Lies lies lies, green energy is black.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

as you say, the resources are finite. If you buy into conspiracies, "they" have been buying up all the great energy saving ideas and shelving them for decades. But since we know now that solar and wind power are not going to be the answer for all our energy, we need to find a better way. But....until we find that better way, we don't need to outlaw the only fuel we have.

Mandating EV's, that's something a total and complete DERP would do.

a reply to: network dude

BINGO!!

In fact, to do such things based on the premise that it will force alternative energy sources sooner is not only irresponsible, it's dangerous. Why? Because it creates a sense of crisis rather than just urgency, and this results in less comprehensive testing. A certain 'clot shot' comes to mind in the pharmaceutical industry as an example.

Just look at all the results of longer term testing on EV's and how things aren't turning out as rosy as many of the purveyors of doom porn predicted when these products were rushed out into the market. (i.e. fires, toxins, life cycle concerns, raw materials, etc., etc., etc.)

a reply to: network dude

Wind and solar aren’t even that bad as they stand, they’re just certainly not the bill of sale that was given.

They need to stop pushing the market so hard, and they just need to be honest.

Wind and solar aren’t going to save the planet much less fully offset our energy mix. But they’re a good supplement. The only reason they aren’t right now is because most of the energy goes to ground since the localized grid doesn’t need it while the energy is being produced.

But there are things in the mix that could store that energy efficiently.

If they figure out the lining for hydrogen fuel cells, you can use excess grid power to extract hydrogen from water, then you have a transportable fuel.

One of my favorites is two offset ponds/lakes. When you have excess power you pump the water to the higher lake. When you need power, you drain it and the pump is now a generator. The reason I like this one so much is areas would have extra water in case of drought, and stored energy if fuel sources are scarce or expensive.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

bah, don't get me started on Hydrogen. All I hear is it will never work, and excuses for how energy intensive it is to separate the H from the O. As if we have reached the apex of our ability to do things and understand the unknown. I totally get we can't run a car on water today (just don't tell Stan Meyer) but maybe, just maybe, someone will discover a cheap, small way to do the electrolysis and you can run your car on ditch water for a beer run.

And no, I'm not bitter.

a reply to: network dude

We can totally do hydrogen now, and it would help purely for the reason I described. A lot of energy gets wasted. You could just arbitrage trade the excess energy. Energy prices plummet because there is high supply and low demand? Buy it and make hydrogen to sell.

It’s a small bottleneck, the containment. But so long as it was in a safe environment, a very small leak isn’t the end of the world. There’s some seepage of gasoline vapor lost, not to mention the fact you have to use a lot of it to transport itself.

None of it is evil or bad to me, they all have their place. But I don’t view any of them politically. I view them all as an investor and someone who wants more long term energy independence.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I don’t think any of the new technologies have proven to be super dangerous.

Sure, there have been fires, but ICE engines can catch on fire too. It’s rare for both though.

Truth be told, there’s not a huge rush to move to alternative energy yet, and that’s OK. We’re producing more oil right now than ever before, I think that speaks for itself.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

I had actually written a follow-up post to the one you replied to discussing alternative energy sources like nuclear and some suggestions for how to make it orders of magnitude safer, but I deleted it because I felt I was getting too long winded.

To your points, no, EV's aren't "super dangerous", but they are more vulnerable to the environment they operate in than ICE vehicles. And, their batteries are loaded with toxic compounds when set alight. Heat rejection is also an issue with all of the latest generation lithium and similar battery technologies. ICE engines just boil over and if bad enough crack the block...they don't go on thermal runaways. And, while burning fossil fuels might be debatable from a toxicity standpoint, there is no question that lithium compounds found in most next generation EV's is far more toxic when set aflame than any ICE engine will ever be. Obviously plastics in the vehicle outside of the engine are relative between the two.

If the world was really interested in helping to reduce polution to combat climate change, they should require appliances lifespans to be increased way above what they are these days. They make things to fail in way less years than they used to.

It does not cost much more to make a fridge or stove so it will last twenty five years instead of ten years. Tools are all deathdated with either planned obsolescence or increased rates of failure so they have to be replaced in less years.

Look how long those old stone masonry houses lasted...some a thousand years. Many things China makes are required not to last by companies of the USA....so they can keep consumerism humming. Same with clothing styles....we are being led to believe we have to have new styles to match society...we go into the stores and see new styles promoted by influencers and buy crap just to stay in style...the same goes for appliances and floor coverings and building materials. I used to be a Builder, people are constantly trying to keep up with style which is perpetuated by companies trying to get people to buy things to replace what they have. I dread buying a new stove, the electronics are getting way more problematic and when we bought our new washer last year, replacing one that lasted ten years with the last three years of that sucking...the control panel cost fifty bucks less than we paid for the washer...so we had to buy the warrantee because there were quite a few circuit boards that fail because of power surges even within that five years. At least the five year warantee was only one hundred ten bucks at Menards...way cheaper than other warantees.

Making things less susceptable to failure is not in the future of products we buy nowadays, we blame China, but I knew someone who was the head of a big pneumatic tool manufacturer company in Taiwan, and he told me they had to put flaws to reduce lifespan in their tools required by the US companies that bought them for resale under various names....even those sold to snap-on and other major businesses.

This is one of the ways we are destroying the environment. Those big windmills will not hold up to a tornado...and it is all about consumerism and forcing change so we have better economies.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Those are valid points.

But for the most part, I don’t think people have been exposed to anything toxic at scale from EV’s (in first world countries). Thats not to minimize the reality if there was truly a discussion on “should this be implemented for everyone”.

It’s young, imperfect, doesn’t have the infrastructure to support it. I think fuel cell EVs will be better, load it with hydrogen or another source for quick fuel ups, and generate electricity on the go. If you can refuel quick, then range isn’t as much of a factor. Solid state batteries may be another option if they find a replacement for lithium (which is also finite, and used in a lot of other applications competing with cars).

I see it kind of like when cars used leaded gas. Obviously bad, but we figured out a reasonable fix.

I’m interested to see where it goes, and think it could be a nice supplement.

I still drive a six speed diesel, so my curiosity isn’t rooted in impending fear for the environment. That’s not to say I don’t care, I think we all take for granted how clean the US is compared to many places on earth. But my engine will last a long time, I get incredible fuel economy, and using the car for half a million miles means it helped offset the materials and emissions of creating a whole other car.

I’m a nerd, and love all things tech and new… but I still love the simplicity of my manual, and my next house will have a wood fireplace or wood stove (with modern HVAC too because I can’t sleep in a hot summer because I’m spoiled). I like old and new, I think it all has its place.

I found a couple of videos about the battery disposal, recycling fire problem.





They show how dirty they can be and how little is known about safety handling them.

a reply to: BeyondKnowledge3

The coal mine under Centralia PA has been on fire since 1962, and is estimated to continue to burn for another 250 year.

Pretty much the whole town is gone.

Some energies are safer than others, but all have their risks.

Even a dam can unleash havoc.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: BeyondKnowledge3

The coal mine under Centralia PA has been on fire since 1962, and is decimated to continue to burn for another 250 year.

Pretty much the whole town is gone.

Some energies are safer than others, but all have their risks.

Even a dam can unleash havoc.

We have a underground coal fire from where I used to live in CO that’s been burning for a 120 years It did spark a fire some 20 years ago called the coal seam fire, crazy they can burn that long. They say there’s 20+ subterranean coal fires burning in CO. Some can burn for hundreds of years I’ve heard.

From what I understand on the matter it's better to have a windfarm comprised of hundreds on smaller windmills made of sturdy polymers still lightweight enough to turn easily in even the mildest of wind conditions in certain regions like the Southwest.

It's a better use of resources, easier to repair and maintain and replace parts on if something goes wrong than those giant windmills I've seen out in West Texas, but the wind currents out that way are stronger the higher up you go so they managed to talk a rancher into leasing his land to install these gaint things.

It's aestheically pleasing to be driving on the long stetches of road and see them turning slowly in the wind.

I can't vouch for how cost effective they are, but it never hurts to have a multitude of energy producing technology, and maybe in the future we'll see more smaller wind farms helping to subside rural communities and towns in the southwest.

It's nowhere near as bad as the Industrial Revoution and when folks were burning coal in their hmes to keep warm, smoke inhalation, black lung, layers of dust on everything adding to human suffering and Oil RIgs as far as the eye could see.

A slong as we keep the population in check and urban sprawl at bay to the best of our abilities, we shoudl be fine.

Unfrotunately, in a worse case scenario, immigration and sprawl gets out of control and the mindelss masses exponentially grow with the first world demands of mcmanisions and new suburban subdivisions of large family homes for a family of four who suck electicity like mad from insisting on running their air conditioners full blast during the summer and overloading the orginal small towns windfarm sustainability with increased consumer energy demands and charging stations for their EV's we should be fine.

Fossil fuels will always be Number One as long as people refuse to buy into the bullsnip "Green Energy Mandate."

The cause of climate change in certain region has more to do with an over abundance of housing and concrete, designer trees that don't produce much shade or oxygen and dense urban sprawl slowly creeping over our Nation like a cancer to accomdate the growing "environmentally sensitive populace" with more money than sense and their insatiable creature comforts.

On the bright side, the younger generation are pushing for walkable communites and towns, which will reduce the need for cars, as a large swath of them are adverse to owning and driving a car entirely so Musk's push for mass charging stations will be lmited to certain areas and sectors instead of becoming the de facto norm.

a reply to: KrustyKrab

It’s wild to think about the scale of the vein to be able to provide so much fuel.

Goes to show how much energy it can provide.

I’m still fine with coal, it has its place. It just highlights there’s risks with all of them.

I don’t think cherry-picking to demonize one over the other helps at the end of the day. If we’re smart with all, and diversified, we’re more nimble when there are inevitable hiccups with a singular or group of energy sources.

Maybe if we start telling the Greenies that fossil fuel is made from conservatives blood and for every drop they use another conservative will die.... They will love fossil fuel?
Joking. I think the biggest fake is the push that natural gas is bad. The push to go all electric is about control, nothing more. The grid can't support all electric lifestyles they are trying to push.
Solar is a joke especially here in California. We produce so much it can't be used and is getting sold to Arizona and Nevada at a negative rate. My mother in law who lives in AZ just got a notice of a rate decrease thanks to California selling off access at a negative...... But yet PG&E is supposed to raise our rates another 20% this year.