Tommy Cookers wrote:maybe this distorts some of our other perceptions ?
do people actually think EVs are anything but a gesture and a diversion ?
the world needs more heat energy than electrical energy, and always will
and, as we are finding, viable renewable electricity is a fiction
Tommy Cookers wrote:EV people haven't even got batteries that are worth spit !!
aleks_ader wrote: Look belove for example at that videos (sorry if everyone already post it). I think it good made my point why is good to do it and why is worth to try...
We need just "Aladins lamp" and open that unexploded areas and once for all do something good for our future generations. We mechanical and electrical engineers must stick heads together and make it work.
Tommy Cookers wrote:do we really have faith in vehicles and energy systems that are effectively designed by elected politicians ?
when elected politicians have conspicuously failed in all aspects of their actual jobs
remember that EVs and Hybrids exist only because of California's legal mandates justified on zero tailpipe emissions in cities ... or ... please stop blowing your greenist trumpet, 'gyro !!
autogyro wrote:None of this technology change is a direct result of global warming or CO2 emissions.
Andres125sx wrote:autogyro wrote:None of this technology change is a direct result of global warming or CO2 emissions.
Agree on almost all your reply autogyro, but not on this. I think it´s not a direct result of any single factor, but the result of multiple factors, and global warming and CO2 emissions are two of them.
Cost of fuel is another one.
Marketing is another one (any company need to attract customers, and today being "green" is a big factor to attract)
Weather changes we´re watching and make us afraid about our influence to the planet is another one
Health and pollution, specially into any big city is another one
And so on...
If you take all of this it´s easy to understand the technology change. As usually, it´s not a matter of some single factor, but the summation of multiple factors
Tommy Cookers wrote:@ Andres
in this thread here my prime point was that overall we need more heat energy than electrical energy, and we always will
Tommy Cookers wrote:so the possible benefits from land vehicle electrification are small relative to this 'big picture'
and we are anyway very far from replacing fossil fuels in electricity generation
Tommy Cookers wrote:in the unfortunately-titled 'N' thread I tried to suggest that we are a long way from fossil fuel exhaustion
and that globally we are in need of renewable water sources rather than renewable energy sources
(many are now living on food grown with non-renewing water)
Blanchimont wrote:Andres, how does driving (for fun?) a 2-stroke KTM 125 SX go together with your strict believe that it is harmful for the planet to burn petrol?
richard_leeds wrote:I think something might be lost in translation?
richard_leeds wrote:I read Tommy's comments as meaning the need for clean heat energy and clean water supplies is more pressing than clean vehicles.
richard_leeds wrote:I'm not sure how basics such as heat and water can be seen as avaricious?
richard_leeds wrote:Yes clean electric cars would be great for urban pollution, but that's trifling compared to the fuel used to heat buildings. I've only mentioned the point of consumption. It gets worse when we factor in distribution.
richard_leeds wrote:So the argument then says we should make generation & distribution more efficient. But when we get cleaner electricity we'd find it would have the greatest benefit if it was used it in our buildings.
Heating buildings is where we burn the majority of a natural resources, so that's where we can have the greatest gains. I can see the cooling plume from the UK's largest power station from where I'm sitting now. Raw material is being burnt and a lot of the released energy is thrown away in those steam plumes, and another load of that energy is thrown away in distribution to my house to power this laptop. In addition the most efficient way to heat my house is to burn even more raw material (ie gas) in my own little power station in my garage. My car is a pimple in comparison to all that waste.
As the ancient mariner might have said "Heat, heat everywhere, but not a joule for warmth"
As it happens my house is in a small development of perhaps 30 houses, the ideal size for a small CHP unit that would provide cheap heat in winter and free cooling in the summer. When the house is empty in the daytime that CHP unit can send energy over a very short distance to the nearby town centre. Waste heat from that daytime generation can be stored in my house to see me though the night, or used for cooling in the summer.
Unfortunately UK obsession about owning our own little castles and fear of anything remotely resembling social housing means we'll never get domestic CHP schemes in the UK. Centralised power systems do have a bad press thanks to poor quality social housing in the 60's and 70's.
CHP can't be that bad can it? Look at this lovely residential area with a nearby CHP plant. It has lots of trees, no noise, and zero crime!
Users browsing this forum: CCBot [Bot] and 0 guests