Transitioning to a low carbon life

[Jon H]

1 hour ago, IDD15 said:

So that's over 1.3 million vehicles kicking a big hole in their emissions and oil company profits

 

There are over 33 million cars on Uk roads so all of the ev's and hybrids are what, 4%? And as we already established their impact on emissions is not that great. 40k ish miles driving etc for ev, worse for a hybid. A hybrid doing its thing on the motorway will be worse than a pure petrol car due to its greater weight. It will then claw some of it back with regenerative brakes and in traffic where the electric part really comes into its own. In any event, its a very small contribution that makes absolutely no difference to the overall picture. 

 

I do not have time to research the most exact numbers, but what i have found with a quick search says transport counts for about a quarter of uk co2 emissions. Of that it seems about 60% is from cars, so 14.4% of the total?. If all of the 1.3 million were all electric, totally non polluting a charged by renewable it would knock around .6% off the total? Please check my numbers, i was in a rush writing this and its been a long time since did percentage maths. but if my super generous and not at all realistic example shows ev's currently make only .6% of an improvement we really are making no impression at all.

 

This is especially true when we consider that China, where all of our virtuous 'green' products come from, emits appox 3 times the co2 of the whole of the EU combined. 

 

As i have tried to point out numerous times already, the scale the the problem is immense and its clearly lost on many. 

 

As for hydrogen, i never said its efficiency would be that great. But as we have insufficient lithium, and changing battery chemistry might require more mining, it may still be a greener option if it can be manufactured in a sustainable way. 

 

1 hour ago, Frank Skilbeck said:

seems a shame just to burn a lot of it

 

I always thought flares on oil rigs etc were a waste. Why dont they capture that gas and use it for something?

 

 

 

[john davidson 1]

It seems to have missed every ones attention that some buses in Aberdeen are powered by hydrogen , wonder if there are others 

[Ron Gray]

1 hour ago, Jon - Laser Engines said:

 but if my super generous and not at all realistic example shows ev's currently make only .6% of an improvement we really are making no impression at all.

 

This is especially true when we consider that China, where all of our virtuous 'green' products come from, emits appox 3 times the co2 of the whole of the EU combined. 

So what, we sit on our backsides and do nothing at all? Even 0.6% is better than a big fat 0%!

[Rich Griff]

In the 90's I had regular access to periodicals like New scientist etc..

 

One issue I read with great interest was about German hire cars at an American airport, probably near las Vegas, a desert/very sunny region.

 

Solar electricity was used to "crack" water with the cars running on the "green" hydrogen thus produced, resulting in very clean and long lasting engines emitting heat and water.

 

The only real problem we have with hydrogen is coming up with " leach proof" materials, materials that do not allow leakage, of the hydrogen, to atmosphere, from the storage tanks.

 

Hydrogen "leaked"  into the atmosphere then "buggers off" into space and is lost for ever.

 

Space is full of hydrogen apparently.

 

We do not at present have the means of bringing hydrogen back to earth it seems.

 

Dirty hydrogen is a no brainer in my opinion.

 

A scientist on an energy TV program in the 70's stated that exploitation ( harvesting being a better word ) of the Sahara region would totally supply all world energy needs hundreds of times over for the next hundreds of years.

 

The French built and ran ( still are as far as I know at present ) solar mirrors focused on a tower mounted " sodium boiler " ( may have been sulphur ) to produced electricity that was sent to coastal desalination plants that pumped water inland to "green the desert".

 

Some joined up thinking from the French.

 

It will never happen in the uuk, never in a million years.

 

All that's really needed is the "political will", western money to fund these types of projects for the betterment of sunny equatorial regions who would supply the west ( or is it the northerners, hemisphere wise ) with produce and "clean" fuels whilst feeding the solar regions and raising their standard of living to boot.

 

Don't worry, your tax £'s will never be used in this way, Manon rules, particularly the blue variety.

 

Farmers need to up their game a bit as well, slurry into biodigesters to produce methane to power electric generators, the waste being the nitrogen they are after for crop growth etc..

 

I'll stop waffling now and study the notes to fill in that caa form before time runs out. Then I will go and plant an other tree to replace the one harvested to produce the paper used to print the info out. The blank sides of the paper will come in useful later, and after that ? Why, I will make some paper aeroplanes, and after that, recycle the paper..!!!

 

Think on.....

Edited September 4, 2023 by Rich Griff

[John Stainforth]

48 minutes ago, Ron Gray said:

So what, we sit on our backsides and do nothing at all? Even 0.6% is better than a big fat 0%!

The trouble is: it is not even 0.6% because china is building one new coal-fired 1 GW power station about every three days, which is partly being used for the manufactuing industry we have offshored. The only alternative that makes some sense, at the scale required (unless there is some unforeseen breakthrough) is solar - not PV but parabolic mirrors - in the Sahara and other deserts. This will require a lot of political will and international cooperation, which is not exactly in fashion worldwide and Britain.

[Jon H]

5 minutes ago, Ron Gray said:

So what, we sit on our backsides and do nothing at all? Even 0.6% is better than a big fat 0%!

 

In many respects it may actually be better to do nothing if what we are doing makes the problem worse or gains us very little. Like i said, my example is massively favourable towards ev's, and the UK grid is already not bad when it comes to cleanliness, so globally, its not going to do anything to solve the problem. It may be better to redirect the resources gaining us little on cars and point them towards something more meaningful. What that would be i honestly cant say, but doing 'something' just to be seen to be doing it is not exactly a winning strategy. They did that with ethanol in petrol and current research actually suggests that adding ethanol makes petrol dirtier than it would be without it as they failed to factor in all of the fugitive and other emissions when they initially calculated the whole deal.

 

Ultimately, we cannot solve this problem with current technology and resources and we certainly cannot consume our way to a greener future. electric cars, solar panels, home battery banks etc. Its all stuff we have to make and it makes the overall problem worse. It would probably have made the most sense for solar panel manufacturers to first make their own operation solar powered, but that is unlikely to make them any money and depending on their own power needs, they might need such a large area to take make themselves green that it wasnt an option. Once again we are back to scale. So we need to make the best of what we have and use it more intelligently while working like mad on real solutions for the future, even if they only come online in 100 years, we need to buy those 100 years now. 

 

We already discussed that EV's are winner for climate in Norway for example due to their hydro power. Fantastic, cut off all other markets from buying them and send them all to Norway until they have replaced every ICE car. That is then one whole country ticked off and out of the way. Then move EV sales to the next country where they can make the most impact. Equally, an EV in Australia is totally useless due to their coal powered grid being utterly filthy. If i remember my geography, Australia has rather a large amount of empty space and quite a large amount of sunshine. So again, instead of sending solar panels to dark and rainy England lets send them down under and get Australia sorted out. Once that is done, send them some ev's, or use the solar for hydrogen fuel cells, whatever works best. now we are getting closer to two countries off the grid, who's next? We should also start reforesting on land and in the sea (kelp is a great co2 sink), stop cutting down the forests that are left. This reforesting business would be good for biodiveristy as well while we are at it....i could go on for hours about things i think would be an advantage globally. Cutting plastic, emissions, etc. Honestly i could probably be here all day. 

 

Assuming a study determined they were advantageous as proposed, and a better idea was not on the table, doing the things i suggested above would require a broad reaching, coordinated and long term global strategy. This, sadly, is the biggest and most laughable fantasy of them all as the people running the joint cannot see past the next election let alone 100 years ahead. And working together? not so much. Add to it the fact that its unlikely to make anyone any money we really are in a pickle. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jon H]

2 minutes ago, John Stainforth said:

The trouble is: it is not even 0.6% because china is building one new coal-fired 1 GW power station about every three days

 

You know where that coal comes from? Australia. And its the brown extra filthy kind too. 

[J D 8]

9 minutes ago, Jon - Laser Engines said:

This, sadly, is the biggest and most laughable fantasy of them all as the people running the joint cannot see past the next election let alone 100 years ahead. And working together? not so much. Add to it the fact that its unlikely to make anyone any money we really are in a pickle. 

 As Adam Savage of Myth busters says " There's your problem".

[Learner]

1 hour ago, Ron Gray said:

So what, we sit on our backsides and do nothing at all? Even 0.6% is better than a big fat 0%!

Thinking of buying an electric car to save the planet after spending the last 60/70 or more ruining it just a joke, same as a heavy smoker whos packed up and complains about smokers.

[Ron Gray]

Spending the next 20 - 30 years doing sweet fa is the joke, unfortunately it isn’t funny.

[Tim Kearsley]

In all the talk of the planet-saving (or not) people are forgetting another reason for buying an electric vehicle - they are so much better to drive and so much cheaper to run.

- instant response

- stupendous acceleration

- no annoying exhaust noise

- no horrible stink of fuel or exhaust fumes

- cheap as chips to run

 

I love the way the dedicated EV-bashers never have any other solution to offer.  It's child's play to criticise, much harder to offer an alternative. It makes me laugh how they always point out to me the disadvantages too - having to wait 20 minutes to charge, range anxiety etc - as though I'm not aware of all that!  I know I'll never buy another ICE car.

 

As far as the planet-saving, I think it's too late.  No government will admit that the Western lifestyle is unsustainable and the great public only support fighting climate change and helping biodiversity etc as long as it doesn't impact their comfortable life. Take one less holiday abroad mate?  Nah, it's me right!

Edited September 4, 2023 by Tim Kearsley

[Learner]

11 minutes ago, Tim Kearsley said:

In all the talk of the planet-saving (or not) people are forgetting another reason for buying an electric vehicle - they are so much better to drive and so much cheaper to run.

- instant response

- stupendous acceleration

- no annoying exhaust noise

- no horrible stink of fuel or exhaust fumes

- cheap as chips to run

 

I love the way the dedicated EV-bashers never have any other solution to offer.  It's child's play to criticise, much harder to offer an alternative. It makes me laugh how they always point out to me the disadvantages too - having to wait 20 minutes to charge, range anxiety etc - as though I'm not aware of all that!  I know I'll never buy another ICE car.

 

As far as the planet-saving, I think it's too late.  No government will admit that the Western lifestyle is unsustainable and the great public only support fighting climate change and helping biodiversity etc as long as it doesn't impact their comfortable life. Take one less holiday abroad mate?  Nah, it's me right!

Fair play your enjoying the car for what it is but dont the dedicated  ic bashers (EV brigade) also point out the disadvantages and why they dont like  i.c?

[IDD15]

4 hours ago, Learner said:

You forgot to mention up to 30% not working.

Hah! Good one.😃

about the same as those hydrogen pumps then!🙃

[Frank Skilbeck]

3 hours ago, Jon - Laser Engines said:

 

 

I always thought flares on oil rigs etc were a waste. Why dont they capture that gas and use it for something?

 

 

 

They do, it's used to run the generators and heating system (to heat the oil/water mix to.help it separate and stabilise the oil), where there is a gas pipeline it can be exported, if.not.it's often reinjected, my last project.had 2 x 1 MW compressors. A small flare.is kept lit for safety reasons in case of a plant blowdown.

 

Not in all parts of the world however, big issues in parts of iraq with flaring off high H2S gas, the resultant SO2, causing health issues. 

 

In the North Sea produced water contained radioactive salts, we had specialist contractors to decomtaminate equipment before maintenance entry.

 

[IDD15]

3 hours ago, Jon - Laser Engines said:

 

 

I do not have time to research the most exact numbers, but what i have found with a quick search says transport counts for about a quarter of uk co2 emissions. Of that it seems about 60% is from cars, so 14.4% of the total?. If all of the 1.3 million were all electric, totally non polluting a charged by renewable it would knock around .6% off the total? Please check my numbers, i was in a rush writing this and its been a long time since did percentage maths. but if my super generous and not at all realistic example shows ev's currently make only .6% of an improvement we really are making no impression at all.

 

This is especially true when we consider that China, where all of our virtuous 'green' products come from, emits appox 3 times the co2 of the whole of the EU combined. 

 

As i have tried to point out numerous times already, the scale the the problem is immense and its clearly lost on many. 

 

As for hydrogen, i never said its efficiency would be that great. But as we have insufficient lithium, and changing battery chemistry might require more mining, it may still be a greener option if it can be manufactured in a sustainable way. 

 

I beg to differ! 😃

 

You need to take into account the displacement and efficiency effects in your calculations. If we are generous and assume an ICE car is half as efficient as an EV  then clearly twice as much fuel is required to go the same distance. As you progress back up the supply chain the inefficiencies at each stage (transport distribution, storage, refining, shipping, storage, dewatering, well pumping) progressively get larger with a knock on increase in emissions. 
 

So by removing the need to use fuel in the first place, effectively displacing it you can have a much larger  effect than the straight one for one replacement you suggest. I must apologise but I can’t find the study that explained this much better than I can, but fundamentally if you replace fossil fuels you need much less renewables than you would think.

 

There are also benefits to be had in terms of health which are not insignificant.

 

You’re quite right of course the sheer scale of what we face is enormous but for some of us sitting and waiting for some future unproven technology is not an option. However, I promise not to glue myself to a road… 😀

 

idd

[Jon H]

10 minutes ago, IDD15 said:

You need to take into account the displacement and efficiency effects in your calculations. If we are generous and assume an ICE car is half as efficient as an EV

 

ICE cars are about 25%-28% efficient, EV 30-40% if you factor in everything. It does vary depending on the efficiency of the grid, but its not massively more than ICE unless you are able to plug it directly into a windmill. I was watching something about this very issue the other day and the chap broke down the whole thing from power station  efficiency, line losses, transformer losses, losses in the vehicle...etc

 

Not that it makes any difference as its the emissions that are relevant. 

 

17 minutes ago, IDD15 said:

There are also benefits to be had in terms of health which are not insignificant

 

Agreed, clean air in cities is a good thing but as we have said, the modern crop of luxury barges are not the way to do that. 

 

20 minutes ago, IDD15 said:

So by removing the need to use fuel in the first place, effectively displacing it you can have a much larger  effect than the straight one for one replacement you suggest

 

yea i get wat you are saying. You save the emissions of fuel not burned but also the emissions of the fuel not manufactured as you dont need it. Snag is, unless we can find alternatives for the other stuff we get from oil we will keep refining the fuel out anyway and we cant exactly pour it down the drain. 

 

22 minutes ago, IDD15 said:

I can’t find the study

 

I wish i saved half the resources i used for my information as much of what i am saying is paraphrased and i dont remember all the references used in the report so its harder for me to validate my comments. That said, the chap who does the reports is probably not forum friendly when it comes to language in the videos. 

 

24 minutes ago, IDD15 said:

However, I promise not to glue myself to a road

 

Excellent

[John Stainforth]

3 hours ago, Jon - Laser Engines said:

 

You know where that coal comes from? Australia. And its the brown extra filthy kind too. 

Yes, Latrobe brown coal.

[J D 8]

           I follow the Club of Rome who fifty one years ago published a book that caused a lot of controversy around the world and was much poo pooed by the powers that be of the time. However much of what was warned about has come to be and the calendar/timing of increasing problems for mankind as noted is pretty much on track.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Our habits/lifestyle have long been predicted to lead to our demise, doing what's right don't win enough votes and generally costs money, it'll never catch on.

[Glenn Stevenson]

I always imagined our hobby attracted intelligent people however it would appear that a number of us have fallen for the net zero cult (FOR THE GREATER GOOD!)

The people that run the world must be rolling in the aisles.

 

[J D 8]

13 minutes ago, Glenn Stevenson said:

I always imagined our hobby attracted intelligent people however it would appear that a number of us have fallen for the net zero cult (FOR THE GREATER GOOD!)

The people that run the world must be rolling in the aisles.

 

  The people that lead us to today's situation don't give a monkeys. They have had their fun live their lives and are already dead.

 

[Jon H]

This is not exactly on topic but it is related. 

 

A year or so ago i stumbled across this then 10 year old video while researching guitars. Its a video by the owner of Taylor Guitars and talks about the practices used in the felling of ebony for use in musical instruments. To say i was shocked by the practices used is an understatement and i wonder how often this sort of thing is repeated around the world. Getting rid of poor practices like this will also help with the carbon problem. 

 

 

 

 

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

We can bandy figures and statistics around until the cows come home after a day’s methane production but the root of the problem is the success of the human race.  Not only is it expanding at an exponential rate but all the world’s population are more aware of and aspire to a “western” lifestyle. Sadly, the world is likely to resolve this situation by a combination of war, pestilence, famine and natural disasters unless we can limit population expansion by humane methodologies. 
 

My own take on IC cars is that emission control has reached a stage of ridiculous complexity without sufficient industry competence in diagnostic capability and reasonable part replacement costs.  While cars don’t rot anywhere near as badly as in the past, expensive repairs to emission control systems will limit their useful lives as their values drop.  It’s early days but the relative simplicity of EVs has a definite attraction in addition to any driving experience, point of use pollution and possible economic advantages. 

[Don Fry]

Agree, Martin, as the saying goes, house on fire, stop adding wood.

But regarding the western love of big, fast, heavy cars, the extra carbon used by one of them will waste more carbon than a family living in the poor areas of the world. And a small, light slow car will still get you to the flying club. 
 

Taxation to curb wasteful behaviours normally works.

[Cuban8]

With the exception of the very poorest countries, our modern day prosperity has been driven by industrialisation and the access to cheap personal transport. Been going on for a century and more and I just don't see how trying to rip the backside out of that in a matter of a couple of decades is not going to wind up impoverishing most of us here in the UK. They'll try to have us all nice and zero emission (and skint) while some other poor devils across the other side of the world do our dirty work, quite literally, for us. It's started already with many new stealth 'green' taxes and levies, pointless rules and regulations,  along with  controls on where and when one can go.

(A programme on Lithium extraction from rivers in Argentina and the disasterous effect it is having on poor people living a substistence life style was show on Al-Jazeera recently - I urge you to try to see it.)

 

I'm sick to death that we in the UK are being screwed down to the floor with increasing numbers of virtue signalling plans dreamed up by out of touch academics just back from some nice comfortable international conference, and dodgy politically motivated scientists whose views seem to be accepted unquestioned by obsequious politicians and many figures in the media. Phew!

 

The chances of humanity being incinerated by thermo-nuclear war has diminished to next to nothing, so those needing something alarmist to fill their days with need to come up with something else. What could be better than CO2 emissions and global warming? So easy to fiddle figures, distort statistics and over state the effects of various natural phenomena. It's all bad news according to them as they conveniently ignore the very many positives of moden day living. I point a finger at Sky News and their Climate change panic programmes, and of course the good old BBC who will jump on any dodgy bandwagon at the drop of a hat.

The trouble is, by doing so in order to create false alarm and unneeded 'crisis action', real problems and bad actions will become lost in the noise............I draw your attention to the very different scale of or very own issues with the authorities and model aircraft regulations - a minute problem in the scheme of things but driven by the same motivations IMHO.

Am I mistaken?