Could Mobo's and gas guzzler's actually help make a greener planet?

BruceK

BruceK

Well-Known Member
Joined
8 Feb 2015
Messages
8,361
Location
Conwy
Visit site
There has been quite a few threads recently about the future of diesel and what it means for us Mobo'ers. I look out into Liverpool Bay and can see windfarms stretching over the horizon. Hundreds if not thousands by impression and with the directive to phase out diesel cars where does that leave us?
I just cant see an electric car being my salvation. My business / client trips on average way exceed their capacity.
Then I saw this and thought it's probably a windup in typical Ozzie fashion. Making fuel out of atmospheric carbon capture at the same price as the forecourt pump. Perfectly green diesel that removes green house gasses and burns neutrally.

https://www.facebook.com/VICEAustra...2/UzpfSTU0MTQ4NDQyNDoxMDE1NjIzNDM4NTIyOTQyNQ/

A little more digging and it seems the technology is actually out there but prices for capture and refine seem to vary. Maybe it's just a pipe dream but it seems to be an answer to a whole lot of issues

https://www.cell.com/joule/fulltext/S2542-4351(18)30225-3
 
Last edited:
TQA said:
Notice that he glosses over the bit about where the energy required for this process comes from.

At the end of the day it is an inefficient way of storing energy and it will release the CO2 back into the atmosphere when the fuel is burned.
Click to expand...

I didn't think he glossed over it. His implication was quite clear. Yes it does take a fair amount of electricity to do this and the proposal by inference is electricity by renewable means. Hence me bringing up the dearth of windfarms etc in Liverpool Bay. The question really is would it take much more electricity than say would be required for an electric car and on the balance of monies involved he states his belief that an alternative fuel source vis a vis electric cars may on the balance be cheaper over all. He states, whether true or not that the burnt fuel will not be putting CO2 back. I am under no illusion that he is painting the best picture possible and that the methodology and science has not been vetted by the wider scientific community but I can understand why they would be possessive over the technology. It certainly has more meat to it than these water to hydrogen schemes that have been taking people in.
 
We will all be driving EV's and PHEV's in the next 10-15 years. Battery size and usable capacity is growing rapidly and the cost is dropping. EV charging stations are currently 50kW DC but are now moving to 150kW DC with some providers working on 350kW DC with liquid cooled cables and battery storage integration to reduce the requirement for huge electricity connections.
Even run of the mill manufacturers are going this way. The new Hyundai Kona will be available in a 64kWh battery with a range of 300 miles very soon.
 
Everyone has a list of reasons why an EV won't work for them - until they actually try one out that is and do some real research rather than listening to oil company propaganda.

The real question is how much pollution/CO2 do leisure boats produce out of the total? I suspect we are quite a long way down the list of polluters, but when diesel is finally banned there will be other alternatives, including electric boat engines - the technology has been around for an awfully long time.
 
Is that 300 motorway miles? I live in North Wales my clients are on average 3 to 4 hours drive away. The trains would be my preference but currently the equivalent train journeys would take 5-6 hours away and do not have a flexible enough interval that wont increase the journey time to closer to 8-9 hours away. If an electric car could drive from Anglesey to London non stop and be recharged within an hour I'm a believer. Until then I am sceptical that they are anything more than urban commuters.
Regarding batteries. Yes battery technology is going forward in leaps and bounds but has anybody actually stopped and wondered if there is enough Li to go around for all the batteries required? Just asking because it's not exactly a common commodity at the moment.
 
The diesel pollution problem is not CO2 gas emissions, it's NOx particles in the exhaust, dangerous to lungs when inhaled, especially by kids, and imho it's only really relevant in cities full of Chelsea Tractors and diesel powered public transport. My girlfriend who lived just off the South Circular was one of Otto Diesel's millions of victims. It would be safer if all city vehicles were electric or hybrid, and also made some sort of noise so you could tell one was approaching. Bring back trolley buses! (only joking).

I share the OP's doubt that the planet has enough lithium to supply a global market in Li-ion car batteries. Li recycling seems to be a bit iffy at the moment but it would need to develop into a major industry like lead, if the electric vehicle market takes off.

Regarding air pollution by boats, I thought the big problem is what container ships and tankers emit when they switch to bunker fuel when away from land. Or has this been banned yet? If not then I don't feel too guilty about running my pair of 63Ps for a few hundred hours.

The interview in the first link was an interesting intro but why on earth choose Facebook as the platform to air it? I'm still struggling with the apparently in-depth article in the second link, (even though I have a degree in Physics and a masters in Engineering), but I'll try to understand it over the next few days. Well done by some of the posters above who mastered it in 2 hours or so.
 
When we're all driving electric cars in 10-15 years, as has been widely predicted, where is all the electricity going to magically appear from?

I thought the national grid was already pretty much at maximum capacity.
 
JerryC the platform wasnt FB. Just taken from the FB page of VICE an Ozzie news media group. I just came across it via FB.
 
Grubble said:
Everyone has a list of reasons why an EV won't work for them - until they actually try one out that is and do some real research rather than listening to oil company propaganda.

The real question is how much pollution/CO2 do leisure boats produce out of the total? I suspect we are quite a long way down the list of polluters, but when diesel is finally banned there will be other alternatives, including electric boat engines - the technology has been around for an awfully long time.
Click to expand...
Like what are they going to do with the (not insubstantial) diesel fraction from the distillation column ?
 
I dunno, but given the political will, power stations could be modded to use it, also enormous ships to clean up their offshore act.
 
JerryC said:
I dunno, but given the political will, power stations could be modded to use it, also enormous ships to clean up their offshore act.
Click to expand...
So it will still be burnt then !

What a wonderful PC World we all live in. Does anyone actually think we can do a damn thing about global warming, apart from culling at least half the Human Race, or yes that's what Global Warming will do ? The end is same, so we might as well enjoy the party. Humans are also products of Nature, and Nature will win in the end.

(the last sentence does not apply to members of the DUP)
 
Hi Superheat6k, I think Bruce's point was about diesel particulate pollutants ie nitric oxide molecules NOx etc, (deadly if inhaled over a long period and I should know, see my earlier post ), not carbon dioxide. Nobody mentioned global warming - sorry if they did, I missed it - some on here believe GW is a matter of political "groupthink" rather than evidence-based science, and I doubt NOx contributes to it, so I don't quite get where your 2nd para comes from.

PS I totall agree the dirty stuff will be burnt, but hopefully somewhere well away from where we can breathe it, rather than in our city centres.
 
Last edited:
JerryC said:
Hi Superheat6k, I think Bruce's point was about diesel particulate pollutants ie nitric oxide molecules NOx etc, (deadly if inhaled over a long period and I should know, see my earlier post ), not carbon dioxide. Nobody mentioned global warming - sorry if they did, I missed it - some on here believe GW is a matter of political "groupthink" rather than evidence-based science, and I doubt NOx contributes to it, so I don't quite get where your 2nd para comes from.

PS I totall agree the dirty stuff will be burnt, but hopefully somewhere well away from where we can breathe it, rather than in our city centres.
Click to expand...
I too am all too familiar with nasty nasty conditions COPD and emphysema. However, my response was not thinking of inner city effects of the local pollutants, though, but just how the World's population is about to stop using energy at the rate it does. Electrics vehicles still require the power produced somewhere and the transmission and battery storage losses make them little if at all more efficient than conventional engined vehicles, let alone the use of rare earth metals in the batteries. So the diesel will still have to be burnt, or we will be swimming in the stuff, still might bring the price down, eh !
 
JerryC said:
some on here believe GW is a matter of political "groupthink" rather than evidence-based science, and I doubt NOx contributes to it, so I don't quite get where your 2nd para comes from.

.
Click to expand...

Oh no, GW is definitely happening, that's irrefutable. What's up for debate is how much of a part are we playing in this vs natural rhythm and are the predictive models accurate or scaremongering to an agenda. The latest round of talks and predictions are very bleak indeed. Then again so was the ozone hole. Funny how we could change from CFC's so quickly but when truly big money is concerned well then...
 
Sorry Bruce, I omitted the key 'MM' before the 'GW' . BTW, if you didn't do it a few years ago, google the entire leaked transcript of all the internal emails amongst the research team working at the "University" (lol) of East Anglia who were told by the government to find any evidence of MMGW but couldn't find any, then tried to be selective to fit a few facts to fit the theory, but famously failed. Then read the ludicrous denials by their professor.
 
It wasn’t that long ago we were all encouraged to buy diesel cars, then guess what ? All of a sudden they are considered bad for the environment so next they are pushing for us to buy electric cars, I’m sure once we all have them someone will come up with a reason why they are no better as well. Correct me for being cautious but atfter getting caught ince you have to be a little more careful and with the current lot in charge of this country I don’t trust them to run a bath.
Our power stations are running to capacity and demand will only get worse with all the thousands of houses being built. What about the supermarkets, they have a couple of charging points to show they are helping, I can’t see them installing a charging point to each parking space. We are a long way off this being a viable alternative.
As for global warming, yes it’s happening but the question is can we change nature? the UK alone can’t do anything, it’s got to be a worldwide effort and getting that co operation is going to be tough.
I will stick with diesel until a viable alternative is available.
 
JerryC said:
Sorry Bruce, I omitted the key 'MM' before the 'GW' . BTW, if you didn't do it a few years ago, google the entire leaked transcript of all the internal emails amongst the research team working at the "University" (lol) of East Anglia who were told by the government to find any evidence of MMGW but couldn't find any, then tried to be selective to fit a few facts to fit the theory, but famously failed. Then read the ludicrous denials by their professor.
Click to expand...

That’s an interesting take on things but probably one for the Lounge :)
 
superheat6k said:
I too am all too familiar with nasty nasty conditions COPD and emphysema. However, my response was not thinking of inner city effects of the local pollutants, though, but just how the World's population is about to stop using energy at the rate it does. Electrics vehicles still require the power produced somewhere and the transmission and battery storage losses make them little if at all more efficient than conventional engined vehicles, let alone the use of rare earth metals in the batteries. So the diesel will still have to be burnt, or we will be swimming in the stuff, still might bring the price down, eh !
Click to expand...

Again there is a lot of real information about EVs that you can find online, rather than simply repeating oil company propaganda with myths about lack of efficiency and so on.

You know that in the 21st century some of us have solar panels on our roofs and some of us could recharge our EVs from our own solar panels or that almost 30% of the electricity we currently generate in the UK comes from renewable sources?

Whether you like it or not, the internal combustion engine is on the way out for cars and its nothing to do with living in a "PC world" but more to do with reducing the amount of harm cars do to those around them and reducing our reliance on resources from places like Saudi Arabia.

Personally I don't like spending £50 at the petrol station just to pay for solid gold Lamborghinis - maybe you do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top