TheSamba.com :: View topic

Wed Dec 07, 2022 4:49 pm

Onceler wrote: https://www.iea.org/news/renewable-power-s-growth-...y-security

Text from article:

Quote: The global energy crisis has triggered unprecedented momentum behind renewables, with the world set to add as much renewable power in the next 5 years as it did in the past 20
Quote: Utility-scale solar PV and onshore wind are the cheapest options for new electricity generation in a significant majority of countries worldwide. Global solar PV capacity is set to almost triple over the 2022-2027 period, surpassing coal and becoming the largest source of power capacity in the world.
hopefully the estimated rate of increase is on the low side. EV's will be emitting less and less CO2 as time goes on.
Be careful what you wish for. Articles like this are very misleading. Notice they use the term "renewable" power, not "wind and solar" power. Wind and solar are high on the list for common sources of renewable power, but wood, landfill gas and dung are also on that list. So is hydroelectric, which might not produce much CO2, but has a HUGE negative impact on the environment. So when they say the use of "renewables" is going to increase dramatically in the coming years, do they mean solar farms and windmills? Or do they mean people are gonna start chopping down trees, damming up rivers, and burning feces to heat their homes and charge their EV's? Probably a little (or a lot) of both.

Also, claims of beating out coal as a source of energy sound like a big deal, but coal isn't really used to generate as much power as you might think. In the US, coal generates only about 2% more electricity than nuclear; natural gas is by far the largest source of energy.

Mickey bitsko wrote: I had no idea we have a global energy shortage.. and we're just learning this..gov.expert. . .
We don't.

What we have is a global distribution of energy shortage . . . and it's entirely self-inflicted.

Wed Dec 07, 2022 5:16 pm

Xevin wrote: The UK says “Yes” to a new coal mine. That’s forward thinking :wink:
Why would they do that :-k

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/dec/0...in-cumbria
finster wrote: jeez don't take anything that the uk is doing at the moment as guidance or a good example of anything. nothing makes sense...

"The mine will also produce an estimated 400,000 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions a year, increasing the UK’s emissions by the equivalent of putting 200,000 cars on the road.
The vast majority of the coal produced will be for export, as most UK steel producers have rejected the use of the coal, which is high in sulphur and surplus to their needs."

but hey - 500 jobs... :roll:
Actually, according to the article, that coal isn't going to be used for power generation; it's not even going to be used in the UK. It's going to be exported to other countries for steel production. Here's my favorite paragraph from that article:

"Where these exports will go is uncertain, as most European steelmakers are turning away from the use of coal and adopting green methods such as electric arc furnaces and renewable energy."

Gee, I wonder what they're gonna use to generate the power for those electric arc furnaces . . .

And don't let that "equivalent of putting 200,000 cars on the road" bit worry you. Let's put that number into proper perspective, shall we? I just looked this up a few days ago: Minnesota's 19 ethanol distilleries (you know, ethanol, the stuff we're putting in our fuel to reduce CO2 emissions) are pumping nearly DOUBLE that amount of CO2 into the air every year. And that only represents about 5% of the total CO2 produced by the rest of Minnesota's top 100 greenhouse producing industries (in other words, just the top 100 polluters in the state of Minnesota are producing the CO2 equivalent of 7 million cars every year)!

200,000 cars? Shoot, is that the best you can do?

Wed Dec 07, 2022 5:16 pm

I don't for a minute think there's energy shortage,
Didn't believe it when Jimmy Carter was president either.

I keep forgetting to bring hydroelectric into the conversation.
I know there's more than a few Canadian members on here that are knowledgeable about hydroelectric that operates around Vancouver Island,
Why doesn't the US use this technology on the California coast,
How dirty can it be... I mean the process..

Wed Dec 07, 2022 5:37 pm

Mickey bitsko wrote: .............I keep forgetting to bring hydroelectric into the conversation. ............
How dirty can it be... I mean the process..
It's not dirty in any way, the hurdle is the millions of acres of "Traditional Aboriginal land" it floods, and the small towns and farms that also seem to spring up along river valleys. The negotiation, permits and land aquisition takes decades and billions before a single shovel hits the ground. A couple hundred acres for a nuke plant is a piece of cake in comparison, but I'm sure the "rent a crowd" army of protesters would be gluing themselves to things over one of those too.

Wed Dec 07, 2022 5:42 pm

oprn wrote: Mickey bitsko wrote: I don't have any idea what the ingredients are in unleaded gas but logic tells me that natural gas would burn cleaner than ul fuel.. idk
Skills, you're probably right, no money in it.
I have no idea either, all I know is the exhaust from unleaded fuel stinks really really bad!
I'm glad you guys brought this up, because this is something I've always wanted to brag about, but never had the right opportunity.

The latest engine I built for my car is very efficient (approaching 39%). One of the most interesting collateral effects I've noticed is how clean the exhaust smells, almost like I'm burning propane instead of E10. The exhaust ports and the exhaust header have almost no carbon deposits inside them, even after nearly 50,000 miles.

Just thought I'd throw that out there.

Wed Dec 07, 2022 6:02 pm

busdaddy wrote: Mickey bitsko wrote: .............I keep forgetting to bring hydroelectric into the conversation. ............
How dirty can it be... I mean the process..
It's not dirty in any way, the hurdle is the millions of acres of "Traditional Aboriginal land" it floods, and the small towns and farms that also seem to spring up along river valleys. The negotiation, permits and land aquisition takes decades and billions before a single shovel hits the ground. A couple hundred acres for a nuke plant is a piece of cake in comparison, but I'm sure the "rent a crowd" army of protesters would be gluing themselves to things over one of those too.

Red tape all .gov, all about THE MONEY, ... not people and not green..MONEY.!

Wed Dec 07, 2022 7:07 pm

I live five miles from a small town ,Thunder Bay River runs right threw it ,Dam with Pond had a Hydroelectric Plant when I was young,It ran the whole town,,, It was removed and never replaced, The River flows east and I counted at least 3 more Plants non working,, :? Sad

Wed Dec 07, 2022 7:23 pm

Mickey bitsko wrote: busdaddy wrote: Mickey bitsko wrote: .............I keep forgetting to bring hydroelectric into the conversation. ............
How dirty can it be... I mean the process..
It's not dirty in any way, the hurdle is the millions of acres of "Traditional Aboriginal land" it floods, and the small towns and farms that also seem to spring up along river valleys. The negotiation, permits and land aquisition takes decades and billions before a single shovel hits the ground. A couple hundred acres for a nuke plant is a piece of cake in comparison, but I'm sure the "rent a crowd" army of protesters would be gluing themselves to things over one of those too.

Red tape all .gov, all about THE MONEY, ... not people and not green..MONEY.!
Absolutely!, the most plausible theory from the tin foil hat crowd is all the protest groups and their lawyers are funded by US oil interests in some third party donor way, kind of makes sense since their best interest is to cripple Canada's resource industry so they can maintain market share. It's difficult to prove them wrong.

BC did allow some small privately run dam projects ~20 years ago, sadly they too have gotten greedy and have to make the board of directors happy, fish are suffering due to reduced stream flows in some cases. I'm all for using a river to make power and money, but I also like fish and fishing, something has to come first even if it means reduced profits in drought years.

Wed Dec 07, 2022 7:23 pm

Floating vw , you don't have a Catletic Converter, that what makes them smell :roll: ,plus you got a 'Good Tune' on the motor :wink:

Wed Dec 07, 2022 8:38 pm

busdaddy wrote: Mickey bitsko wrote: busdaddy wrote: Mickey bitsko wrote: .............I keep forgetting to bring hydroelectric into the conversation. ............
How dirty can it be... I mean the process..
It's not dirty in any way, the hurdle is the millions of acres of "Traditional Aboriginal land" it floods, and the small towns and farms that also seem to spring up along river valleys. The negotiation, permits and land aquisition takes decades and billions before a single shovel hits the ground. A couple hundred acres for a nuke plant is a piece of cake in comparison, but I'm sure the "rent a crowd" army of protesters would be gluing themselves to things over one of those too.

Red tape all .gov, all about THE MONEY, ... not people and not green..MONEY.!
Absolutely!, the most plausible theory from the tin foil hat crowd is all the protest groups and their lawyers are funded by US oil interests in some third party donor way, kind of makes sense since their best interest is to cripple Canada's resource industry so they can maintain market share. It's difficult to prove them wrong.

BC did allow some small privately run dam projects ~20 years ago, sadly they too have gotten greedy and have to make the board of directors happy, fish are suffering due to reduced stream flows in some cases. I'm all for using a river to make power and money, but I also like fish and fishing, something has to come first even if it means reduced profits in drought years.

I was commenting on the hydroelectric technology that use tide flow, I thought there were hydroelectric generators in the straits, Vancouver Island?

Wed Dec 07, 2022 9:48 pm

Mickey bitsko wrote: I was commenting on the hydroelectric technology that use tide flow, I thought there were hydroelectric generators in the straits, Vancouver Island?
Not that I've ever heard of, the bay of Fundy on the East coast of Canada has some drastic tidal swings and I've heard of proposed power generation using it, around here the tide only changes 3-4 feet, pretty minor.

Wed Dec 07, 2022 10:45 pm

Mickey bitsko wrote: I don't for a minute think there's energy shortage,
Didn't believe it when Jimmy Carter was president either.

there isn't

there is however a common sense shortage. until each and every greenie spins their own yarn, hunts their own food and walks everywhere they can eat shit.

Don't think for a split second the UK won't be the first one to use a nugget of coal if they need it, and they will.

Speaking of coal, these greenies can also fuck off and probably haven't even heard of Centralia Pennsylvania which has been burning coal underground for over 50 years, with an estimated burn time remaining of over 250 YEARS So this burn is going on unchecked, no emissions controls in place and I have to rub my feet across the rug to generate electricity or blow on a windmill?

Seems to me to be an epic waste and really should be looked into. If it's going to burn for 250+ years doing NO work at all, we may as well harvest the power and use it. But, that makes too much sense....

They are looking to DOUBLE our rates here from 0.12kWh to 0.24kWh. you don't think for a minute Stop and Shop, Wal-Mart, Home Deopt- basically every business isn't going to go up on EVERYTHING to literally keep the lights on?

I can literally drive around town here and there were old hydroelectric 'plants' inside a lot of these old mills once they got away from water wheels powering their places and switched to electricity.

Being on the east coast and the home of the industrial revolution it's mind-blowing to me that the infrastructure that has been in place for over 100 years now isn't being used for hydroelectric generation.

One local mill had a wild setup where they not only powered the mill, but 4 towns. It was a pretty cool setup that SHOULD be used today. but isn't

Centralia edit:

just found another article that claims a 500 YEAR burn estimate:

The fires underneath Centralia were estimated to burn for at least 500 years if not more

https://www.thetravel.com/what-centralia-looks-like-today-can-you-visit/

Thu Dec 08, 2022 12:01 am

Bwahahahaha :lol:

what a joke

the tips from ford are great...use your seat heater instead of your HVAC. this will be fantastic in a sleet/freezing rain situation.

overpriced garbage. born to lose and destined to fail

Thu Dec 08, 2022 5:33 am

This just in:

We're being lied to about electric vehicles.

https://www.motortrend.com/features/truth-about-electric-cars-ad-why-you-are-being-lied-to/

Thu Dec 08, 2022 6:15 am

quote - Cobalt mining relies largely on slave labor, if not child slave labor. Actually, that last part is sadly true.

Thu Dec 08, 2022 7:56 am

Your concern for the children of the Congo is touching.

Hopefully as increased scrutiny is brought to bear by EV snobs abuses will lessen.

In the meantime I'm more worried about the children of Idaho:

https://www.npr.org/2022/10/08/1127310649/in-idaho...is-opening

Thu Dec 08, 2022 9:21 am

Feel good words, " most of the mining will take place under ground, for less damage to surface water? " " geopolitically correct ", why is this political?
In the future there will be federal funding..
All this jibberish is the new definition of green.
How much kickback is the Idaho Governor getting.
I've gotten terribly cynical in my advanced age.

Thu Dec 08, 2022 9:29 am

steve244 wrote: This just in:
We're being lied to about electric vehicles.
https://www.motortrend.com/features/truth-about-electric-cars-ad-why-you-are-being-lied-to/

Thanks, that’s the kind of information I’m looking for. That doesn’t me I fully trust everything thing on the internet but it’s part of researching what is true and what is BS. Some good take aways in that article.

The article on the Idaho Cobalt mine is a let down. It’s great we can get a small fraction of Cobalt needed to be self sufficient and not rely on foreign countries. However we will send that Cobalt to Brazil for refining. Ugh. Not only are we relying on another country. We are transporting it back and forth to Brazil 6400 miles each way. Like our crude oil industry. It appears we will not be totally self sufficient even though we could be but the money and environmental cost is cheaper to farm it out to other countries. Side note. Canada deals with our nickel. This is how we do it.

Thu Dec 08, 2022 9:35 am

Mickey bitsko wrote: Feel good words, " most of the mining will take place under ground, for less damage to surface water? " " geopolitically correct ", why is this political?
In the future there will be federal funding..
All this jibberish is the new definition of green.
How much kickback is the Idaho Governor getting.
I've gotten terribly cynical in my advanced age.

It’s why we have terms like “Snake Oil”

Thu Dec 08, 2022 9:41 am

Mickey bitsko wrote: Feel good words, " most of the mining will take place under ground, for less damage to surface water? ".

that right there shows there WILL be damage to surface water, just less of it :roll:

but ground water (wells that people actually drink from) fuck that water, it's under ground.

That motortrend article sited every far left rag out there. Not one datapoint was made from a middle ground organization NPR? you couldn't get any further left than those folks

Like Xevin said, we are going to transport that Cobalt on diesel electric trains and ships running bunker oil. Still a joke....

funny how nobody wanted to touch my Centralia comments or the cold weather range issues. Trying to reason with most of the posters here is like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end