Electric cars pollute 1,850 times more then fuel based autos.

[Groogo]

The 2022 U.K.-based Emissions Analytics study found that after driving both a gas and electric car 1,000 miles, the number of particles collected from the EV was vastly greater than the gasoline-powered car.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/electric-cars-pollute-1850-times-more-than-fuel-based-vehicles-study-finds/

[Voroff]

Originally posted by Groogo:

Originally posted by Voroff:

Whaaaa, (...)
The real solution is rail. Every housing in the states connected to the railway system.
And cycles. And small ULMs.

And just think, you could have said that intelligently and politely without the jerkiness. *shrug*

That's called provocation, and sass - that's conscious and willing : i'd rather toy with your "emotions" than care about them. Btw, you ignoring my request for any kind of link in your other topic "marianne", was it conscious ? :)

[Groogo]

Originally posted by Voroff:

Originally posted by Groogo:

And just think, you could have said that intelligently and politely without the jerkiness. *shrug*

That's called provocation, and sass - that's conscious and willing : i'd rather toy with your "emotions" than care about them. Btw, you ignoring my request for any kind of link in your other topic "marianne", was it conscious ? :)

I have no idea what your other topic is but I do thank you for revealing your intent when you post. I no longer care about your point of view either and I would rather see nothing at all.

[Voroff]

Originally posted by Groogo:

Originally posted by Voroff:

That's called provocation, and sass - that's conscious and willing : i'd rather toy with your "emotions" than care about them. Btw, you ignoring my request for any kind of link in your other topic "marianne", was it conscious ? :)

I have no idea what your other topic is but I do thank you for revealing your intent when you post. I no longer care about your point of view either and I would rather see nothing at all.

You think i was talking about provocation in a public forum, it was targeted about your sorry hide ? Hum, fun.
The other part was about a topic YOU made TODAY, where i responded directly to you with a quote, and was ignored, mainly because answering me was deemed too difficult to integrate into your political rethrorics, i guess. I just asked for a link about your claim as OP ... fun, again.

[ZOMBIECRUNCH]

Originally posted by ⛧:

Are you telling me that something that runs off a battery that doesn't have a 100% perfect rate of exchange, and may have traveled so many miles off a power grid that can have losses over distance, uses more gas than something that runs of gas directly?

That sounds silly

Seriously, why would a car thats heavier because of a giant battery, use more power and thus create more pollution?

Nor would more of these cars be needed in industry such as trucking due to inability for a single Truck to travel as far.

They cannot be used in trucking. They just catch fire. And they have a lot of downtime due to charging. Also it makes 1,500$ look like a good deal for diesel.

[Enigmatic]

The push for electric car mandates is to build a surveillance grid.
Nothing to do with the environment.
imho, i could be wrong.

[Incarnate]

Don't look up the data from solar panels or you will cry.

[Groogo]

Originally posted by Incarnate:

Don't look up the data from solar panels or you will cry.

They are screaming that the world needs to install more solar panels before they try and block out the sun! And billions if not trillions of tax payers monies are need to put into their cronies pockets for the contracts to do both.

[Morkonan]

Originally posted by Voroff:

...
Nowhere did I say that was the only reason and that certainly was not my intent, that is your spin.

OK, accepted - My mistake. It seemed like your intent, though.

TLDR: Here's the part where I think we can agree - It's time to science-the-heck out of this thing instead of listening to political lobbyists. . Read below for infos... :)


If there's an issue with solar, it's got to start at material production and maintenance of continued expansion, IMO.

We can't maintain the solar energy generation expansion by using photovoltaic cells at this rate. Ain't gonna happen - That's a complex, expensive, process using rare earth elements and toxic chemicals that have to be dealt with.

They also don't produce enough energy for them to be a workable solution, by themselves. We can't maintain production growth or maintenance at that kind of scale, either. (Maintenance... maybe. But, that's using some crazy concepts like high-efficient solar cell local generation on house rooftops, everywhere... maybe. It won't take care of our needs, though.) The density needed for a solar-cell farm at current efficiency rates means a lot of places would end up being mostly solar cell farms... (We use ever-increasing amounts of electricity. PCGamers... you've been spotted! :))


There is a potential solar solution in steam-tower generation. But, that'd mean that every neighborhood would have a big ugly mirror+steam-reactor target tower in view and would have to have the room for all those reflectors. Low maintenance, good production... until...

Solar energy only works when the sun is shining.

^-- There's the big argument that gets ignored. :)

With a solar plant being used, it has to purposefully store energy for night use to fully serve its purpose. That means batteries. (Or, a giant spinning wheel storing potential mechanical energy... Or, heated up salt slurries or some other form of mode of energy storage. Night will come.)

(All this, above and below, includes Electric Vehicles too. They're both part of the problem and an overall small part of the solution.)

... (insert lots of stuff I didn't write, but could have)...


Here's the problem that few people talk about: Economic Growth.

In order to be considered a healthy economy in today's economic model and to provide the organized, manageable, acceptable living experience most humans desire, a minimum expansion of positive economic growth of 3% is absolutely necessary. That is a universal truisim, for all nations. (If not, examples of exceptions are welcomed)

When that is not met, economic collapse, and certainly economic stress and other issues, becomes much more likely. Those are bad things. They can lead to sociopolitical instability that could even cause more environmental issues than an orderly, healthy, society would.

And, our economy increasingly relies on the large-scale consumption of electricity.

^-- There is the real problem we have to confront. And, it's an uncomfortable fact that The Environment has not been naturally balanced to serve our human-derived economics needs.

This is one of the reasons why "AI" has been targeted by some forward-thinking groups. It takes huge amounts of electrical power to provide energy to the big server farms that expensively host such things. (Bitcoin et all has been targeted for the same environmental problems)

... (more stuff I didn't write, but can)...

Do we want a solution to all these things? EVs? Rampant Solar Power Panel expansion? AGW? Life, The Universe, and Everything?


We need another way to produce electricity.


Since the invention of fire, photovoltaic power generation is the only novel method we have invented to produce electricity. Waterwheels are the exception, I guess, and some other intermediate use of mechanical energy. But, those are small-scale solutions using pretty restricted mechanical energy generation. They are good, safe, clean, but take either exceptional natural requirements with hydro-power or don''t produce enough energy, like with mechanical waterwheels/windmills.

We specialize in turning heat energy via a number of source into electricity. It is what we do. All coal/nuclear/proposed fusion methods transfer heat energy via water steam into mechanical energy and then into electrical energy.

Photovoltaic production is nearly direct, losing nothing to work energy to transform it into electricity, but it is inefficient and there are limits involving physical law that can't be broken using current methods. They are great, but of limited use at scale, in other words. (Edit Note: I don't mean to be misleading, but inefficiency here is deep science quantum lore stuffs. The point wasn't to go into that. We do have more solar cell forms coming in with higher efficiency. They won't matter terribly much, though.)

All other transfer and generation methods and even the materials of construction, like nuclear containment, use the same rare metals/compounds that high-efficiency mechanical transfer generators use.

IOW - All this <waves hands> stuff... has the same basic issues.

And, what's worse? We have that pesky need for continued, forever, 3% positive economic growth. And, we depend on heating up water to turn steam turbines made out of many of the same rare elements used in nuclear power that does the same thing...

We are still cavemen, perpetually excited about boiling water and turning cranks.


Your task :) is really to come up with a new, highly efficient, low cost or high efficiency, means to generate electrical power to meet the needs of an ever-expanding demand for it.


Here's the part where I think we can agree - It's time to science-the-heck out of this thing instead of listening to political lobbyists.

[Incarnate]

Originally posted by Groogo:

Originally posted by Incarnate:

Don't look up the data from solar panels or you will cry.

They are screaming that the world needs to install more solar panels before they try and block out the sun! And billions if not trillions of tax payers monies are need to put into their cronies pockets for the contracts to do both.

I'm sure there's corruption, but I simply meant that they are unbelievably toxic. Both in terms of production and as waste: https://www.wired.com/story/solar-panels-are-starting-to-die-leaving-behind-toxic-trash/

[Groogo]

Originally posted by Incarnate:

Originally posted by Groogo:

They are screaming that the world needs to install more solar panels before they try and block out the sun! And billions if not trillions of tax payers monies are need to put into their cronies pockets for the contracts to do both.

I'm sure there's corruption, but I simply meant that they are unbelievably toxic. Both in terms of production and as waste: https://www.wired.com/story/solar-panels-are-starting-to-die-leaving-behind-toxic-trash/

/agree I think that wind and solar are both great for small impact uses, ie: a homestead etc....large scale the diminishing returns (negative impacts) are overwhelming almost all, if any usefulness.


Wind turbines are showing terrible returns from energy generated vs environmental impact as well.

[aka]

The two stupidest thing in all of human history are Factory farming, and EV's.

Each of these two things are far worse than nukes, genocide, religion, plagues, famine combined.

Hope this helps

[De Hollandse Ezel]

Originally posted by Morkonan:

Here's the part where I think we can agree - It's time to science-the-heck out of this thing instead of listening to political lobbyists.

while I doubt we will ever run out of fossil before the end of times and this universe-simulation is ended and we all stand before Christ for judgment day...

in eseence.. yes.

but that science is going to take time, and is going to take REAL economy aka energy and resources.

climate chance can easely be adapted against.. it is not a problem.. we can combat all effects with our current tech. but again is going to need energy and resources...

the current obsession with co2 reduction leads to processes that are terrible destructive to the planet right now.
whats more.. they massively do damage to the real economy, they consome more resources & energy while producing less..
-> this leaves less to do the vital research to science us out of this. if any at all, meaning it leads to a far less preferable future..

going green at the current techlevel just is NOT viable... and it will only cause much worse disasters..

instead we should indeed focussing all those funds now wasted on co2 reduction to both climate adaptation and research while keeping out economy strong.

for now fossil remains the best technology we got.. and we got enough to last us another 200 years that should be enough time to do the inventions we needed like nuclear fission

[Groogo]

And let's not forgot that more co2 has almost always been a good thing but there is no money in it! You may stop being fearful and enjoy living your life on this beautiful planet!

[Triple G]

Originally posted by Groogo:

And let's not forgot that more co2 has almost always been a good thing but there is no money in it! You may stop being fearful and enjoy living your life on this beautiful planet!

Yes - i always thought the winters here are too cold, and the sea is too far away. More CO2 could solve both.

[ZOMBIECRUNCH]

Originally posted by εnigmatic:

The push for electric car mandates is to build a surveillance grid.
Nothing to do with the environment.
imho, i could be wrong.

I don't like the smell of these new cars. They smell horrible. And the dashboards are garbage. I remember when they were basic metal and plastic and could take a beating.