sharetrader
Page 157 of 176 FirstFirst ... 57107147153154155156157158159160161167 ... LastLast
Results 2,341 to 2,355 of 2633
  1. #2341
    The past is practise. Vaygor1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northland
    Posts
    906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vagabond47 View Post
    ... I never said heat moves a piston...
    Quote Originally Posted by Vagabond47 View Post
    And yet... your single energy transfer (which actually isn't a single transfer, its Chemical -> Heat -> mechanical) ....
    Quote Originally Posted by Vagabond47 View Post
    ... I'm not going to bother with your **** anymore. You have zero clue, and pull numbers out of your butt that have no place in reality, and back up your BS assertions with zero supporting evidence. You are all hot air.

    Psst: not worth replying, you just got killfiled, I won't see it.
    And there we have it folks... yet another preacher who has completely lost all sight of the point being debated and gone full retard abusing those who hold a different viewpoint.

    Blocking posts now too... no different to covering ones ears with ones hands, shaking ones head, and shouting "La la la la la".... the ultimate response from those who cant handle the heat.

  2. #2342
    FEAR n GREED JBmurc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Central Otago
    Posts
    6,976

    Default

    The fact is that our earth has ice in its veins

    While nations such as China dominate global emissions and are increasing them, ‘nations such as Australia and New Zealand need not panic over the use of fossil fuels’.

    Climate change is a defining issue of our time, especially for young people who are persuaded that we are doomed unless urgent action is taken on carbon emissions.
    Activists, with some success, are demanding climate emergencies be declared around the world, making those demands on the basis that temperatures are at record highs, glaciers and sea ice are melting at unprecedented rates, and sea levels rising dangerously.

    A cursory examination of the geological literature shows that the first two assertions are simply not true, and that rising sea levels are par for the course.To assert that today’s temperatures are record highs is mischief-making of the highest order.
    Earth has been much hotter (up to 10C hotter) for the vast majority of geological time. Jurassic Park was very hot, and when the dinosaurs suddenly died out 65 million years ago, the succeeding age of mammals was similarly very hot.

    The last million years (a mere heartbeat on the geological time-scale) has been atypically cold, with extraordinarily large fluctuations in temperature. This period can be described as a series of 100,000-year-long cycles of dangerously cold ice ages (10C colder than today) and warm interglacials (where we are now).
    The interglacials are relatively short, usually a few thousand years, and we are already 12,000 years or so into this one. The record would suggest we might soon descend into another dangerously cold glaciation.

    Geologists know temperatures were higher than they are today during the Holocene maximum, 5000 to 9000 years ago in our current interglacial, and higher (by at least 2 C) in two of the last three interglacial periods.
    Sea levels are rising, but just 12,000 years ago, at the end of the last glaciation, sea levels were as much as 140m lower than today, and they then rose dramatically as we entered this interglacial.
    Sea levels were significantly higher than today just a very short time ago.Sea levels were also significantly higher in the last interglacial 125,000 years ago; Florida Keys, for example, is the remains of a coral reef that grew then.

    The really major ice melt was during the transition from the last glaciation to today. Canada was covered entirely by a massive sheet of ice with no vegetation and New Zealand’s South Island lakes were 1km-thick glaciers — so today’s reductions in sea ice and glacier volumes are quite trivial.
    This is proved by the modern-day retreat of glaciers which is exhuming the remains of forests that existed just a few thousand years ago in Alaska and Europe.
    Alarmists assert that despite all that, CO2 is a greenhouse gas and we are pumping large quantities of it into the atmosphere, causing catastrophic warming. But the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change does not know how potent CO2 is as a greenhouse gas, and gives a possible range for climate sensitivity of one to six.

    If climate sensitivity is low (close to one) then our emissions will never dangerously warm Earth. Climate sensitivity due to CO2 alone is actually just one, but climate scientists add all sorts of uncertain feedback effects to make it higher.
    Milankovitch Cycles are the favoured explanation for the recent cycles of ice ages and interglacial periods, thus making the sun the main driver of temperature change.
    But other factors are certainly involved, because climate is an incredibly complex system, and on the geological time scale, processes such as plate tectonics, volcanism and impacts from extraterrestrial bodies play significant roles.

    Let us agree that the sun drove the 10C ups and downs in temperature between glaciations and interglacials, and let us acknowledge that the modern satellite record of temperatures shows global temperatures regularly going up and down by as much as 1C on a timescale of three to 10 years (probably due to oceanic influences such as El Nino).
    We know, too, that temperatures over the past 9000 years have varied up and down by almost 2C. Not one of those changes can be blamed on our carbon emissions.

    In the context of these natural changes, why is the small warming of about 1C in the 20th century regarded as extraordinary and alarming?
    The IPCC stated quite clearly that: “In climate research and modelling, we should recognise that we are dealing with a coupled nonlinear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.”
    Why is it then that people believe the so-called IPCC projections of future climate change to be valid, when even the IPCC says it can’t make valid predictions?

    It is an indictment of our education system that students are convinced today’s climate change is extraordinary when it falls well within the bounds of natural climate change.
    They should be told, too, that we do not know how potent CO2 is as a greenhouse gas.All this is not to say that there is nothing to be alarmed about. Humans have changed and often overwhelmed the environment (most living things try to do exactly the same, but are restrained by some form of dynamic equilibrium).

    If we want our civilisation to survive, it is imperative that we manage finite resources (including fossil fuels) more carefully.Most politicians talk in terms of a few years’ time, or of caring for our children’s or grandchildren’s generation, but I’d prefer to think we can stay around a little longer than that.
    Human civilisation as we know it has been around perhaps 10,000 years, so let’s start by making sure we can survive for at least another 10,000 years. And why not a million years or more?
    Which means we must stop polluting the oceans, stop overfishing, find more sustainable sources of electricity and control population growth. Given the present reality that large nations such as China dominate global emissions and are increasing them, nations such as Australia and New Zealand need not panic over the use of fossil fuels.

    Nuclear energy may be a short-term option for Australia, but surviving for another million years will certainly require new solutions and technology.
    I suggest to the activists that the clarion call for action should be “managing the environment and sustainability”, not “stopping climate change”.The very idea that we can stop climate change is barking mad. Climate change is inevitable, as geology has always shown.

    David Shelley lectured in geology at New Zealand’s University of Canterbury.

    https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...b4e1af68e8442a
    People don't have ideas, ideas have people

  3. #2343
    Update Ready To Install
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Floating Anchor Shoals
    Posts
    7,920

    Default

    This looks to help with reduction, may need tweaking a bit but def on the right track.


    The Government is signalling its intention to slash the price of imported electric and hybrid vehicles by up to $8000 in a bid to make greener cars cheaper for Kiwis

    Read more

  4. #2344
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Excellent Post JBMurc!
    Quote Originally Posted by JBmurc View Post
    It is an indictment of our education system
    This is the problem with poorly understood sciences that are then taught to impressionable people, by people that don't actually understand what they're saying.
    Quote Originally Posted by JBmurc View Post
    If we want our civilisation to survive, it is imperative that we manage finite resources (including fossil fuels) more carefully.Most politicians talk in terms of a few years’ time, or of caring for our children’s or grandchildren’s generation, but I’d prefer to think we can stay around a little longer than that.
    Human civilisation as we know it has been around perhaps 10,000 years, so let’s start by making sure we can survive for at least another 10,000 years. And why not a million years or more?
    Which means we must stop polluting the oceans, stop overfishing, find more sustainable sources of electricity and control population growth.
    My thoughts EXACTLY!

    If anyone is interested and wants to learn somethings go listen to the Joe Rogan podcast on Youtube with a guy called Randall Carlson https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0Cp7DrvNLQ&t=848s . That one in particular is some good graphs from 16min 30 sec, which show clearly the climate extremes the planet has experienced before. Then listen to the rest of his podcasts with Joe, then go listen to the rest of Joe Rogans podcasts (he has some ridiculously interesting guests on, particularly the scientists, Brian Cox, Neil Degrasse Tyson etc)

  5. #2345
    Update Ready To Install
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Floating Anchor Shoals
    Posts
    7,920

    Default

    Splitting hairs imo. at least we are agreed we have to reduce our carbon footprint, reduce pollution etc etc. and activists are usually needed to wake people up and force them to look outside their self bubbles.

  6. #2346
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshuatree View Post
    Splitting hairs imo. at least we are agreed we have to reduce our carbon footprint, reduce pollution etc etc. and activists are usually needed to wake people up and force them to look outside their self bubbles.
    The importance is because, to get anyone to change you need to go about it in the right way. If your main push is that 'man made CO2 is causing global warming' you only have to provide scientific evidence of climate change prior to man producing CO2 and your entire argument is dead.
    IMO the main focus should be on the environment, not on the climate. Because people do not care about the climate, but no one wants to live in a polluted environment. And for any REAL change to happen the world needs to work together to assist developing nations, which is impossible under the current regimes of nationalism.

  7. #2347
    Update Ready To Install
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Floating Anchor Shoals
    Posts
    7,920

    Default

    Whatever gets us there is ok with me but i will stick with fact based evidence of Human induced global warming. A two pronged attack sounds great.

  8. #2348
    The past is practise. Vaygor1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northland
    Posts
    906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshuatree View Post
    This looks to help with reduction, may need tweaking a bit but def on the right track.


    The Government is signalling its intention to slash the price of imported electric and hybrid vehicles by up to $8000 in a bid to make greener cars cheaper for Kiwis

    Read more
    So the government now legislating to force those who are doing what is right (buying petrol/diesel driven cars) to subsidise those who are deluded enough to purchase a transport mode so inefficient it cant sustain itself without said subsidy.

  9. #2349
    Guru
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Sth Island. New Zealand.
    Posts
    4,551

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vaygor1 View Post
    So the government now legislating to force those who are doing what is right (buying petrol/diesel driven cars) to subsidise those who are deluded enough to purchase a transport mode so inefficient it cant sustain itself without said subsidy.
    Have you ever stood at an intersection in Tokyo, L.A, Jakarta or any other big cities? That shows you the huge advantage of EVs. Furthermore they certainly are efficient enough to sustain themselves. Currently there are huge costs associated with the IP. But once production is another year or so down the track they should be cheaper than ICE autos. When you think of an ICE having a heavy block and head, a crankshaft, pistons, valves, cams, flywheel, an oil sump and pump, all sorts of seals and gaskets, complex cooling system, electronic ignition system, and needing to transmit through a complex gear system - then compare it to an armature and a few field windings in a simple housing, you might see an advantage in an EV. not just in production but in running costs and reliability. None of which is to say I think the govt. should subsidise them, because I don't think they should.

  10. #2350
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Mid of Middle_earth
    Posts
    782

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshuatree View Post
    Splitting hairs imo. at least we are agreed we have to reduce our carbon footprint, reduce pollution etc etc. and activists are usually needed to wake people up and force them to look outside their self bubbles.
    What turn people off is when so called activists call it "global warming" and then change it to "climate change" due to their argument fallacy. Climate changes of course, dah!

  11. #2351
    The past is practise. Vaygor1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northland
    Posts
    906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fungus pudding View Post
    Have you ever stood at an intersection in Tokyo, L.A, Jakarta or any other big cities? That shows you the huge advantage of EVs.
    No it doesn't. That is your perception.

    Quote Originally Posted by fungus pudding View Post
    Furthermore they certainly are efficient enough to sustain themselves. Currently there are huge costs associated with the IP. But once production is another year or so down the track they should be cheaper than ICE autos.
    No they won't be. The problem is the batteries, the huge cost of getting the ingredients to make them, and their limited lifetime.

    Quote Originally Posted by fungus pudding View Post
    When you think of an ICE having a heavy block and head, a crankshaft, pistons, valves, cams, flywheel, an oil sump and pump, all sorts of seals and gaskets, complex cooling system, electronic ignition system, and needing to transmit through a complex gear system - then compare it to an armature and a few field windings in a simple housing, you might see an advantage in an EV. not just in production but in running costs and reliability.
    All the above is required to make batteries and electricity. Electric cars that could go the same distance can an ICE vehicle are so heavy, they can't make them for general use.


    Quote Originally Posted by fungus pudding View Post
    None of which is to say I think the govt. should subsidise them, because I don't think they should.
    Agreed. Governments meddling with market forces is seldom successful.

  12. #2352
    Guru
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Sth Island. New Zealand.
    Posts
    4,551

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vaygor1 View Post
    No it doesn't. That is your perception.
    Tell that to the traffic points-men in Tokyo who have to wear oxygen gas masks while on duty. There are heaps of examples where the concentration of exhaust gases makes breathing difficult. Something fortunately not a problem in our own country - spend a week in Beijing. The worst I have struck, surprisingly, is Orlando.

  13. #2353
    The past is practise. Vaygor1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northland
    Posts
    906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fungus pudding View Post
    Tell that to the traffic points-men in Tokyo who have to wear oxygen gas masks while on duty. There are heaps of examples where the concentration of exhaust gases makes breathing difficult. Something fortunately not a problem in our own country - spend a week in Beijing. The worst I have struck, surprisingly, is Orlando.
    The worst I spent was in Bangkok in 1995. You could stare at the sun all day without hurting your eyes such was the haze, all the locals wearing wet rags across their mouths to breath. Many people throwing up (including myself) at every intersection every day. But Bangkok now has crystal blue skies almost every day and hardly any e-vehicles. I lived there for 3 years around 2010 and have been back regularly ever since. Around 2004 to 2007 I used to go to Beijing often for work and it was always incredibly clear blue skies (and very cold as i invariably went in winter).

    I was in Bangkok in May and June this year. Skies there are definitely clearer than Sydney's. I think the oxygen masks you refer to in Japan (if true.. are you sure they weren't just filters?.. did they have an oxygen tank on their backs?) are more of an HSE thing required to take all practicable steps. I was in downtown Tokyo last year and didn't see any masks.

    Maybe it's just the nasty by-products produced by making batteries is heaver than air and/or out of town. Also out of town will be enormous amount of coal-fired power stations to produce enough electricity to run this e-vehicle_for_everybody_fantasy were all having.

  14. #2354
    Update Ready To Install
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Floating Anchor Shoals
    Posts
    7,920

    Default

    Batteries will get cheaper and are i think. Nickel can replace cobalt , i think Tesla are looking at buying their own nickel mine etc. Lithium will get cheaper, as more facilities start up(takes quite a few years) replacement metals will be found, batteries can be reconditioned.Ive seen Leafs and/or prius's advertised with them etc, etc.

    Currently EV's use is best in suburban, short around town use which is how many/most are used; for shopping, kids to school, getting to work. Leafs are great family sized cars.

    Leafs have a 5 star ANCAP safety rating.
    Last edited by Joshuatree; 15-07-2019 at 09:59 PM.

  15. #2355
    The past is practise. Vaygor1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northland
    Posts
    906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshuatree View Post
    Batteries will get cheaper and are i think. Nickel can replace cobalt , i think Tesla are looking at buying their own nickel mine etc. Lithium will get cheaper, as more facilities start up(takes quite a few years) replacement metals will be found, batteries can be reconditioned.Ive seen Leafs and/or prius's advertised with them etc, etc.

    Currently EV's use is best in suburban, short around town use which is how many/most are used; for shopping, kids to school, getting to work. Leafs are great family sized cars.

    Leafs have a 5 star ANCAP safety rating.
    Nice to see the 5-Star rating. There's really no excuse for anything less these days on any type of vehicle.

    With only a tiny uptake of e-vehicles (percentage wise) in the world to-date, the demand on Cobalt and Nickel doubled last year.
    So double the demand in a year without doubling the amount of nickel mines, and prices will go down?
    Somehow get rid of child slavery/labour and dangerous practises used for mining in the Congo where 2/3 of the worlds Cobalt supply come from and prices will go down?

    However one looks at it, the answer is to mine and mine and mine and mine, and then mine some more.

    References:
    https://smallcaps.com.au/cobalt-supp...iolations-drc/
    https://www.argusmedia.com/en/news/1...-cobalt-nickel

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •