Electric cars?

[rederob]

Nice way to start a reply "if you knew anything..." settle down.

How are you producing your hydrogen by using high carbon emission natural gas or carbon monoxide producing methods?

Both sound stellar for the environment.

Again, if you knew anything then you would know where the future lies and where massive investments in hydrogen are being made, and started by doing some basic research to inform yourself.
So stop shooting yourself in the foot.

 

[3 hound]

Again, if you knew anything then you would know where the future lies and where massive investments in hydrogen are being made, and started by doing some basic research to inform yourself.
So stop shooting yourself in the foot.

No doubt there are big investments being made, so far a lot of the investments are scams like solar roadways. I thought this was about improving environmental outcomes.

 

[3 hound]

This is what so many critics say, yet they willing have probably bought many clothing items which have come from sweat shops and nations employing underage children. And how many engagement rings contain blood diamonds? Your point is a diversion as the capacity of individuals, through their own labour, to produce the necessary quantities for industry is almost zero.

No the point is still valid and it's irrelevant that the same point applies to diamonds and apple phones etc.

You have made a logical fallacy.

Sorry I didn't really get the other points you were making.

 

[rederob]

Hydrogen can be produced using green energy sources.

Seriously mate, it’s like you are working off information and arguments that are 10 years old.

@Value Collector - you might be too generous.
I was posting on this stuff before ASF was around, and telling people about Tesla's Roadster shortly after it was produced in 2008.
The environmental arguments against NEVs are mostly weak and often baseless.
A few days ago a very wealthy Pom with a YouTube channel showcasing his ICE vehicles uploaded a video canning the benefits of EVs of supposed detailed research. It was an absolute croc that a 10 year old could debunk. He replied a few times to my comments with absolutely nothing substantial. However he posted lots of laughing emojis to my claim that EVs were typically safer than ICEVs and had that warmth of peeing in a wetsuit as only he knew! So I posted a link to a car insurers website that said that EV claims were 40% less than for ICEVs when harmonised for distance.
Bottom line is the wealth of information available if people keep an open mind and are not sucked in by regurgitated nonsense from the ICE age,

 

[3 hound]

Again, if you knew anything then you would know where the future lies

If you knew anything you would know that if you knew where the future lies you would be a god or something similar, getting a bit above yourself.

 

[Smurf1976]

I lived for a decade in big cities and never owned a car. A car is an unnecessary PITA in modern high density cities

Taking a neutral position ideologically and politically, it could similarly be argued that cities themselves are the ultimate problem.

Regardless of that argument though, bottom line is the world has a huge existing base of cities, towns and so on and the car isn't going away anytime soon so the question becomes how to power them.

effectively modern slavery including children in the most horrific conditions.

No denying that but the same could be said for ICE vehicles. There's an awful lot of misery around the world that in one way or another is brought about by oil.

The real solution I'd argue is that we simply shouldn't be buying anything produced in an unacceptable manner. We could obtain the minerals to produce batteries and so on from sources that don't involve sending kids down the mines if we really wanted to. Might cost a bit more, might mean we have to accept some pollution or whatever in our own backyard but it could be done. Just because a present source is problematic doesn't preclude changing the source.

 

[3 hound]

Hydrogen can be produced using green energy sources.

True but largely pointless statement when you look at the scale of production required then the green concept gets way less obvious if it is even possible.

 

[3 hound]

Taking a neutral position ideologically and politically, it could similarly be argued that cities themselves are the ultimate problem.

The ultimate problem is the question that is not allowed to be even thought ie; how many humans can the planet sustain.

 

[Value Collector]

True but largely pointless statement when you look at the scale of production required then the green concept gets way less obvious if it is even possible.

Take a few moments to look at the scale of investment and speed that Fortescue metals is moving in that direction

 

[rederob]

No doubt there are big investments being made, so far a lot of the investments are scams like solar roadways. I thought this was about improving environmental outcomes.

Now you are making even less sense. There are no solar roadways in existence, so don't confuse a concept being trialed with the real thing.
Again, go through this thread and the environmental benefits have been many times repeated.

No the point is still valid and it's irrelevant that the same point applies to diamonds and apple phones etc.
You have made a logical fallacy.

FYI, repeating a similar point with different emphasis cannot be a logical fallacy. It's a fact of life in this world that not every country has strong labour laws, as @Smurf1976 points out.

Sorry I didn't really get the other points you were making.

I can understand that.

If you knew anything you would know that if you knew where the future lies you would be a god or something similar, getting a bit above yourself.

I contexted my comment in relation to hydrogen so stop trying to be a smartarse. This thread has over 290 pages and within them you will find a lot about what is happening on the hydrogen front.
I guess you have missed headlines like this:

Andrew Forrest begins work on green hydrogen hub in Gladstone, confirms $3b for renewables farm​

And this:

Twiggy signs deal with Airbus to back hydrogen planes​

As far as people like Twiggy are concerned, the future lies in a hydrogen economy and he's investing billions into it. You don't have to agree, but being ignorant to it won't prevent it.

 

[3 hound]

Take a few moments to look at the scale of investment and speed that Fortescue metals is moving in that direction

A link or something would be helpful. I won't be replying any further tonight tho. Thanks for discussion.

 

[sptrawler]

The ultimate problem is the question that is not allowed to be even thought ie; how many humans can the planet sustain.

That has been brought up many times.
The other problem that brings up and has been mentioned is, the amount of greenhouse gas produced by the extra humans, is proportional to their affluence.
That is as humans become more affluent they consume more energy, because they buy more electronic junk, so the extra demand on the electrical supply increases.
Funnily enough the ones who scream the most about climate change are the elites, who consume the most power in their McMansions, with their cinema rooms and their Range Rovers.
We are a weird lot aren't we. ?
Thankfully Elon Musk has now given the elites a "clean" car, with the snob value, to replace the Range Rover, that's a big step in he right direction.

 

[rederob]

A link or something would be helpful. I won't be replying any further tonight tho. Thanks for discussion.

Two links were immediately above your post!
You laziness is exemplary.

 

[3 hound]

Now you are making even less sense. There are no solar roadways in existence, so don't confuse a concept being trialed with the real thing.

Mayor Pete, in the US is spruking them as we speak.

Do you not remember the hype around solar roadways Wattways??

It's the typical false green scam that gets promoted to the public as an environmental benefit.

Engineers and construction companies love green investment because all the money they make but the more data comes in we learn how scammy much of it is and at the public expense.

The World bank has even published papers on the negative environmental impacts of so called green investment.

 

[3 hound]

That has been brought up many times.
The other problem that brings up and has been mentioned is, the amount of greenhouse gas produced by the extra humans, is proportional to their affluence.
That is as humans become more affluent they consume more energy, because they buy more electronic junk, so the extra demand on the electrical supply increases.
Funnily enough the ones who scream the most about climate change are the elites, who consume the most power in their McMansions, with their cinema rooms and their Range Rovers.
We are a weird lot aren't we. ?
Thankfully Elon Musk has now given the elites a "clean" car, with the snob value, to replace the Range Rover, that's a big step in he right direction.

You forget to mention how the green elites can't seem to travel in anything but their own private jets.

 

[sptrawler]

At the moment coal stations are closing earlier than they were originally scheduled to just because of the economics, the coal stations are struggling to compete in the market against renewables.

That is a true statement, but it doesn't actually give a fair representation of the actual issue.
The coal stations are struggling to compete with renewables, because they have to run inefficiently or be taken off line to allow renewables to provide power when they are generating, when the renewables aren't generating because there is no sun and no wind, the coal generators have to re start and provide the power required to keep the lights on.
So to say carte blanche that they struggle to compete, doesn't honestly reflect the situation, it is cherry picking that renewables are cheaper when they are running, but they aren't always running which goes back to at call generation and storage.

 

[rederob]

Mayor Pete, in the US is spruking them as we speak.

Do you not remember the hype around solar roadways Wattways??

It's the typical false green scam that gets promoted to the public as an environmental benefit.

Engineers and construction companies love green investment but the more data comes in we learn how scammy much of it is and at the public expense.

The World bank has even published papers on the negative environmental impacts of so called green investment.

We had a premier that spruiked cars that ran on water!
You are digging up such crap it beggars belief.
Green investments are driving first world economies more strongly than most other investment sectors, and most of it is privately funded.
If you want to be credible, link to sources.
When I went outside today the sky was falling. I even took a photo.
I suggest you get back on topic and start asking questions that make sense.

 

[Value Collector]

A link or something would be helpful. I won't be replying any further tonight tho. Thanks for discussion.

There is no one link to explain the whole thing, but here is one link.

Basically FMG is moving rapidly towards becoming a global hydrogen and green energy producers.

But this thread is about ev’s, I just charge mine at home using my solar panels on the roof of my house, pretty simple.

https://www.fmgl.com.au/docs/default-source/announcements/2361891.pdf?sfvrsn=d18eb613_4

 

[3 hound]

We had a premier that spruiked cars that ran on water!
You are digging up such crap it beggars belief.
Green investments are driving first world economies more strongly than most other investment sectors, and most of it is privately funded.
If you want to be credible, link to sources.
When I went outside today the sky was falling. I even took a photo.
I suggest you get back on topic and start asking questions that make sense.

What crap are you talking about, you arrogance is only eclipsed by your ignorance.

Have a great evening and goodnight.

 

[Value Collector]

That is a true statement, but it doesn't actually give a fair representation of the actual issue.
The coal stations are struggling to compete with renewables, because they have to run inefficiently or be taken off line to allow renewables to provide power when they are generating, when the renewables aren't generating because there is no sun and no wind, the coal generators have to re start and provide the power required to keep the lights on.
So to say carte blanche that they struggle to compete, doesn't honestly reflect the situation, it is cherry picking that renewables are cheaper when they are running, but they aren't always running which goes back to at call generation and storage.

I was under the impression that it isn’t coal plants having to switch on and off that’s the problem, because they aren’t really doing that, it’s the suppression of the actual whole sale price, by solar and wind, at least that’s how AGL was explaining it.