Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Zythryn

Pages: [1] 2
1
Policy and solutions / Re: Electric cars
« on: August 16, 2019, 04:21:10 AM »
Nice piece on auto manufacturers needing to shift modes to EVs.

https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2019/08/business/electric-cars-audi-volkswagen-tesla/

2
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: July 22, 2019, 08:31:19 PM »
...

The day Tesla makes a profit over a period of several years and payed their debts down to a level that is withing the healthy range.


For a rapidly growing company, profit over several years without exception is very unusual.
As for the debt point, at what level would you consider “Healthy”?  And how would you measure it?

4
So just WHO is going to do this banning and dictating how companies spend their money?  Are you suggesting a single monarch who has final say over this with worldwide authority?

Nothing describes my frustration with this forum better than this nicely packaged paragraph.

Your proposal to an alternative of status quo manufacturing conglomerates controlled by immensely powerful billionaires...  is feudalism. How rotten has your brain become? ...

Nice ad hominem attack.
You took my reply out of context.  It was suggested we outlaw companies ability to do certain things, and I wanted to know how that was to be done.
I am wide open to an idea other than capitalism, but have yet to see suggestions as to what to do.
I’ll look up that book, thanks for the reference.

Someone commented on Norway leading the way.  I would agree.  However, Norway’s economic system has a Capitalistic component.
I would suggest education in critical thinking is a stronger way forward than some “I wave my hands and a miracle occurs” suggestions.
Capitalism itself isn’t the problem, people acting ONLY in their self interest with no thought to the consequences is the problem.  And until that is changed, no economic system is going to work.

While capitalism isn’t the best system, it is coming up with solutions, just not fast enough.
Mass transit and bike lanes are expanding in many areas.
Cleaner methods of power generation are expanding.

Meanwhile, the shift to an entirely new economic system is still waiting to happen.  It will be great when it finally arrives, but in the meantime I am going to keep doing what I have the power to do under the current system.

5
Meanwhile, as we talk about Uber and Lyft, autonomous taxis and Tesla, another 95 million ICE vehicles will hit the roads in 2019.

While I sympathize... what do you suggest doing about it?

I completely understand, and agree, that “no cars” is better than “cleaner cars”.
However, insisting that cleaner cars are no better than dirtier cars seems short sighted.


Who is saying that? Certainly not me.

We should ban the sale of all new ICE vehicles worldwide by 2022. We should eliminate corporate taxes for all vehicle manufacturing companies effective immediately while also banning the use of dividends for these same companies, requiring that all profits be used to tool up for EV manufacturing. If we do this, most ICE vehicles will be off the road by 2030, certainly no later than 2035.

Or we could continue to discuss how market forces, the mysterious workings of the invisible hand, and autonomous EV taxis are going to save us all from certain doom.

Great, I like answers.  So, just how are you going to eliminate corporate taxes for all vehicle manufacturing companies and require that all profits be used to tool up for EV manufacturing?
Seems like market forces are already starting to do the later.

No one is saying EV taxis are going to save us single handedly, but they may well help.

So just WHO is going to do this banning and dictating how companies spend their money?  Are you suggesting a single monarch who has final say over this with worldwide authority?

6
Meanwhile, as we talk about Uber and Lyft, autonomous taxis and Tesla, another 95 million ICE vehicles will hit the roads in 2019.

While I sympathize... what do you suggest doing about it?

I completely understand, and agree, that “no cars” is better than “cleaner cars”.
However, insisting that cleaner cars are no better than dirtier cars seems short sighted.

I know of, or have read about less than 5 people in the world that has gone to a true zero carbon lifestyle.  Getting an entire society seems an impossibility.
However, EVs are making huge inroads. 
No, EVs are not the silver bullet, but they are better than nothing.

If any poster has a way to adopt a true zero carbon lifestyle, or even zero individual car ownership en masse, great!  Please share with us how to get to that wonderful endpoint.

If they don’t, please don’t denigrate the people who have found a way to make incremental improvements.

7
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: February 11, 2019, 04:31:29 PM »
Some companies a realizing that the upcoming band payments are easily handled with Tesla’s current cash flow.

https://electrek.co/2019/02/11/tesla-tsla-stock-jumps-wall-street-profit-model-3/

8
Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: February 10, 2019, 05:42:14 PM »
...


It is a skewing of the facts, to be true, because what we are seeing, today, is the start up and installation costs being borne by the consumers.  However there are very few people who will be super happy that their electricity costs will fall in 25-50 years so long as they pay double for the next 25 to 50 years.

...

Just to note, this pricing pattern isn't universal.
Three neighboring states in the USA, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Iowa have varying levels of renewables.
Wisconsin's retail electric prices are the highest, Minnesota's in the middle, and Iowa's the cheapest.
Iowa has the largest percentage of renewables, Minnesota is in the middle, and Wisconsin has the smallest level of renewables.

Electricity costs rely on many factors and I don't believe you can draw conclusions by just looking at the retail costs.

9
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: February 04, 2019, 09:16:20 PM »
I agree, Neil, but don't you find it somewhat strange that so many financial people leave?

While not Neil, I’d like to throw in my two cents.
The CFO left, Tesla hired a new one.
The new one, for whatever reason, found quickly that they didn’t want the job, and left.
The original CFO returned to help out until a new person could be found to take on those duties.  This time, hopefully, Tesla can take more time to insure the next CFO will be a good fit.

Now, Tesla has announced they found such a person, and that the original CFO is staying on for a time to help ensure a smooth transition to the new guy.

This could be a sign of funny business as GSY insists.  Or it could simply be that the first replacement was a mistake and Tesla is being much more careful this time (which is my opinion).

Unusual, perhaps, but nothing more.

10
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: January 20, 2019, 02:46:21 AM »
...

Puerto Rico apparently uses renewables to generate 2% of her electrical power.
Coal, Diesel, and Bunker Fuel is burned to generate 64%, while NG provides another 34%.

https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=RQ

Does adding an additional load to this already straining electric utility make any sense at all?

Terry

Quite possibly not, however, you can’t logically take the worse case and generalize it to everywhere else.
Take a look at where EVs are sold.  In the United States (excluding Puerto Rico) it is very difficult to find any location where the 3 most efficient EVs are dirtier then a Prius.
https://blog.ucsusa.org/dave-reichmuth/new-data-show-electric-vehicles-continue-to-get-cleaner

Likewise, the average EV is cleaner than the average gas car in virtually every location in the USA.
Granted, the USA isn’t the world, but it is a much larger sample size than a small island territory with few, if any EVs.

11
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: January 10, 2019, 08:23:59 PM »
...

We don't need better cars, we need fewer cars - and fewer parking facilities, fewer traffic lanes, fewer horns and fewer accidents.


Terry

I agree that we need fewer cars.  Unless you believe we can transition quickly to “no cars” I don’t understand why anyone would fight improving the cars that do exist.

12
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: December 07, 2018, 03:44:30 PM »
Looks like the incentives Nevada offered Tesla to bring the GigaFactory there are panning out.

https://www.reviewjournal.com/business/teslas-nevada-gigafactory-ahead-of-economic-impact-expectations-1543280/

Tesla is ahead of the original predictions of number of jobs, capital investments in Nevada and tax revenue generated by Nevada.

13
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: November 28, 2018, 02:18:30 AM »

From the Model 3 Owners Manual:
Quote
If Model 3 is plugged in, you can heat your Battery using wall power by turning on climate control using the mobile app.


https://insideevs.com/tesla-model-3-range-loss-bitter-cold-video/



"Basically, the Model 3 doesn’t have a battery heater but instead uses waste heat to attempt to warm the pack. This isn’t as efficient as the systems in the Model S and X and also leads to issues when it comes to Supercharging. The battery simply won’t charge as fast if it’s not kept warm."

"Needless to say, if you plan on owning a Model 3 in an area that experiences extreme cold on a regular basis, you’re going to see considerable range loss. Additionally, plan on spending a significant amount of time charging. "

My bolding.
Terry

All I can tell you is that the Model 3 looses the same ratio of range as both the S and X.
I believe the what you quoted is simply incorrect.

Our family has owned and driven in winter the Tesla Roadster, S, X, 3.  As well as the Volt and a converted plugin Prius.

We do garage our cars overnight.  Outside during work or travel the Model 3 warms up just fine rebotely.  Regen is limited, but not as limited as the Model S after being cold soaked.
SuperCharging will take longer, as it limits amperage until the battery pack warms to optimal temperature to allow high speed charging.

Hope that is helpful?

14
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: November 25, 2018, 04:26:38 AM »
Yes, it should be more widely shared that electric vehicles under-perform in the cold. We basically couldn't use our early model electric car (Zenn) in the winter here in Minnesota. I assume they have improved, but the basic physics of the thing mean they will always lose some performance in cold weather, it seems to me.

This is my ninth Minnesota winter driving an EV.
Range definitely takes a hit.  The average loss for our cars has been 30%, max range loss of 50%.  Our ICE vehicles lost 20% efficiency on average.

It is basic physics.  Cold air is denser, there is more rolling resistance, and for EVs, battery power is used to heat the car.

Charging at sub freezing temps has never damaged any EV I am aware of.  Most EVs (All?) either have temperature management, or trickle charge the batteries until they warm up enough to take a charge at normal rates.

15
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: November 08, 2018, 03:45:17 PM »
Tesla accounted for almost 50% of the plugin cars sold in the US in October :)
https://insideevs.com/us-plug-in-electric-car-sales-charted-october-2018/

16
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: October 28, 2018, 04:27:26 PM »

17
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: October 19, 2018, 01:58:39 AM »
Tesla now offering a mid-range version https://3.tesla.com/model3/design?#battery

$4k less than the RWD long-range battery version ($45k vs $49k).

18
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: October 14, 2018, 10:21:48 PM »
...It greatly upsets me that this is the path we're taking. And it is unbelievable disappointing to see a forum of such smart people endorse it.  I know I come off as a raving lunatic on this forum, and have my account ignored by many people. And maybe I am crazy. And maybe this path will work out in the end. But I have a awful feeling that maintaining the status quo but with a green "twist" is going to be an utter failure. I can't help but to think that solving the problem with the techniques that got us into this mess is a really bad idea.


Rather than tearing down the companies and people that are doing, in your view, not enough.  Why don't you promote solutions that are better?

No single solution is going to fix everything.  So add to the options, rather than tearing down partial fixes.

19
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: September 18, 2018, 07:02:41 PM »
Here’s a map showing what your ICE car’s MPG must be, to be cleaner than an EV powered by that region’s grid.  Remember too that the grids are continually getting cleaner as coal plants close and more renewables come on-line.

(I’d love to see this down to a more local level, and a similar one for Europe, etc., but this is a start.)

That is actually out of date.  Here is their latest report:
https://blog.ucsusa.org/dave-reichmuth/new-data-show-electric-vehicles-continue-to-get-cleaner



As you said, EVs continue to get cleaner.

As for self driving cars, I think those are more than worthwhile if they encourage some multiple car households to become single car households.

20
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: September 08, 2018, 05:02:01 PM »
Tesla (the GROUP) needs a COO.  Hiring a president for the automotive piece is fine (I assume they already had either a president or general manager) .....

I believe Musk was filling those roles.
Regardless of what acronyms, I believe this move was to do exactly what you wanted.  Take workload off of Musk.
And I agree with you, Musk was running himself into the ground.  I hope that this will help aleviate that.
Is it enough?  Who knows, but I think it was a good move.

21
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: August 04, 2018, 07:24:28 PM »
R&D, and EVs are wonderful. It's good tesla and all the other car manufacturers are doing something about EV. All good. Yet Tesla is still just another car (and battery) manufacturer and retailer. While Governments are far more powerful and critical to managing change society wide because they have their responsibilities too. Horses for courses? What I mean by that is the governments create the playing field and frameworks in which every company operates. Providing incentives for new better tech is part of that but not everything. They could tweak all kinds of things.

They could, but they aren’t.
Tesla has been able to lower the carbon footprint of some people.  Have they brought it to zero?  No, of course not.
One of the huge achievements is that they have lowered the carbon footprint of many people who have no interest in doing so!
Tesla has prompted other manufacturers to make EVs, driving innovation and increasing options for consumers as well as lowering prices.
Tesla has helped make EVs cool, driving people to want them even if they think climate change is a hoax.

Do we need to do more? Absolutely!  But I’m not going to be critical of Tesla’s efforts just because they haven’t solved it all by themselves.  They have prevented more CO2 from entering the atmosphere than I, or you, ever will.

22
“Spotted: @NetZeroMN's striped Tesla, inspired by @ed_hawkins' stunning climate visualization.“
https://twitter.com/EricHolthaus/status/1018517799981985793
...

Now I know I hit the big time, I’ve been posted to the Arctic Sea Ice forum  :)

I wish, instead of stenciling on the CO2 graphs I had used the historical temperature graphs.
Great conversation starter though!

23
Elon doesn't like public transportation as it currently exists.  You might note that Elon/Boring Co. is right now building public transportation.

That's the thing. Public transportation works. He's gone out to reinvent the wheel, and tailor it for wealthy people. The idea of having individual pods to transport cars is a hilariously wasteful concept that I can't believe is actually seriously being considered.

It isn’t.

Enjoy your bike.  Enjoy living in a densely packed city if that's what you like.

But you are not going to put the majority of Americans on bikes.  And a lot of people are not going to live in densely packed cities if they can avoid it.  Battery powered cars and other vehicles will work for them and get us off petroleum.

Quote from: zizek
People are going to have to do make significant lifestyle changes if we are going to realistically combat climate change and other environmental issues.

Fine, how are you going to get them to do so?
Yelling at a mountain is all fine and good, but it gets nothing done.
So, while some solutions don’t lower carbon footprints as much as you like, they are lowering them.  Will it be fast enough?  I don’t know, but it is progress.  And it is moving a heck of a lot faster that shouting at a mountain.

24
Walking the walk / Re: Managing PV + battery system
« on: April 02, 2018, 11:14:36 PM »
...
However, it is not a good idea to worry about winter solar power. Even at lower latitudes in Canada like Ottawa's 46 degrees N it would be a mistake to try to optimize winter gain at the expense of summer gain. ...

This depends upon your goal.
For our home project, we did optimize towards winter production as winter is when we use the most electricity.
Sure, for cost/kWh produced it doesn’t give the best results.
For minimizing my electric draw from the grid it worked quite well.

We also use batteries.  The primary reason was to provide power in the winter during grid outages.  We enjoy the secondary benifit of being able to use less grid energy and more of our own.

25
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: December 26, 2017, 05:42:01 AM »
...
Am I mistaken in believing that many some American locals are still generating electricity using coal?
I'd think that this might weigh heavily on the scales.
Terry
That is a very broad statement, so no, you aren’t wrong that some or many (especially if you define “many” as “more than three” American locals use [some] coal powered electricity.

As of a couple of years ago, 70% of American locals emit fewer GHGs in an average EV than in the most fuel efficient hybrids.
Even in the most coal intensive areas, the average EV is still cleaner than the average petrol vehicle.

Lots of data and specifics here: https://blog.ucsusa.org/dave-reichmuth/new-numbers-are-in-and-evs-are-cleaner-than-ever

26
Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: December 04, 2017, 02:59:29 PM »
In Southern California, near the ocean, heat pumps make sense economically. In Southern Nevada, where winter temperatures regularly drop below freezing, an air/air heat pump burns more electricity than straight resistance electrical heating.
Using tap water to extract heat from, or to utilize as a heat sink, is illegal in both states. and in most jurisdictions.
If you think our local has harsher winters than Southern California, think of a different method of staying warm.
Terry

There is a huge difference between air source and ground source heat pumps.
Granted, ground source heat pumps don’t work well everywhere, but they do work well in lots of places.
Our house in Minnesota uses zero natural gas, propane etc.. It is all electric and uses heat pump tech for heating, cooling, domestic hot water and clothes drying.
Our solar panels supply more net energy than our house and transportation use annually.

Heat pump technology can be used very efficiently in cold climates.

27
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: December 03, 2017, 02:15:47 AM »
From the 2016 chart it seems that December was a bumper month. Is this expected to repeat?
Terry
Typically.  Over the last few years there has been a rush in December due to the tax rebate.
This year maybe even more so if the rebate gets the axe.

28
Walking the walk / Re: Managing PV + battery system
« on: September 22, 2017, 02:19:37 AM »
We have a net-zero setup using PV power.  No battery backup yet, but we are planning to have that installed within two months.
One thought would be to charge an electric car when you have a surplus.  Not sure if you have one available during the afternoon, but that will allow for a good chunk of storage.

29
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: January 25, 2017, 03:57:40 AM »
I think you are talking past each other.

 Rate of scale-up is a real issue Sig and the numbers are relentless... Cumulative global sales of Prius is less than 4 million as of April 2016. No more than 11 million hybrids since 1996. What makes EVs so special other than fuel option? Because the majority sees it as such...Make them cheep and reliable and then...

Tesla/Mercedes ?

Are we talking about affordable options here? ...

Hybrids peaked at around 3% market penetration in the U.S.
I expect EVs to surpass that by 2020 and keep going.
Why?  Because hybrids offer one thing, and one thing only above regular cars.  They use less fuel.  While that is good enough for many here, we are in the minority.  Most of the market buys based on performance, drive experience, convenience, number of cup holders and such.

EVs win in performance and drive quality at the same price point.
EVs also beat regular cars for convenience for anyone with charging at home (40-60% of car buyers).

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1108483_hybrid-market-share-peaked-in-2013-down-since-then

As for the ramp up, yes, that will be a huge undertaking.  But Tesla has performed a number of feats they were told were "impossible" and they just keep doing it:)

They also have help.  Although other companies aren't all in like Tesla, they are learning that if they don't go electric, Tesla will eat their lunch.

30
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: January 19, 2017, 01:26:15 AM »
This is a great article that may reassure some, on either side.
http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/self-driving-cars-endanger-millions-american-jobs-thats-okay/

I agree jobs will be lost.
Lives will be saved.

But it takes a long time to replace vehicles on the road, en masse.
Technological advancements lead to tools that do the jobs of people.  This has happened all the way back to the wheel.
Economies adjust, people adjust and societies will adjust.

31
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: January 04, 2017, 06:35:50 PM »
Interesting.  So you guys have no spare capacity at night?
We have tons, which I suppose is why EVs are such an easy decision here.

32
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: January 04, 2017, 01:31:47 PM »
...
This is why we only see high priced vehicles aiming for a higher and higher market.  Essentially it's impossible to mass market plug in EV because the energy source simply does not exist.  Most developed world electricity grids are very close to, or at, peak capacity most of the time.

How to we transition fossil fuel transport onto a grid which has no capacity to spare.  Especially when that transport is as much as the same again or even double the current electrical grid.
...

That is an issue, I didn't realize the grid in the U.S. was so different than other developed nations in that aspect.
In the U.S. we have a huge amount of capacity available.
As long as people mainly charge at appropriate times, we have a grid today that could handle about a light vehicle fleet that is 50% EVs.

33
Walking the walk / Re: Passive / green House Design
« on: December 17, 2016, 05:13:28 AM »
Cloudiness is a bigger issue than angle in our area.
Our array is rooftop mounted at 44 degrees.  On a sunny day, as long as the panels are clear of snow, we get about 80% of what we get in the late summer.

While that angle is not optimal for summer, it helps keep the snow off in the winter, and gives us better winter production when we need the power.

34
The rest / Re: Presidential poll for US citizens on the forum
« on: October 03, 2016, 02:06:08 PM »
I don't know how much a debate matters to Trump supporters. ...

The debates aren't about changing minds of supporters, they are about getting the "undecided" voters.

35
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: January 10, 2016, 06:54:38 PM »
...

Sorry.  That is flat.  Flat does not mean going down but not rising anywhere near as fast as expected/projected.  EV sales have been hyped and they are not performing.
...

EV sales were 97k in 2013.  In 2014 they were 123k.
That is about a 25% increase.

If you want to call that flat, that is your prerogative.  It is not, however, the typical meaning of the word. 
Did it meat some people's expectations?  No, but it met others almost dead on.

I find this forum very refreshing as it largely has people using facts, numbers and data.  Opinions are generally stated as such.

A Tesla that replaced a 18mpg Mustang in California reduced GHG contributions by a whole lot more than a Leaf replacing a Prius in California.

Is it enough of a reduction, perhaps not, but it is a lot more than doing nothing.

36
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: January 10, 2016, 05:09:22 AM »
...

Sales were flat in 2014 and down in 2015.  ...

And in terms of what is happening with this issue it is North America which is the key market.  It is not just that EV sales fell 5.3% in 2015.  It is worse than that as 22% of all EV sales in the US were high end luxury cars.  Tesla's.  The sales of luxury cars is never a positive marker when the issue is stopping excessive consumption and waste of resources.  A person buying a small fuel efficient ICE vehicle is doing far more to help than some rich guy hot rodding around in a Tesla.  They are no different than Al Gore talking environmentalism and living in a 40,000 plus square foot mansion.

http://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/

By the very link you referenced, EV sales were not flat in 2014, they were up.
We shall have to see what EV sales do this year.  I believe they will increase, mainly on strength of PHEVs, with BEVs having more growth than PHEVs in 2017.

As for which types of cars, I would rather replace high performance/large ICE vehicles with electrics than smaller efficient ICE vehicles.  Far larger gains.

37
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: January 09, 2016, 06:27:00 PM »
I don't think anyone expects EVs to replace 100% of the light vehicle fleet.
EVs are being adopted faster than hybrids were, and the near future looks very bright with the next generation EVs starting late this year with the Bolt.

Too little, too late?  Perhaps, but they seem to be on a fairly rapid adoption rate considering the change required by the owners.

38
Science / Re: Mauna Loa CO2
« on: January 06, 2016, 03:17:11 PM »
...
Do I think we will change our ways and implement policies which will prevent this catastrophe?  Not a chance.  I do not believe we are not capable of changing our nature.  So what will our nature dictate?  A version of survival of the fittest, the most ruthless and the luckiest....collapse.  Which gets back to my point - the sooner the better.

So why do you promote not using cars or being energy efficient?
Why aren't you a professional denialist?

If you truly believe the sooner, the better, why aren't you working to speed the demise?

I don't think anyone is saying changes in behavior will solve the issue.
What I believe is the sooner we make some changes, the less bad it will get.

I may be biased, as I would certainly be one of the first to die without society. 

39
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: November 25, 2015, 05:16:47 AM »
I really don't want to be the anti-EV guy over here, but this...

Quote
“If I plan my journey, the car should know the places I want to visit along the way, because it knows my preferences,” he continued. “The car should begin to learn my desires, and not just me as owner or user, but the people who are with me. It should be a much more social event to be in the car.”

...it simply makes me nauseous.

That isn't anti EV.  That is anti tech interface.
Frankly, it makes me a bit nauseous as well.

However, if it gets people in efficient cars that wouldn't otherwise get in efficient cars, more power to the marketing speak.

40
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: November 21, 2015, 08:00:21 PM »
Yes, there are complex elements to a high end EV.

But there are still many fewer moving parts. No carburetor, pistons, fuel injection, spark plugs...

Let's not forget the ICE cars, even cheap ones, are pretty darn complex pieces of machinery with plenty of points to go wrong.

EV engines are definitely better than ICE. This really sank in when I had my electric lawnmower repaired (which is ultra-simple) and saw what a mess gasoline lawnmower engines were in the repair shop, so dirty and so many moving parts.

I figured it'd be the same for cars, but I'm in doubt now after watching that Tesla How It's Made video. Such a thing can simply never be sustainable. Not only the car (which looks more like a laptop on wheels than a car to me), but also the production process is incredibly vulnerable and non-resilient.

I hope to buy 1-2 electric bikes soon (much simpler and more repairable), and then hopefully we can keep our CNG-powered car and only use it for large distances (saving a lot of money on insurance etc).

The motor is far simpler.
Many things that make up an ICE, or CNG, or electric vehicle are the same.
Safety equipment, suspension, brakes, doors, etc.

We will stick with our EV for long ranges.  We will not have any CO emitting devices in our attached garage or house.
I really do need to bike more though, I'll work on that next year :D

41
Consequences / Re: 2015 El Niño?
« on: November 10, 2015, 08:18:32 PM »
Short note to say THANK YOU to ASLR, LMV, DO, wili, neven & others that generously provide the graphics & explanations for helping the rest of us better understand these complex phenomena. 

I bet Neven could provide statistics, but there are surely MANY other folks, like myself, that rarely post here but do read this site every single day!  The graphics are wonderful and very helpful.  But, the reason I come here is because you take the time to explain what they mean.  You put them into a context that I can understand.  This is not easy.  Hell, I am concerned that ASLR may strain something trying to come up with a new verb to describe how the SOI behaved (drifted, moved, jumped, dropped, etc.). 

Anyway, thank you for taking the time to make these subjects accessible for the rest of us.  Your efforts are very much appreciated!
+1!
Very well said!

42
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: August 16, 2015, 03:56:54 PM »
Is the Model XXL comparable to a Humvee, because that's what I need to make sure the eggs from the supermarket don't break.

If you are referring to the Tesla Model X, no, it is a car based SUV, typically designated a "crossover".
Looks like you will just have to get that Humvee ;)

I'm curious, did you check out the Mitsubishi Miev?

43
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: August 16, 2015, 03:50:43 PM »
Again, I agree no cars is the best situation.
How do we get to that point?

Currently we can't even get a carbon tax passed.

The "perfect or nothing" position lowers society's carbon foot print by so little it is difficult to see any change.  Until one day everything falls apart and society has no choice.

Taking a good, but not perfect stance of EVs (which automatically get cleaner as we clean the grid) gets us started towards cutting some co2 emissions and might just delay everything falling apart.
More time for society to respond is a good thing.

44
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: August 12, 2015, 04:27:54 AM »
...  I do not believe in miracles and I do not depend on god to come down and save us from our stupidity ...

So given that how should we proceed?  Well by definition from the above the vast majority of people (it is human nature after all) are going to pray, wait for a miracle, put their faith in technology (Tesla, etc), deny reality, get out their fiddles, rearrange the deck chairs, and so on.  Those of us who are not comfortable in the company of the above folks will try and actually work on solutions which could solve our problems and work towards helping create the next civilzational structure.  That structure has to have very different forms of living and existing.

So enough of that as one can go on for hundreds of pages as I have done a number of times.

Back to your question of why ev's are not a solution and Musk is not the messiah.  ...

The train is off the tracks and we are going in the ditch.  It is not the end of all things as we have done this many times in our past.  It happens to all civilizations.  They grow, live and die.  It is just our turn.  But since we can see what is coming it is possible to make the transition easier going down and thus easier going up.  This is what I advocate for - it is the correct moral and ethical choice.  Managed decline in order to save as much as we can for those who come after us.  Alternately - and what we seem to be doing - is to double down on faith in technology and miracles and pull out all the stops in order to find some way to scrape along trying to maintain BAU as long as possible.  If we do this, and that is the unfortunate path I think we will take, it will leave a wasteland for the future and take them far deeper into the dark and leave them a far longer climb back into the light.  And they will have all the BAU folks to thank for it.  So if Musk wants my respect he drops his sci-fi fantasy of colonizing other planets and parks his Telsa and puts his creativity and wealth into working to solve the 3 great problems.  Nothing else actually matters.

Jim, I respect your opinion even though I disagree with your premise.
I don't respect your communication style.
I don't believe anyone here has referred to, much less considers Musk the Messiah.
I don't believe anyone here is expecting a miracle.
And nobody expects EVs, or anything else to be a silver bullet.  It will take a lot of partial solutions.

Cleaning up the grid is critical with or without EVs.  With EVs, that part of our transportation automatically gets cleaner as our grid does.

I believe we have already put too much CO2 in the atmosphere to prevent a temp increase of 2C.  I also believe things will get worse.
I also believe that if we can start slowing our CO2 emissions, we can soften the blow.  I don't see your solution doing that, as almost no one will go that route.

Those that can be convinced to eat meat less often, drive more efficient cars than they currently are, downsize their houses, or move closer to town centers, will save millions of tons of CO2 each year.  Not because each person is saving a huge amount, but because a lot of people can be convinced to save a little.

Those of us willing to do more, will do more (go vegan, don't have kids, install wind or solar, etc).  This is wonderful, and I am thankful for everyone's contributions.
This, I believe, will soften the blow more than insisting everyone cut CO2 99%, which results in almost nobody cutting anything.

As for softening the blow, that is laudable, and is exactly what I am doing as well.

45
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: August 11, 2015, 03:11:24 PM »
Jim, I agree with you, cars are not the perfect answer.
Yet, we have a path to lower emissions through electric cars.

What is your path towards eliminating cars?

Yes, your goal of zero cars will do more for cutting CO2.
Yet I see no path to reaching that goal other than total collapse.

So I will promote the goal that cuts our CO2 from personal transportation in half and has a chance, rather than your plan that has zero chance, thus results on no decrease in CO2.

46
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: August 10, 2015, 12:59:52 AM »
I thought the Tesla S was the master plan, but now SUVs. What's next? Pick-up trucks? Vans? Tanks? Luxury yachts?

As much as the geek in me likes all the stuff that Musk does, it looks like Green BAU with a heavy dose of personality worship.

What will be done, will be done, I guess.

The Model S is the second stage of the Master Plan.
The first was the Roadster.
The final step in the plan is the Model 3.

The Model X is a variation on the Model S.  Step 2B if you want to fit it into the plan.

If the Model S is taking Audi A8s, Mercedes S Class, and BMW 7 series gas guzzlers off the road, I'd say it is going according to plan.
If Tesla drives competition from other manufacturers, so much the better.

Will we reduce our CO2 output in time (or is it already to late)?  I don't know.  But it is progress.  If someone comes up with a way for us to progress further, faster, I'll be pulling for them too.

47
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: August 09, 2015, 11:09:42 PM »
He wants nothing less than a complete upheaval of the industry.

And so he builds a SUV? Wow, what an upheaval.  ::)

What's the first word in the mantra reduce, re-use, recycle?

Well, they are reducing the amount of gasoline needed in the average car.
Unfortunately, they can't start be building 500,000 small cars/year as they simply don't have the production capability.
Per, "the not so secret master plan" start with a high cost, very low quantity proof of concept.  Then move to lower cost, higher quantity cars.  Using the funds from the first cars to grow their production capability.

If you are looking for a more minimalistic car, check out the Miev.  As long as the range. Meets your needs it is a great little car.

48
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: August 05, 2015, 02:08:49 PM »
...
Sales are less in the US than last year thru June.  Here is the link do the math.

http://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/

No one is arguing that point.
The disagreement comes in your claim that low gas prices are hurting EV sales.
Most owners I know bought the car because they are simply better cars for their needs.

49
Geoff, I agree eliminating cars would be better.
However, how long do you think it will take for society to do so?

In the meantime, why not lessen the impact by making cars that emit less GHGs?

If someone wants to be responsible for emitting less GHGs, an electric car allows them personal control over the fuel source.  Which is not the case with gas cars, unless you go with biodiesel.

If running EVs on renewables, how much less GHGs annually vs a standard 25mpg gas car?

50
Jim, this is where we differ:

"To para phrase:  Green BAU is attempting to maintain our current civilizational structure and economic system by converting to renewable energies, increased efficiencies, and mostly depending on future technological developments (unknown at this time) which will save us from catastrophe.  Not all but many proponents of this approach take it not because they think it will work (they just hope for a miracle) but because they shy away from really thinking about what the facts say is going to happen.  And the alternative scares them."

I fit the very first part of your definition.
I do not "mostly depend upon future technologies" nor even partially. 
As others have stated, the sociological changes are more challenging than the technological ones.
I don't believe many on this path believe it requires it will require a miracle, nor that it will prevent changes that are already baked in.

For either method (continued improvements or end civilization quickly) to have any impact you have to convince the public.  Not as Vidaloo continues to state, the leaders.

There are many changes that are needed, and can be done without destroying our way of life.  Giving up long distance travel is fairly simple for 99% of people.  Eating chicken rather than beef is another fairly simple change.

If a person can convince a million people to cut their emmissions by 50%, and another person convinces 100 people to cut theirs by 99%, which has more affect on the big picture?

Now, if the ecosphere reaches a point where our civilization can no longer be supported and a crash comes, so be it, however, I will continue to work towards improvement whenever I can.

I believe the future will be better off the more GHG we stop spewing into the atmosphere.  If you believe that 50%, 75%, 25% cuts are no better than 99%, that is your right.

Pages: [1] 2