020, 05:10:53 PM
Textbook red scare.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on February 13, 2020, 10:11:26 PM
Textbook red scare.

Not in the slightest.
Whether you know it or not you are talking Command economy.

It does not work. Even China has given it up.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: wili on February 14, 2020, 01:56:34 AM
It won us WWII, though! Or helped, like...a lot!

Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on February 14, 2020, 06:28:12 AM
There is a difference between a gun to your head and a catastrophe some time after you are dead.

People will accept short term restrictions for an immediate threat.

This is the whole problem with climate change.  By the time it reaches an immediate threat, it will be 50 years too late to do something about it.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 24, 2020, 09:29:16 PM
Just saying:

Good thing we have private cars to get essential personnel to work during the Covid-19 pandemic, rather than subjecting them to the risk of public transportation (if that is even still running).  Also, to get sick people to the hospital when ambulances are overwhelmed.

Even better:  electric cars, which are not dependent on fossil fuels.

Italy is closing Gas Stations
[/quote]https://twitter.com/alex_avoigt/status/1242477783978139654

(ANSA) - Rome, March 24 - Italy's petrol stations will start closing down from Wednesday night because they are unable to ensure protection from the coronavirus or "the economic sustainability of the service", sector unions said Tuesday.
http://www.ansa.it/english/news/business/2020/03/24/petrol-stations-to-start-closing-wed_f139beeb-9662-4b29-8535-c39586776ec1.html
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Paddy on April 03, 2020, 05:49:33 PM
Are any car companies likely to go bust courtesy of this outbreak?  New car sales must have dropped massively all over the world...
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 03, 2020, 06:23:54 PM
Are any car companies likely to go bust courtesy of this outbreak?  New car sales must have dropped massively all over the world...

Every automaker whose Q1 results I have seen show declines — except for Tesla. :)

The ICE to EV transition (or lack of same) is being followed on the Electric Cars thread:
Compare declines at other automakers:
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2686.msg257701.html#msg257701

Tesla Had The Best Ever Q1 Performance, Total Production 102K and Deliveries 88,400 Units
https://www.tesmanian.com/blogs/tesmanian-blog/tesla-had-the-best-ever-q1-performance-total-production-102k-and-deliveries-88-400-units


@ValueAnalyst1 on Twitter has made several shoe-bets (which they do not do lightly) that 2019 was the last profitable year for any of the OEMs, and most will fail, many in the next year or three.  And this was before the pandemic.  OEMs need to sell ICE to keep their investors happy while they invest billions in batteries and EVs — a burden Tesla did not have, and has already passed the critical mass sales hurdle needed to stay alive.

Tesla has enough cash on hand to handle today’s fixed costs into 2021.  OEM’s have desperately been trying to deal with shrinking sales since 2019.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: oren on April 04, 2020, 06:40:22 PM
I wonder if EU rules on average fleet pollution will be suspended this year because of CV19, an excuse to support the ailing traditional car makers.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: blumenkraft on April 04, 2020, 06:56:06 PM
OMG, don't paint the devil onto the wall, Oren.  :-[
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: oren on April 04, 2020, 08:12:18 PM
Not being European, my experience with politics may have been somewhat worse. I hope it doesn't happen of course.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: blumenkraft on April 04, 2020, 08:29:59 PM
Me neither, but doesn't sound too far fetched to me. Wouldn't be the first time they lobby their way out of legislation...
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on April 06, 2020, 11:15:45 AM
The UK saw the numbers of vehicles sold in March reduce by 45%.  Granted Italy and Spain have seen worse, but the UK has a curious dynamic where we have significantly more sales in March and August than in any other month of the year.

Jan and Feb saw 229k vehicles sold in the UK. March was open for sales for half the month, yet recorded 203k less sales than normal.

On the other hand the UK saw an increase of pure EV sales with a 197% increase YOY in March. In fact the UK saw nearly twice as many BEV sales than it did Hybrid.

Personally I am not expecting that the EU delays the emissions regulation.  The car manufacturers have had a decade to become compliant.  What they may do is delay legislation that stops the customer having to pay the fines by increasing pries.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 06, 2020, 03:54:50 PM
“Taking it to the logical end,” write Loup Ventures’ analysts, “we believe car companies that have been around for 50-plus years will eventually (10 years from now) be forced to restructure or go out of business.”

Tesla May Come Out Of The Current Crisis Ahead Of Legacy OEMs
https://insideevs.com/features/408154/big-auto-dilemma-chasing-tesla/
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 25, 2020, 02:26:58 PM
Coronavirus-hit Lombardy city will turn 35km of streets over to cyclists and pedestrians
The Strade Aperte plan includes temporary cycle lanes and 30kph speed limits.


Milan announces ambitious scheme to reduce car use after lockdown
21 Apr 2020
Quote
Milan is to introduce one of Europe’s most ambitious schemes reallocating street space from cars to cycling and walking, in response to the coronavirus crisis.

The northern Italian city and surrounding Lombardy region are among Europe’s most polluted, and have also been especially hard hit by the Covid-19 outbreak.

Under the nationwide lockdown, motor traffic congestion has dropped by 30-75%, and air pollution with it. City officials hope to fend off a resurgence in car use as residents return to work looking to avoid busy public transport.

The city has announced that 35km (22 miles) of streets will be transformed over the summer, with a rapid, experimental citywide expansion of cycling and walking space to protect residents as Covid-19 restrictions are lifted.

The Strade Aperte plan, announced on Tuesday, includes low-cost temporary cycle lanes, new and widened pavements, 30kph (20mph) speed limits, and pedestrian and cyclist priority streets. The locations include a low traffic neighbourhood on the site of the former Lazzaretto, a refuge for victims of plague epidemics in the 15th and 16th centuries.


In the UK on Monday, Brighton started opening part of the seafront, Madeira Drive, only to pedestrians and cyclists from 8am-8pm. In Barnes, London, businesses and residents have coned off part of the road outside shopping parades to expand pedestrian space and help shoppers keep their distance from each other.

Meanwhile in the Republic of Ireland, Dublin is suspending loading bays and parking spaces to increase space for social distancing, by using removable plastic separators.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/21/milan-seeks-to-prevent-post-crisis-return-of-traffic-pollution

Image below:  Plans for Corso Buenos Aires before and after the Strade Aperte project.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 15, 2020, 09:06:45 PM
U.S.
Are Drive-Ins the Theaters of the Future?
Quote
The entertainment industry—and movies in particular—has been hit especially hard by the coronavirus.

Tons of films have shut down production or been delayed. And then there’s the larger, perhaps even more concerning question: Will people want to go back to movie theaters, where we’re all sitting in close proximity, munching on snacks, laughing, and breathing the same air?

Of course, there is one way to see a movie in public without having to sit near a bunch of strangers: You guessed it, drive-in movie theaters.

Drive-in theaters, once a staple of American culture, have waned to the point of near extinction today. (There are reportedly 350 left in the country, down from a peak of about 4,000 in the 1950s.) But is it possible that the theaters of the past might become the theaters of the future? …
https://www.baltimoremagazine.com/section/artsentertainment/are-drive-ins-the-theaters-of-the-future-bengies-maryland

The drive-in nearest me is hosting all sorts of church services these days. 

New use for the parking lots of all those deserted shopping malls? 
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: blumenkraft on May 15, 2020, 09:26:28 PM
In two towns near me Autokinos (car-cinemas) opened in recent weeks and a third one is planned.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 15, 2020, 09:50:36 PM
In two towns near me Autokinos (car-cinemas) opened in recent weeks and a third one is planned.

Wow.  I had no idea they were a thing outside of the U.S.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: blumenkraft on May 15, 2020, 10:18:32 PM
It was a thing here until 20 years ago or so (in a town where a huge US army station was located).

Now it's a thing again. ;)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 15, 2020, 11:43:40 PM
Found this  :o

German Drive-In Cinema Growth Taps Into Car Culture
Quote
Drive-in cinemas have been experiencing a renaissance in Germany ever since the epidemic lockdown forced movie theaters to close their doors on March 16. Over the course of the past few weeks, the number of drive-in cinemas increased from a mere handful to more than hundred. The Federal Network Agency has already assigned 43 frequencies for drive-in cinemas; about 80 more applications have been submitted.

Rental companies that offer mobile LED video walls have reported a surge in demand. ...

The Autokino Stuttgart-Kornwestheim is one of the permanent drive-in cinemas that is equipped with two screens, one of 540 square meters (12m x 36m) and the other 240 square meters (10m x 24m). Powered by a 7,000 lumen 2D projector, up to 600 cars can be parked in front of the big screen. ...
https://celluloidjunkie.com/2020/05/12/german-drive-in-cinema-growth-taps-into-car-culture/
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on June 17, 2020, 06:47:47 PM
My car battery died.
This is not the first time, and my guardian says it’s because I don’t drive it enough. He wants me to drive it about twenty minutes in a parking lot two or three times a week.
Is he right?
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 17, 2020, 10:22:12 PM
My car battery died.
This is not the first time, and my guardian says it’s because I don’t drive it enough. He wants me to drive it about twenty minutes in a parking lot two or three times a week.
Is he right?

Yes. But you should have a reputable auto place check your battery to see if it has reached a point where it needs replacing.  That happens.  I just had the same situation — I’m driving less because my volunteer activities have been shut down due to COVID.  And my old battery couldn’t handle not being recharged as frequently by driving.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: interstitial on June 18, 2020, 07:04:43 AM
Once a week would should be enough unless you have some electrical drain with the key off. A door ajar light can be enough to drain the battery over an extended period. Cold climates shorten the life of lead acid batteries significantly.


If you don't want to waste fuel and you have a battery charger you can accomplish the same thing by turning on your headlights for awhile and then recharging the battery. If you don't already own a battery charger a trickle charger is cheap and will do the job. If you don't need to drive twice a month buy some fuel stabilizer to add to the fuel. With all that I would still drive it at least once every other month or other problems may arise.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: swoozle on June 18, 2020, 07:27:46 AM
My car battery died.
This is not the first time, and my guardian says it’s because I don’t drive it enough. He wants me to drive it about twenty minutes in a parking lot two or three times a week.
Is he right?

Or, if practical for your situation, get a cheap car battery charger and use that to charge the battery up every week or so. No need to burn all that gas to go in circles.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on June 18, 2020, 01:11:09 PM
How does a battery charger work? Do I have to plug in? I live in an apartment style condo with a carport across the parking lot, is this a deal breaker?
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: KiwiGriff on June 18, 2020, 03:38:48 PM
If you park outdoors you can get a small solar panel from most auto parts stores or your on line source of choice that will keep your battery topped up .
Just place it on your dash and plug into your cigarette lighter in most cars.
https://www.amazon.com/Battery-Tender-021-1163-Maintainer-Controller/dp/B004Q86JJ8?th=1
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on June 19, 2020, 04:55:45 PM
KiwiGriff:
I suggested that to my guardian and he said, basically, "Hell no!".
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: blumenkraft on June 19, 2020, 05:29:38 PM
What? Why??
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: interstitial on June 19, 2020, 09:47:40 PM
I would guess because unless you have a cut out circuit when the battery is fully charged you can cause the battery to explode.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on June 20, 2020, 04:58:34 PM
I would guess because unless you have a cut out circuit when the battery is fully charged you can cause the battery to explode.

If you read the specs, it has an integral charge controller that ensures battery health.

I certainly did as I'm looking for something like this and have had the uncontrolled one where it fries your battery.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: KiwiGriff on June 20, 2020, 09:57:04 PM
I made the effort to find one that did. ;)
I use a standard 50 watt panel and a charge controller to keep the boat and tractor battery's healthy as they only get used occasionally and neither actually has a working charge circuit of the motors.

I made the following  assumptions before I made the recommendation.
A car start battery is about 50 amp hours A lead acid car battery loses about 1% of its charge per day.The ten watt panel  I suggested sitting on your car dashboard should give about .5 amps into 13.5 volts (float charge voltage) . You will get an average of about 3 times that in a day so about 1.5 amp hours.

If Toms car is running flat from lack of use it is probably losing another 1% .
So we can presume he is losing 2% of his charge daily giving about an amp hour a day loss.

An extra 0.5 amp hour a day should not kill your start battery as quickly as running it flat on a weekly basis will .


 
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: interstitial on June 21, 2020, 03:55:46 PM
Needing the control circuit was just something to be aware of when looking for a solar charger as apparently NielT found out the hard way. Apparently KiwiGriff you put more effort into looking for the best one than I thought of. Tom your guardian is wrong but I would follow his or her advise anyway.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on June 21, 2020, 04:18:06 PM
He says I don’t drive it enough for the gasoline to matter. I think he just hates the idea...he cusses out car charging parking spaces when we are out. And if you think he’s a Neanderthal you should have seen my dad...he was like Archie Bunker.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: interstitial on June 21, 2020, 05:51:32 PM
He says I don’t drive it enough for the gasoline to matter. I think he just hates the idea...he cusses out car charging parking spaces when we are out. And if you think he’s a Neanderthal you should have seen my dad...he was like Archie Bunker.
gasoline does not need an additive if it does not sit in the tank for long. The additive discourages the gasoline from congealing in the tank. Some of the lighter compounds will evaporate lowering the octane of the gasoline. Here is a link they explain it better.
https://repairpal.com/blog/can-gasoline-go-bad#:~:text=If%20gasoline%20sits%20for%20too,burn%20efficiently%20in%20your%20engine.&text=Water%20contamination%3A%20If%20water%20gets,can%20expect%20some%20serious%20problems.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: gerontocrat on June 21, 2020, 06:29:43 PM
He says I don’t drive it enough for the gasoline to matter. I think he just hates the idea...he cusses out car charging parking spaces when we are out. And if you think he’s a Neanderthal you should have seen my dad...he was like Archie Bunker.
To survive Neanderthal's had to make best use of what was available.
Archie Bunkers, on the other hand, go to Trump rallies without benefit of mask and get the "sniffles"..

I think your Guardian gives us a good lesson in why it's been so hard for renewables to become mainstream.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on June 22, 2020, 09:09:21 PM
Needing the control circuit was just something to be aware of when looking for a solar charger as apparently NielT found out the hard way. Apparently KiwiGriff you put more effort into looking for the best one than I thought of. Tom your guardian is wrong but I would follow his or her advise anyway.

In my defence I bought it about 15 years ago and used it for 3 months.

In later testing I found that full sun in the French summer pushes out 24v for about 2-3 hours.

I did find it useful for bringing discharged batteries up to a point where a smart charger would push some current into it.  About a 50% success rate.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on July 17, 2020, 05:04:39 AM
Car tyres are major source of ocean microplastics – study
Wind-borne microplastics are a bigger source of ocean pollution than rivers, say scientists

"an average tyre loses 4kg during its lifetime"
That's 16 Kg per set of tires per car. Much more than the lost fibers from washing clothes

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/14/car-tyres-are-major-source-of-ocean-microplastics-study
  by Damian Carrington

Based on scientific article published 14 July 2020 in:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-17201-9   (not paywalled)
  by N. Evangeliou, H. Grythe, Z. Klimont, C. Heyes, S. Eckhardt, S. Lopez-Aparicio & A. Stohl

 Excerpts
More than 200,000 tonnes of tiny plastic particles are blown from roads into the oceans every year, according to research.

The study suggests wind-borne microplastics are a bigger source of ocean pollution than rivers, the route that has attracted most attention to date. The analysis focused on the tiny particles produced by tyres and brake pads as they wear down.

It estimated that 550,000 tonnes of particles smaller than 0.01mm are deposited each year, with almost half ending up in the ocean. More than 80,000 tonnes fall on remote ice- and snow-covered areas and may increase melting as the dark particles absorb the sun’s heat.

Microplastic pollution has polluted the entire planet, from Arctic snow and Alpine soils to the deepest oceans. The particles can harbour toxic chemicals and harmful microbes and are known to harm some marine creatures. People are also known to consume them via food and water, and to breathe them, But the impact on human health is not yet known.

Earlier work suggested microplastic particles could be blown across the world, but the new study is the first to quantify the effect. The scientists concentrated on fine tyre and brake dust as there is better data on how these are produced than tiny microplastics from other sources, such as plastic bottles and packaging.

“Roads are a very significant source of microplastics to remote areas, including the oceans,” said Andreas Stohl, from the Norwegian Institute for Air Research, who led the research. He said an average tyre loses 4kg during its lifetime. “It’s such a huge amount of plastic compared to, say, clothes,” whose fibres are commonly found in rivers, Stohl said. “You will not lose kilograms of plastic from your clothing.”

Erik van Sebille, at Utrecht University in the Netherlands, said: “The study shows how interconnected pristine remote areas are with what we’re doing in our cities and on our roads.”

“We should be concerned,” he said. “We don’t still know really what the harm is of all these microplastics, but the precautionary principle says that we had better be careful and safe about these things.”

Stohl said the issue of tyre and brake pollution is likely to get worse before it gets better as electric cars become more common: “Electric cars are normally heavier than internal combustion engine cars. That means more wear on tyres and brakes.”



Electric cars are clearly not a solution! Does all technology have destructive consequences?
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: oren on July 17, 2020, 07:18:59 AM
I wonder if computer-assisted driving will improve tire wear. I am sure wear depends on driving style, with reckless acceleration and deceleration leading to more particles being released into the environment. So auto-pilot, traffic-aware cruise control and similar solutions could improve the situation, along with a much lower tear of brake pads thanks to regenerative motor braking.

As for the general question, yes, all technology has destructive consequences. Some care about the degree of destructiveness, trying to replace highly destructive ones with less destructive ones. E.g. replacing incandescent bubs with LEDs, and coals plants with solar PV farms. New, better, cleaner technology is cheered. Some care about the destructiveness itself, and call for less technology. New technology just prolongs the problem.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: KiwiGriff on July 17, 2020, 07:35:04 AM
Electric cars are clearly not a solution!

What is then?

Remember not all of us live in a densely populated flat country with mild weather .
Here in NZ public transport is uneconomic outside of a few large city's due to our low population density and the terrain is too gnarly for cycling. I am  simply not going to walk the twenty four  kilometres  just to get to a shop and back.  I am not even in a  remote region for NZ .

You are not going to sell doing away with private cars to many tens of millions of people in the developed world unless you have a viable alternative .
Perfect is the enemy of the good.
   Electric cars will reduce the major issue of CO2 emissions from personal transport .
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: oren on July 17, 2020, 07:55:26 AM
Of course, the biggest problem is that you have 7+ billion humans, which have their own worries and aspirations. They desire a house and work and food and transportation and children, and a clean planet is great as long as it doesn't get in their way. Some think this is all driven by media and advertising and all that, me I think that's nonsense. Humans strove to better their living conditions since before they were humans, rarely stopping themselves because of the consequences (pollution, dead Neanderthals, killed humans, deforestation, disease, extinction of animals, etc.).
These billions of humans are not under your control and are not reading this forum. They will do as they please and as they can afford.
So a solution, by definition, needs to be something that can reach these humans, and change their behavior. Very hard to do, no matter how good an example you set and how many people you convince on this forum or in real life. In this aspect, electric cars ARE a solution, as they entice many humans to ditch their fuel-burning polluting cars and replace them with less polluting alternatives. Of course, Electric cars are NOT a solution, as 2 billion electric cars will cause much damage to the planet, though admittedly less damage than their ICE brethren. Bottom line, there is NO solution that both saves the planet and is applied widely enough to matter. But this is the old Green BAU argument all over again, and belongs in yet another thread...
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Hefaistos on July 17, 2020, 11:20:47 AM
Car tyres are major source of ocean microplastics – study
Wind-borne microplastics are a bigger source of ocean pollution than rivers, say scientists

"an average tyre loses 4kg during its lifetime"
That's 16 Kg per set of tires per car. Much more than the lost fibers from washing clothes

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/14/car-tyres-are-major-source-of-ocean-microplastics-study
...

I never rode in a car with plastic tyres?
Aren't tyres made of rubber? - which btw is based on a natural product.
Funny that they don't even mention the word rubber in the Guardian article.
I suppose that plastics and rubber have rather different chemical half-lifes, and environmental effects.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: oren on July 17, 2020, 11:27:10 AM
Quote
Today tires consist of about 19 percent natural rubber and 24 percent synthetic rubber, which is a plastic polymer.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/09/tires-unseen-plastic-polluter/ (https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/09/tires-unseen-plastic-polluter/)
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on July 17, 2020, 12:08:42 PM
Thank you for your responses.
Warning: I am somewhat sarcastic today after this morning's disappointments by moving my post and kassy's 'moderation'

Most people on this planet do not own a car.

I observe on this forum in these cases a privileged-people bubble, blacking out all other people (the majority) (no pun intended). These people are the same sort of people who dig up your essential resources and make your clothes etc. etc.
Please think honestly about it and understand where your anger comes from.

Try to imagine to amount of microplastic from 12 Kg of plastic (av. life time pollution of just one set of tires).
The research shows that the airborne plastic pollution is larger than all the plastic flowing from rivers into the ocean. Think about that for a minute.

This is not just a little drawback from driving cars that can be swept under the carpet (as will undoubtedly happen here as I have learned from past experiences). The advertorials will come back (without any new technology, just features and products) and all is forgotten.

Many (erroneously) think that cars are essential. I have ideas on solving the problem of a society without cars (much more localized work/production etc.) but that is for later actually, it has been done before not so long ago.

My intention here is to inform, discus and build a consensus. I really thought that this was a scientific oriented forum, open to new ideas and insights; creating hypotheses and analyse them and then refine and create new hypotheses so that a consensus arises. Until new information comes in and the scientific process restarts. No feelings, believes, privileges or bubbles can be part of that process.
Imo, creating a consensus here has appeared to be nigh on impossible because most forum members' minds are already set with "nobody takes away my car", "there's no alternative" or "I will not sacrifice anything because I believe in progress of technology that will solve everything". This is privileged thinking; the sacrifices have to be made by other (poor) people. And so it goes.

----
Hefaistos, try to investigate it for yourself. I know you can because of your posts in the AbruptSLR thread. I am not going to 'defend' the scientific article. Take it up with the researchers if you doubt the results. Start with looking up "synthetic rubber" on wikipedia.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: bluice on July 17, 2020, 12:23:17 PM
Nanning, I honestly think most here recognize the adverse environmental effects cars produce.

But that is besides the point.  Whether we like it or not, we will never get rid of cars or other personal vehicles. That's why we should find ways to minimize their harmful impact. EVs are one way to do this. We have the technology to decarbonize electricity production. It's not easy but it is possible. With EVs we can decarbonize transportation also.

It is not a perfect solution, but it is better and it is doable.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on July 17, 2020, 02:18:07 PM
nanning, it seems you have mistaken planet Earth for planet Vulcan. Even on the ASIF we do not have pointed ears.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on July 17, 2020, 04:00:35 PM
But we do have mainly privileged thinking Tom, not logical at all. These privileged people cannot see beyond their bubble to see other paths forward.
See how the effects on the majority of (poor) people, who do not own a car, are swept away? It is their planet too.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 17, 2020, 05:52:44 PM
There is currently no option for the transport of persons and goods (including food, clothing and shelter materials) by road (in particular the “last miles”) to reach most areas of the globe.  However, efforts can be made today to reduce environmental damage caused by that transport.  Eliminating exhaust emissions would reduce as much or more PM10 pollution than eliminating brake and tire wear.

Quote
Abstract
Traffic related sources are a significant contributor of particulate matter, particularly in urban environments and major cities. Traffic related particles can be distinguished into: exhaust traffic related particles, which are emitted as a result of incomplete fuel combustion and lubricant volatilization during the combustion procedure, and non-exhaust traffic related particles, which are either generated from non-exhaust traffic related sources such as brake, tyre, clutch and road surface wear or already exist in the environment as deposited material and become resuspended due to traffic induced turbulence. ...
https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC89231/jrc89231-online%20final%20version%202.pdf
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on July 17, 2020, 07:16:46 PM
But we do have mainly privileged thinking Tom, not logical at all. These privileged people cannot see beyond their bubble to see other paths forward.
See how the effects on the majority of (poor) people, who do not own a car, are swept away? It is their planet too.

People like youself perhaps with a very privileged viewpoint.

“Over the next 30 years, the most rapid expansion of economies and populations will occur in urban areas distributed throughout the poorest countries,” says Wood. “This rapid and unsustainable growth will make developing cities among the primary sources of environmental damage and air pollution.  (https://cleanair.camfil.us/2017/10/30/air-pollution-in-developing-countries/)

Under solutions,

Quote
Cleaner methods of transportation, better waste management, better methods of energy production, and technology to reduce emissions will need to be created by government agencies and private interests.

These methods are being created by the developed nations, funded by the purchases of private individuals and government subsidies.  Such as private vehicles.

When needed, these solutions will be available to the poorer countries to reduce their emissions whilst growing their economies.

Your viewpoint is retrograde and doomed to failure. The other viewpoint may not succeed but it will not be for lack of trying and it is a forward moving vision.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: gerontocrat on July 17, 2020, 07:41:50 PM
These methods are being created by the developed nations, funded by the purchases of private individuals and government subsidies.  Such as private vehicles.

When needed, these solutions will be available to the poorer countries to reduce their emissions whilst growing their economies.
When needed? Why not NOW.

India, Africa etc are still being pushed down the fossil fuel / ICE road by OECD based financial institutions, even though renewable-energy based solutions are often cheaper, quicker to implement and reduce dependence on expensive imports from OECD / OPEC countries that consume vast quantities of the foreign currency they do not have.

But they can always borrow, can't they? A few more billions of soft loans in hard currency won't hurt, will it|?

Of course, it surely can't be true that the OECD countries are extracting the last dregs of profits from yesterday's technology by dumping it on less fortunate countries.

One of the many reasons I just chucked the International Development business in the bin.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 17, 2020, 09:02:27 PM
...
When needed? Why not NOW.

India, Africa etc are still being pushed down the fossil fuel / ICE road by OECD based financial institutions, even though renewable-energy based solutions are often cheaper, quicker to implement and reduce dependence on expensive imports from OECD / OPEC countries that consume vast quantities of the foreign currency they do not have. ...[/i]

I just posted this in the EVs thread:
Driving Electric in Africa Is A Whole Lot Cheaper Than Driving ICE: Part 2
Quote
Driving the 38.3 kWh Hyundai Ioniq over 100 km in Angola would only cost you $0.21! Yes, $0.21. In Egypt it would cost you just $0.46 and in Algeria it could cost you $0.61. The Hyundai Ionic has won critical acclaim for its exceptional efficiency. With its consumption of around 153 Wh/km it is surely one to get in these countries. Looking at an equivalent ICE car, the Toyota Corolla would cost you a whopping eleven times more at $2.40 in Angola to drive the same distance. It would also cost you four times more at $2.60 in Algeria and nine times more at $4.01 in Egypt. …
https://cleantechnica.com/2020/07/17/driving-electric-in-africa-is-a-whole-lot-cheaper-than-driving-ice-part-2/

EVs being cheaper to operate, then add autonomy/ride-sharing capability and that checks several boxes:  less FF, fewer cars, fewer emissions.  Eventually, less power of the oil companies to run things, if one dares to think that optimisticly.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: NeilT on July 17, 2020, 09:13:25 PM
I agree gerontocrat, but I was painting with a very broad brush.

But running an EV on dirty coal with no filters can be more damaging than running a modern hybrid like a prius.

So I thought a bit of caution was warranted.  Granted renewable power is always good, but other tech on older infrastructure might not be.

Hence the "as needed".
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: sidd on July 17, 2020, 11:04:32 PM
Mr. Nanning, what would the world with far fewer cars look like ?  Is that world one with no privately owned cars in that world, but vastly expanded public transport and trucks for transport of cargo ?

sidd
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: nanning on July 18, 2020, 06:10:46 AM
Warning: drama ahead ;)

I don't know what I will look like sidd, but the picture you painted is in the right direction I think.
In my earlier post I have written that everything should return to much more local production and work. That way we would be much more resilient as well, food-wise and energy-wise. There is a final global catastrophy looming for civilisation. Compared to that the COVID-19 pandemic is peanuts.

Should we not focus on the most vulnerable (which is also the majority of humans on Earth)? And should we not work towards a solution for everybody (and every lifeform)? But in civilisation they get trampled, abused and exploited.
What is the role of christianity? To focus on 1) more money and power for the rich and exploitating the vulnerable or 2) share with and help the vulnerable? Where has Jezus' great example gone? An upside down world indeed. "Me me me and we we we" say the already affluent ones who have the power.
I stand with the vulnerable and made a personal life choice to be non-affluent (poor)! Please think about that for a moment. I experience what the poor are living through and how they get treated. I do not participate in bad systems. I wish all people would try to do that. They don't. Probably because it takes many sacrifices and self discipline to walk that path.

Thank you gero for giving the correct view. The gasoline that is sold and transported there is much dirtier than ours as well. They get bad shit from us in almost every way.

12 Kg's of microplastic per set of car tires.
GHG, roads, parking lots, garages, aerosols, noise, pollution, Cobalt mining, human rights, Lithium wars, road kill... but still the Pharao's heart stayed hard. The private car is not seen as a tool anymore, but as a precious jewel. O nooo, a scratch on my tool. That is Insane.

A car is a very luxury enclosed personal motor-assisted extremely-high-energy-use polluting means of transport weighing more than 1200 Kg's. So you won't have to move yourself, just press buttons. A car is a weapon of mass destruction and sign of lazyness and disconnect with nature and social society.

Ease, comfort and being inside makes you weak and sick. And addicted; scared as hell to lose it.

I find it remarkable (significant) how people who post comments in TheGuardian are also privileged but so much more open, respectful and willing to see other solutions and paths. Much more empathy there as well. Alas it is not a forum. I had thought that this forum would consist of the same sort of intelligent people but not so (some exceptions). Perhaps (likely) it is a USA thing.


Sorry for this little 'rant' and the drama. I am reconsidering what I am doing here. I have accomplished nothing here (change minds, teach, build up credit) after more than a year of really trying, being nice and respectful, and a lot of effort. I am not here for entertainment at all. I have brought many new ideas and views to no avail. Sisyphus and Cassandra come to mind.
Don't interpret that wrong please because I have much respect for the majority of forum members.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: sidd on July 18, 2020, 09:18:16 AM
Thanks for the reply. I suggest we take this discussion to a new thread, perhaps called "Life Without Cars"

On second thought, perhaps just "Life Without"

https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,3189.msg274990.html#msg274990

sidd

Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: oren on July 18, 2020, 11:30:43 AM
Nanning, I wish you wouldn't be offended so. Just so that you are aware, your posts have a lot of effect and get people to thinking. But I think you are overly focused on the aspect of personal example and miss something in the aspect of a global solution.
Maybe the difference with the people in the Guardian comment section is that on this forum are gathered people who are aware of and care about solving the problems of all humanity, so are less focused on their own personal situation and issues.
A global solution to the private car problem should address the huge segments of:
* People who don't care abut AGW, pollution and other long-term trends
* People for whom the car is the most efficient, the cheapest, or the only possible method, of getting from point A to point B, especially for getting to the workplace, but also for visiting relatives and for buying everyday necessities.

You constantly assume that people who are not convinced by your ideas do so because of their own personal situation, "in love with their cars". "luxury toys", "privileged", "laziness", "scared to lose it", and so on. I think this overlooks the logical arguments people make which highlight the problem of implementing your ideas globally - namely the lack of popular support for them, and the need for alternative transportation solutions for masses of people, solution which in most cases do not currently exist, and that in many cases are not economical to be put in place, or have great political/popular resistance. This is not about you and not about me, it is about the global population, all 7.5 billion of them, and the rate of addition, 80 million net extra people every year. And about the global fleet of private cars, all 1.2 billion of them, and the rate of addition, 80 million new cars every year.
If you think all 80 million cars are sold because of consumerism, mass advertising and brainwashing, and people "in love with their cars", I believe you are wrong. There are economical and logical reasons why so many people spend so much on a huge machine that mainly gives financial headaches. Find the reasons. Deal with the reasons, in a manner that will actually get widely implemented.
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 18, 2020, 04:18:54 PM
Nanning,

I and others recommend solutions that will gradually reduce the need for private cars, and make the remaining ones less polluting.  Of course, this will not happen overnight.

What solutions do you have that would make the need for private cars reduce any faster? 

Keep in mind that every municipality cannot spend millions of dollars on mass transportation, particularly now during the pandemic — and even if they did, such infrastructure building (even adding buses or sidewalks) takes years. 

Tesla has a Master Plan, being executed right now, for accelerating the advent of sustainable energy and transport.  What is yours?
Title: Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
Post by: blumenkraft on August 15, 2020, 07:20:30 PM
VW at it again with the shady stuff.

VW bugging affair: is the dead man the "mole"?

Link >> https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ndr.de%2Fnachrichten%2Fniedersachsen%2Fbraunschweig_harz_goettingen%2FVW-Abhoer-Affaere-Ist-der-Tote-der-Maulwurf%2Cvw5454.html