Early Risers.

[Ozexpatriate]

2 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

XXXXXian propaganda

It goes back much further than that. 

 

I've mentioned it before but under their "Frontline" banner PBS aired a three-part documentary called "The Power of Big Oil".

 

I don't know if you can see it in the UK but it is excellent.

 

The reporting was based, in part, on the technical archives of Exxon-Mobil being transferred to the University of Texas, laying bare the extent of the corporation's predictions of climate change due to the use of fossil fuels in the late 1970s, their experiments using their fleet of company oil tankers to measure ocean temperature to test their hypotheses and their investments in alternatives to fossil fuels.

 

The data was conclusive as early as 1982.

 

All this ended with a change in executive management. The documentary details the subsequent manipulation of politicians (they name names) and the intentional disinformation campaigns to muddle published science that the company, from their own now cancelled and buried research knew was accurate. The documentary includes interviews with consultants who produced the disinformation. As consultants they admitted that they did what all consultants do - say what their patron (Exxon-Mobil) paid them to say.

[figworthy]

15 hours ago, polybear said:

The dreaded G & E Bill dropped thru' the letterbox arrived in the Inbox earlier; seems a Certain Bear scoffed an extra 1/3rd of a Deltic last month, mainly thru' exploits carried out in the muddlin' room.  Beary Conclusion?  Shivverin' has a lot going for it....

 

 

 

Pity Bear doesn't have a decent fur coat he can wear.

 

Oh, hang on ...

 

Adrian

[Tony_S]

1 hour ago, Ozexpatriate said:

I've mentioned it before but under their "Frontline" banner PBS aired a three-part documentary called "The Power of Big Oil".

 

I don't know if you can see it in the UK but it is excellent.

It doesn’t seem to be available on the PBS America channel here. A search  for “Big Oil” on their UK website just returns a documentary about ”The  Big Red One”.

[Ozexpatriate]

5 minutes ago, Tony_S said:

It doesn’t seem to be available on the PBS America channel here

Does the link even resolve to the US landing page (pbs.org)?

 

It first aired in 2022, so it's not 'new'.

 

I imagine you could fake it out with a VPN but that's a lot of trouble. I have the same issue when people post links to BBC iPlayer. I can't see them either. 

[monkeysarefun]

9 hours ago, Hroth said:

Now I appreciate that Top Gear is an entertainment programme, nothing is done scientifically and that Clarkson hams it up for the camera, but one of their stunts was to drive a diesel Audi A8 from London to Edinburgh, and back (800 miles), on one tank of fuel, which was apparently achieved. Then there was the Basel to Blackpool stunt, where Clarkson drove a diesel Jaguar X358 on the proverbial one tank without any particular economy tactics for most of the journey.

 

In my 2L diesel (not the 6L ute!)  I've done Sydney to Walkerville in Sth East Victoria, then into Melbourne and still had enough in the tank for 2 days driving around Melbourne, all up I'd done just under 1200km  (745 miles). On the return journey took the scenic coastal route which is  hilly  and winding and stop-start through towns  but still managed another 1000km before refuelling, so those distances are achievable.

 

 

 

 

10 hours ago, PupCam said:

  I've got a little test for us.   I'll go and stick a screwdriver through the side of a tank of diesel, you can stick a screw driver into the side of a Lithium battery.   Good luck ....

 

Theres plenty of youtube videos showing Teslas off-road, none of them mention  - probably because the amateur car-experts who make them  have not  thought it through  -  that the whole bottom of their car that is mm above the bumps and sharp rocks they are filming is a lithium battery...

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not anti-EV per se. Actually, on a national outlook , they are a good thing -  we have  6.3million tonnes of LIthium so far discovered here . The export of these and other mineral sands needed for batteries and high-tech products will replace coal as a major export as  that winds down.

 

Also we are continually "threatened"  that due to a low-uptake of EV's we will become a dumping ground of cheap ICE cars as manufacturers get locked out of other markets due to regulations banning them. I have the colour of my Aston Martin chosen already.

 

They have their place where distances are short and charging is plentiful. It is annoying though that they are pushed here as a suitable replacement for every ICE car, no matter where you live, how far you drive etc.

 

I blame the previous PM, who's government was proudly climate-change sceptical, he claimed that EV's would "Ruin the weekend" because no one would be able to drive to getaway destinations. This became a challenge to many EV owners , who then went out of their way to get their EV's to remote areas and hashtag it #ruintheweekend, so the myth that they can do everything and go everywhere just as easily as a petrol or diesel car can was  born! 

Edited December 16, 2023 by monkeysarefun

[Tony_S]

15 minutes ago, Ozexpatriate said:

Does the link even resolve to the US landing page (pbs.org)?

 

It first aired in 2022, so it's not 'new'.

 

I imagine you could fake it out with a VPN but that's a lot of trouble. I have the same issue when people post links to BBC iPlayer. I can't see them either. 

It finds the page but video is not available. The trailer plays though. 

Edited December 16, 2023 by Tony_S

[Ozexpatriate]

13 minutes ago, Tony_S said:

It finds the page but video is not available.

I was afraid of that.

 

YouTube to the rescue. (This is the link to part 1. I see part 2 on the side bar. There are three parts.)

 

Edited December 16, 2023 by Ozexpatriate

[Tony_S]

2 minutes ago, Ozexpatriate said:

I was afraid of that.

 

YouTube to the rescue. (This is the link to part 1. I see part 2 on the side bar. There are three parts.)

 

Unfortunately not. I must have a play with the vpn included with my security package, though reviews suggest it isn’t very good!

[monkeysarefun]

9 hours ago, polybear said:

 

 

 

Easily fixed, demand  Australian   Lithium in your next  electrical car!  

 

 

 

 

Edited December 16, 2023 by monkeysarefun

[Ozexpatriate]

53 minutes ago, monkeysarefun said:

They have their place where distances are short and charging is plentiful. It is annoying though that they are pushed here as a suitable replacement for every ICE car, no matter where you live, how far you drive etc.

They are a disruptive technology.

 

The automobile was a disruptive technology. At the outset it wasn't even clear that the internal combustion engine would "win". There were widely available steam powered automobiles (Stanley steamer) and electric traction versions.

 

The argument about EV chargers reminds me of the early days of internal combustion automobiles. There were no petrol / gasoline stations. Car owners had to go the chemist to get kerosene. We've had more than a century of optimizing infrastructure for fuel chemistry, manufacture, delivery and safe-handling.

 

There weren't even suitable roads when automobiles first appeared. Road engineering like bridges, road beds, surfacing was all necessary.

 

The tribulations of the US Army transcontinental Motor Transport Corps Convoy in 1919 are illustrative - breakdowns, dust, mud, failing bridges were all part of the trip. It took them 62 days to cover 3,251 miles and the expedition was manned by 24 officers and 258 enlisted men. An average progress of about 4 mph (based on 12 hours per day). Pretty major compared with a little range anxiety in an EV today.

 

The hallmark of disruptive technology is that it is usually inferior to the incumbent solution when it is introduced - outlined in Clayton Christensen's "The Innovators Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail".

 

Decades from now many of the limitations of EVs will have been eliminated by technical evolutions - just like they were for internal combustion engines - like automatic starter motors for example.

 

Edited December 16, 2023 by Ozexpatriate

[Barry O]

3 hours ago, PhilJ W said:

Hello again from Estuary-Land. I see that we produced 40% of our electricity from renewables last year, a 5% increase on 2021. https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/explainers/how-much-do-renewables-contribute-to-the-uks-energy-mix-and-what-policies-support-their-expansion/#:~:text=In 2022%2C 40% – a, in 2022 after gas.

Still a long way behind countries such as France but better than many.

https://yearbook.enerdata.net/renewables/renewable-in-electricity-production-share.html

Yep... France has a lot of nuclear power stations  and is not afraid of them....

Baz

[PhilJ W]

6 minutes ago, Barry O said:

Yep... France has a lot of nuclear power stations  and is not afraid of them....

Baz

Noted, but those on the top of the list nearly all have hydroelectric power. Also there are new technologies being tested such as tidal power. 

https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/how-tidal-range-and-tidal-stream-projects-could-play-a-key-role-in-uk-energy-mix-03-02-2023/

[PhilJ W]

Goodnight all.

[Winslow Boy]

3 minutes ago, PhilJ W said:

Noted, but those on the top of the list nearly all have hydroelectric power. Also there are new technologies being tested such as tidal power. 

https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/how-tidal-range-and-tidal-stream-projects-could-play-a-key-role-in-uk-energy-mix-03-02-2023/

The french have had tidal power for yonks 40 years plus. I remember being shown round one in the late seventies.

[Tony_S]

8 minutes ago, Winslow Boy said:

The french have had tidal power for yonks 40 years plus. I remember being shown round one in the late seventies.

Used for centuries in East London, not to produce electricity though. 

[polybear]

Bear here.....

 

Up at silly o'clock - cards delivered to neighbours, then more posted & milk from the Co-op....all by 0740 am.

After that it was the joy of clearing all the receipts I've managed to collect over the past couple of months against CC Statements in order to make sure that no little scrote has managed to bill me for stuff I've never had (it happened once, many years ago but a quick call to the CC Company soon had me refunded).

I've also ordered a new CC from a different company but have still to tell the current bunch (who stopped sending paper statements) to p0ke theirs - tomorrow maybe, if they "do" Sundays.

 

Apart from that it's been yet more 'plottin.....one paw forwards, one paw back......

 

BG

[PhilJ W]

14 minutes ago, Winslow Boy said:

The french have had tidal power for yonks 40 years plus. I remember being shown round one in the late seventies.

 

4 minutes ago, Tony_S said:

Used for centuries in East London, not to produce electricity though. 

On the East Anglian coast there was several tide mills. The one at Woodbridge (Suffolk) is still working.

https://woodbridgetidemill.org.uk/

[monkeysarefun]

3 hours ago, Ozexpatriate said:

 @Compound2632's ( Stephen's ) Grauniad link did the maths - so did EV FireSafe apparently:

So internal combustion motor vehicle fires are 8x more likely - according to the data presented.

 

But what does "More likely" mean? In the event of an accident? Just  bursting into flames for  no reason?

 

I have seen a VW burst into flames on the road behind here, it was caused by the battery being under the back seat, contact with the metal seat frame caused the issue. If you think of it there are thousands of similar design faults in a car fleet that stretches back over a hundred years.

 

  These statistics are comparing EV's designed with the aid of  over a hundred years of design and engineering experience , built  with the latest  materials and safety regulations with an insane variety of cars built over  the last 40 or more years,  many of which have been subsequently repaired or "modified" by enthusiastic owners with less than desirable skill. They are operated in all climates,  can be loaded far beyond the manufacturers specifications, and often go un-maintained for much of their life. I'm surprised more of them don't  burst into flames, frankly!

Edited December 16, 2023 by monkeysarefun

[Erichill16]

Still knackered, Goodnight 

[monkeysarefun]

We hit 35.9% renewables last year but we have been hampered by essentially 10 years of inaction (2013 - 2022) by the previous government who went out of their way to find everything they could to prevent its uptake. Including downright misleading claims, like when a major storm in South Australia caused widespread blackouts they placed the  blame   on "renewables" failing, despite the SA government showing   photos of the pylon network that had been destroyed by the winds, thus cutting the supply - nothing to do with the generation side. 

Edited December 16, 2023 by monkeysarefun

[monkeysarefun]

1 hour ago, Ozexpatriate said:

There weren't even suitable roads when automobiles first appeared. Road engineering like bridges, road beds, surfacing was all necessary.

 

 

 

That the OTHER thing about EV drivers here !

 

Not slow in bragging about how much money they've saved by not buying petrol, but ask them for the 46% of that that the government would have  got in order to spend on the roads they are driving on etc and they have a sook.

Edited December 16, 2023 by monkeysarefun

[BSW01]

Goodnight all 

[Andy Hayter]

1 hour ago, PhilJ W said:

Noted, but those on the top of the list nearly all have hydroelectric power. Also there are new technologies being tested such as tidal power. 

https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/how-tidal-range-and-tidal-stream-projects-could-play-a-key-role-in-uk-energy-mix-03-02-2023/

 

But given the hoo-ha over building a short bit of rail line between London and just north of Birmingham, can you not see the problems of flooding  valleys all over the country?   Some of the more obvious candidates in England (Yorkshire and Derbyshire dales) would rule themselves out by virtue of the limestone rock, which would provide massive leaks to any storage facility.

[zarniwhoop]

2 hours ago, Ozexpatriate said:

Decades from now many of the limitations of EVs will have been eliminated by technical evolutions - just like they were for internal combustion engines - like automatic starter motors for example.

Great news for those who will be alive decades from now (assuming, of course, that anyone is).

 

Me, I'm still in the "if I wanted to go there, I wouldn't start from here" camp. Nothing against combatting global warming, but severely p155ed off by the musk fan bois (he was described re his destruction of another company as Xitler, with X pronounced as 'sh') and those who think that one size fits all, or who want to limit everyone's mobility.

 

For myself, when I had a passport I could drive (in summer) from home, via the motorways, to the chunnel, and then either to Luxembourg or to Burgundy before I needed to fill up my diesel. But I have to stop every 2 hours to check my blood sugar (a condition of having a licence while being an insulin user). If I tried to combine that with electric chargers, probably every 200 miles, I would never go anywhere distant. The links to various Grauniad articles a few hours ago included one to a letter in Saturday's paper - from somebody who has a leccy car but suffers range anxiety because for a lot of chargers he has to pre-register with the company and by the sound of it make an initial payment and have other data recorded.

 

And don't get me started on the needs for new HV cabling, or for charging points. In the californian gold rush the main winners were those who supplied the picks and shovels. For EVs, those who can provide the HV cables will probably be the ones who make money out of it.

[jjb1970]

8 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

One thinks of ERs as being generally from an engineering or technical background. It is surprising to find so many apparently duped by Trumpian propaganda rather than seeking to look at the question of EVs in a rational, scientific manner. 

 

It's too easy to blame the orange man, Oxexpatriate has already highlighted that attitudes around continued use of fossil fuel and alternative energy scepticism go back many decades. Trump was just reciting the nonsense he'd been programmed to believe by decades of very slick lobbying and promotion. Trump was an odious ass and reprehensible in many ways, but in many policy areas his real sin was saying the quiet bit out loud (staying in the bit of Syria with oil rather than to bring them some democracy as other Presidents would have tried was a classic example) or being too crass about things. Behind a veneer of saying the right thing in public the Obama administration wasn't a green one. And it's not just the US, the developed world in general refused to act on warnings about the environmental damage of combusting fossil fuels and continued business as usual behind a bit of flowery window dressing about reducing emissions. I really can't condemn anyone for reflecting several decades of extremely professional marketing to retain the status quo, it's probably a big part of why young people are much more passionate about the issue as quite aside from the natural tendency of young people to want to change the world they don't carry all that baggage.