Science/Environment The Carbon Debate, pt III

[medusala]

Wut

Simple argument is simple. Consensus argument is only put about by people on kool aid.

The carbon price and associated innitiatives were working. Better than planned.

How so? How did the EU system go? Where was the international system that Australia was going to hook in to?

Amusing that you accuse others of hollow talking points but once again you have absolutely nothing to back up your claims.

Like any new form of power, replacements require public investment

No they don't.

Why is it that those who so fervently believe in global warming have so little understanding of economics and finance?

 

[Power Raid]

Everything that China does is generally the biggest the world has ever seen. Huge population with centralized power structure. s**t get's done in bulk.

My understanding is that nuclear power is to replace the old clunking coal plants so that it's urban populations stop dieing of respiratory cancers before their time.

Nothing wrong with that and unlike Australia, China actually requires more power for it's citizens. Australia's current problem is overcapacity. Two different stories.

BTW, I don't really care how we get there but I do look forward to the day we aren't reliant on oil for our cars and coal for the globes power. but I do hope australia doesn't choose romantic solutions that cripple the nation or shut down industry as we have already seen in SA.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Because the same things applies. Rather than building massive power generation plants and sending it the consumer, the article is saying that the future is a decentralized network. Take the electric car as you say. Sorry for the quote lump again.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/24/tesla-supercharger/


How much more efficient is it to generate the fuel for the car actually at the recharge point? So efficient that Tesla is able to offer people who buy a Model S free long distance travel FOREVER.

Tesla supercharger stations are already being installed at a rapid rate in China to answer your question about why baseload is already unnecessary for the uptake of EV's.

Can you explain why this is any different to having Solar power on the roof of your house.
Can you really see Californians waiting half an hour on their way home to charge their car, rather than plugging it into the garage overnight ( when it's hard to get much solar ).
Can you then extrapolate that half hour wait to a level beyond a boutique market for rich people who like to have a green image?
ie can you process every car on the road? half hour ?, generating capacity, every day? Think what a servo would be like if everyone had to fill the car every day and it took half an hour.

 

[smokingjacket]

Can you explain why this is any different to having Solar power on the roof of your house.
Can you really see Californians waiting half an hour on their way home to charge their car, rather than plugging it into the garage overnight ( when it's hard to get much solar ).
Can you then extrapolate that half hour wait to a level beyond a boutique market for rich people who like to have a green image?
ie can you process every car on the road? half hour ?, generating capacity, every day? Think what a servo would be like if everyone had to fill the car every day and it took half an hour.

Can you imagine never having to pay for petrol again? I'd wait half an hour for that.

In any case you might misunderstand the point. I was bouncing off of PR who said that what was needed for EV take up was more baseload power.
I was stating that decentralization of power generation looks like it will be the new disruptive technology so you're right, there's no huge difference between charging your car at home and charging it at a supercharger and most people will charge their car at home I'd say. Both are forms of a decentralized power network though. The supercharger network eliminates the need for a return to base though so it makes it viable for say taxis, long distance travel and road freight down the track.

This is the starting point. The technology is already thundering along with just Tesla doing most of the heavy lifting and massive economies of scale yet to kick in. Give it 10 years and it will have rocketed past where we're at currently. The charging issues are already being fixed. The rest of the 'problems' you've stated would indicate a lack of faith in the market or a business looking to increase profit to respond to increased demand.

 

[Power Raid]

Can you imagine never having to pay for petrol again? I'd wait half an hour for that.

In any case you might misunderstand the point. I was bouncing off of PR who said that what was needed for EV take up was more baseload power.
I was stating that decentralization of power generation looks like it will be the new disruptive technology so you're right, there's no huge difference between charging your car at home and charging it at a supercharger and most people will charge their car at home I'd say. Both are forms of a decentralized power network though. The supercharger network eliminates the need for a return to base though so it makes it viable for say taxis, long distance travel and road freight down the track.

This is the starting point. The technology is already thundering along with just Tesla doing most of the heavy lifting and massive economies of scale yet to kick in. Give it 10 years and it will have rocketed past where we're at currently. The charging issues are already being fixed. The rest of the 'problems' you've stated would indicate a lack of faith in the market or a business looking to increase profit to respond to increased demand.

I hope your right as the end goal should be less pollution but my tip is we will use more power in the future not less.

But hopefully we agree on the pollution aspect.

 

[Lebbo73]

I hope your right as the end goal should be less pollution but my tip is we will use more power in the future not less.

But hopefully we agree on the pollution aspect.

A lot of people agree on the pollution aspect. However, it becomes hazy when they start linking carbon emissions to global warming/man made climate change.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

What?

First, what infrastructure is required?

We can easily afford to invest in CSP, we also have the know how. In fact there have been a couple of significant pilot trials canned by lib government.

Secondly, I didn't refer to the electric car, not even once however, the answer to the electric car problem will come soon. Fast charging, long life carbon batteries aren't far away. Secondly, before the GFC, Australia was going to be used as a test market for a Nissan/Israeli collaboration on a new electric conept vehicle with charging stations and renewable eg. solar offsets

We are already miles behind, with China already spending huge amounts of electric vehicle research.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_vehicle_industry_in_China
We have nothing to offer in the way of expertise in this field.

 

[Power Raid]

A lot of people agree on the pollution aspect. However, it becomes hazy when they start linking carbon emissions to global warming/man made climate change.

agree

that's why I see this as an engineering and finance issue. Unfortunately politics has tried to make itself relevant and to buy votes they have turned a rather boring issue into an Armageddon event. It's almost like religion, repent and you will be saved.......vote for me and you will be saved. what the lemmings don't realise is it is ordinary people and businesses who will make the necessary changes and have been doing so for centuries.

 

[smokingjacket]

I hope your right as the end goal should be less pollution but my tip is we will use more power in the future not less.

But hopefully we agree on the pollution aspect.

Worldwide we will use an enormous amount more power in the future, I've no doubt at all about that. Australia I'm not as sure. Population growth will have to outstrip technological efficiency and consumers investing in their own power needs (which I guess also qualifies as more power, but maybe not what you were talking about.

The point about decentralization goes to basic economics though that it would be unwise for Australia to start building large scale, long life nuclear power plants in an already oversupplied market when the trend in cost is in the other direction.

 

[Power Raid]

We are already miles behind, with China already spending huge amounts of electric vehicle research.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_vehicle_industry_in_China
We have nothing to offer in the way of expertise in this field.

you're right and we never were in the race

we were always going to be customers not manufacturers

 

[Power Raid]

Worldwide we will use an enormous amount more power in the future, I've no doubt at all about that. Australia I'm not as sure. Population growth will have to outstrip technological efficiency and consumers investing in their own power needs (which I guess also qualifies as more power, but maybe not what you were talking about.

The point about decentralization goes to basic economics though that it would be unwise for Australia to start building large scale, long life nuclear power plants in an already oversupplied market when the trend in cost is in the other direction.

I agree but I would have two exception to australia. one being the pilbara and the other in SA.

both require massive amounts of power now and growing in the near future, both are energy poor and in SA's case I would use it to build a centre of nuclear expertise.

The "expertise" would require a JV with the french and the Japs to get up to speed but would extend to medical, power, reprocessing and a basis to shift from selling uranium to leasing uranium.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Can you imagine never having to pay for petrol again? I'd wait half an hour for that.

In any case you might misunderstand the point. I was bouncing off of PR who said that what was needed for EV take up was more baseload power.
I was stating that decentralization of power generation looks like it will be the new disruptive technology so you're right, there's no huge difference between charging your car at home and charging it at a supercharger and most people will charge their car at home I'd say. Both are forms of a decentralized power network though. The supercharger network eliminates the need for a return to base though so it makes it viable for say taxis, long distance travel and road freight down the track.

This is the starting point. The technology is already thundering along with just Tesla doing most of the heavy lifting and massive economies of scale yet to kick in. Give it 10 years and it will have rocketed past where we're at currently. The charging issues are already being fixed. The rest of the 'problems' you've stated would indicate a lack of faith in the market or a business looking to increase profit to respond to increased demand.

You didn;t get my point.
As soon as the EV's are mainstream , the supercharger points will not be viable.
Current cars are normally filled with fuel every week or so, and take around 5 minutes to fill.
So multiply it by 5 ( for daily chargiing ) and then by 6 for the time factor, and the capacity in the "charging stations" will need to have 30 times the capacity of the current service station network. Do you really believe that someone will build that amount of infrastructure for free?
If Tesla can afford to do it at all, its only because they are selling expensive top end cars.

 

[Power Raid]

You didn;t get my point.
As soon as the EV's are mainstream , the supercharger points will not be viable.
Current cars are normally filled with fuel every week or so, and take around 5 minutes to fill.
So multiply it by 5 ( for daily chargiing ) and then by 6 for the time factor, and the capacity in the "charging stations" will need to have 30 times the capacity of the current service station network. Do you really believe that someone will build that amount of infrastructure for free?
If Tesla can afford to do it at all, its only because they are selling expensive top end cars.

your right, it is not viable but it is the direction we are going and the opportunity for business is getting the service convenient and right.

at the end of the day, I still see oil companies playing a big role but obviously the product changes and they will evolve to remain relevant (or die). but having huge amounts of capital, is always a good starting point.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

your right, it is not viable but it is the direction we are going and the opportunity for business is getting the service convenient and right.

at the end of the day, I still see oil companies playing a big role but obviously the product changes and they will evolve to remain relevant (or die). but having huge amounts of capital, is always a good starting point.

I kind of thought that Oil Companies sold petrol wholesale, and retailers bought it and sold it at very little profit, hoping to make a living on marked up snacks and groceries.

In the end solar charging, is simply solar energy supply. It doesn't matter whether it's on Tesla's roof or someone else. But this sort of "small" supply is limited. There will be issues when it gets to a certain percentage.
There is NO storage for cloudy days or nights, so you still need to have enough power for the entire demand during these times.
Its not insurmountable though I guess. For example surplus solar energy in the grid on sunny days could be used to pump water back up into Hydro dams.

 

[Power Raid]

I kind of thought that Oil Companies sold petrol wholesale, and retailers bought it and sold it at very little profit, hoping to make a living on marked up snacks and groceries.

In the end solar charging, is simply solar energy supply. It doesn't matter whether it's on Tesla's roof or someone else. But this sort of "small" supply is limited. There will be issues when it gets to a certain percentage.
There is NO storage for cloudy days or nights, so you still need to have enough power for the entire demand during these times.
Its not insurmountable though I guess. For example surplus solar energy in the grid on sunny days could be used to pump water back up into Hydro dams.

I see oil companies evolving into energy companies

 

[smokingjacket]

You didn;t get my point.
As soon as the EV's are mainstream , the supercharger points will not be viable.
Current cars are normally filled with fuel every week or so, and take around 5 minutes to fill.
So multiply it by 5 ( for daily chargiing ) and then by 6 for the time factor, and the capacity in the "charging stations" will need to have 30 times the capacity of the current service station network. Do you really believe that someone will build that amount of infrastructure for free?
If Tesla can afford to do it at all, its only because they are selling expensive top end cars.

No you missed what I was saying again.

The rest of the 'problems' you've stated would indicate a lack of faith in the market or a business looking to increase profit to respond to increased demand.

Capitalism isn't that great at blue sky research but nothing beats it for incremental changes to improve a product.

How did Shell get service stations in every country in the world? Who's to say that superchargers don't replace post boxes/deli's/whatever, seeing as there's no toxic oil that needs to be contained? The possibilities and different ways that this could work or be adapted by the private sector are literally endless so saying that EV's will never go mainstream because superchargers (at this very early stage) can't supply the amount of cars we have on the road now is just petty. Technology will adapt like it has with every other major product in human history.

 

[smokingjacket]

There is NO storage for cloudy days or nights

Yes there is. That's the whole point in the thing.

Tesla also make batteries. First for their cars and now for grid storage.

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/SolarCitys-Networked-Grid-Ready-Energy-Storage-Fleet

 

[SaintsSeptember]

No you missed what I was saying again.



Capitalism isn't that great at blue sky research but nothing beats it for incremental changes to improve a product.

How did Shell get service stations in every country in the world? Who's to say that superchargers don't replace post boxes/deli's/whatever, seeing as there's no toxic oil that needs to be contained? The possibilities and different ways that this could work or be adapted by the private sector are literally endless so saying that EV's will never go mainstream because superchargers (at this very early stage) can't supply the amount of cars we have on the road now is just petty. Technology will adapt like it has with every other major product in human history.

You still aren't getting my point. You need at least 30 times the capacity to service electric cars as we have service stations now.
To store enough charge for a car ( in batteries ) will cost around half the price of a car.
If you want to have solar charged cars it makes more sense to have a large scale solar array with molten salt storage.

 

[smokingjacket]

You still aren't getting my point. You need at least 30 times the capacity to service electric cars as we have service stations now.
To store enough charge for a car ( in batteries ) will cost around half the price of a car.
If you want to have solar charged cars it makes more sense to have a large scale solar array with molten salt storage.

AT THE MOMENT!

 

[Long Live HFC]

However, it becomes hazy when they start linking carbon emissions to global warming/man made climate change.

you don't think co2 and other gases trap solar radiation?

 

[evo]

I was looking to buy an electric hybrid car as our next car but the numbers just dont stack up. Progress is dissapointingly slow in making it viable for the mainstream.

 

[Power Raid]

you don't think co2 and other gases trap solar radiation?

I can't answer for Lebbo but I too sit in the camp that we know CO2 is a greenhouse gas but I don't believe we fully understand its effect given the other variables (a minor issue for me) but I truly don't believe warming is as big an issue as made out to be (thus my disparaging comments re alarmists and watermelons).

that said, I still remain in the camp that we should reduce all pollutions as much as possible and believe the journey should be driven positively and honestly rather than negatively. I also believe the transition should be local focused with a global perspective.

 

[Long Live HFC]

I can't answer for Lebbo but I too sit in the camp that we know CO2 is a greenhouse gas but I don't believe we fully understand its effect given the other variables (a minor issue for me) but I truly don't believe warming is as big an issue as made out to be (thus my disparaging comments re alarmists and watermelons).

You should publish your research and put the world’s minds at ease.

 

[madmug]

I can't answer for Lebbo but I too sit in the camp that we know CO2 is a greenhouse gas but I don't believe we fully understand its effect given the other variables (a minor issue for me) but I truly don't believe warming is as big an issue as made out to be (thus my disparaging comments re alarmists and watermelons).

that said, I still remain in the camp that we should reduce all pollutions as much as possible and believe the journey should be driven positively and honestly rather than negatively. I also believe the transition should be local focused with a global perspective.

Well thats a reassuring motherhood & apple pie statement. I also believe we should love each other & shouldnt have war. The problem is how do we get their. This Gument is intent on destroying the very method of reducing pollution.

So what value is your belief system then? Is it Scientific, of just a warm fuzzy feeling thing?

 

[scon]

Makes me fuzzy.