Oil and the future

Skybird · 03-13-22, 11:01 AM

Nothing wrong in going electircal, I only strongly queston the strategy run by now to get maintain "electromobility", which imo is probaly the stupidiest way in which it could be done. I also question the strong trend for planned economy, and centralised command economy that comes dressed as "ecology friendly" and "electricty-supportive" policy.

We also should be honest, electromobility is not free of ecological costs either. Mining some of the base ressources needed for producing batteries and electric sysstem and cars and engines, is amongst the dirtiest businesses we run. The calculations the advertsising shows to convince sceptics of how much better it is, ecologoically, than gas-driven cars, are very questionable imo, and to say they do not convince me would be an understatement.

You want to reduce mankind's ecological footprint it leaves on the planet? Start with realising that there are too man consumers of thigns and stuff.

WE ARE TOO MANY (tm).

A global population not bigger than 1 to 1.5 billion, maximum. Not before then does it make sense to talk about real longterm strategies. 8 Billion? 12? 14 billion? Forget it.

Kapitan · 03-13-22, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

Nothing wrong in going electircal, I only strongly queston the strategy run by now to get maintain "electromobility", which imo is probaly the stupidiest way in which it could be done. I also question the strong trend for planned economy, and centralised command economy that comes dressed as "ecology friendly" and "electricty-supportive" policy.

We also should be honest, electromobility is not free of ecological costs either. Mining some of the base ressources needed for producing batteries and electric sysstem and cars and engines, is amongst the dirtiest businesses we run. The calculations the advertsising shows to convince sceptics of how much better it is, ecologoically, than gas-driven cars, are very questionable imo, and to say they do not convince me would be an understatement.

You want to reduce mankind's ecological footprint it leaves on the planet? Start with realising that there are too man consumers of thigns and stuff.

WE ARE TOO MANY (tm).

A global population not bigger than 1 to 1.5 billion, maximum. Not before then does it make sense to talk about real longterm strategies. 8 Billion? 12? 14 billion? Forget it.

Indeed you raise some good points here with electro mobility, Id also point out how would the increased demand for electricity be met with the current network and infrastructure.

Also with many grids operating close to 100% at peak times could the current network sustain the extra capacity?

What fuels would the generation plant use to create this extra power? seems to me that wind solar and hydro would be sufficient so would we in this case go nuclear?

Rockstar · 03-15-22, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapitan

Indeed you raise some good points here with electro mobility, Id also point out how would the increased demand for electricity be met with the current network and infrastructure.

Also with many grids operating close to 100% at peak times could the current network sustain the extra capacity?

What fuels would the generation plant use to create this extra power? seems to me that wind solar and hydro would be sufficient so would we in this case go nuclear?

It’s possible the concern for increased demand for electricity will be met with advances in new tech. For instance Toyota is investing quite heavily in hydrogen fuel cells. If perfected the future of the electric car could face the same fate as the Betamax cassette.

mapuc · 03-15-22, 05:53 PM

This was in our news today

Quote:

With a new initiative, the government will boost the production and consumption of green fuels, which can be used for ship engines, trucks, aircraft and in industry, and not least for export. Denmark has particularly good conditions for producing green fuel, and is now entering the race for sustainable substitutes for coal and oil. Denmark will aim to build 4 to 6 GW PtX capacity in 2030.

https://ens-dk.translate.goog/presse..._x_tr_pto=wapp

Markus

03-13-22, 11:01 AM	#1
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,754 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Nothing wrong in going electircal, I only strongly queston the strategy run by now to get maintain "electromobility", which imo is probaly the stupidiest way in which it could be done. I also question the strong trend for planned economy, and centralised command economy that comes dressed as "ecology friendly" and "electricty-supportive" policy. We also should be honest, electromobility is not free of ecological costs either. Mining some of the base ressources needed for producing batteries and electric sysstem and cars and engines, is amongst the dirtiest businesses we run. The calculations the advertsising shows to convince sceptics of how much better it is, ecologoically, than gas-driven cars, are very questionable imo, and to say they do not convince me would be an understatement. You want to reduce mankind's ecological footprint it leaves on the planet? Start with realising that there are too man consumers of thigns and stuff. WE ARE TOO MANY (tm). A global population not bigger than 1 to 1.5 billion, maximum. Not before then does it make sense to talk about real longterm strategies. 8 Billion? 12? 14 billion? *Forget it.* __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.