Will Electric Vehicles Be Viable? When?

[strad]

If you close your eyes you won´t see the evidence, but the evidence is there anycase, you´re only fooling yourself Strad

Works both ways Andre

[strad]

djos; I have said when they get all their ducks in a row I might consider an electric car.
But not because of AGW. I like the performance and smoothness. I like the instant full application of available power best. However I must be able to confidently drive from Seattle to Phoenix for example or to southern Texas. I have to be able to stop and charge up as quickly or close to as I would fill up with gasoline. I can't have to stop and wait an hour let alone 8 or more hours to continue my trip.

[V12-POWER]

The reason why me or the tougher-made people here don’t follow the masses are simple; we trust what we see and feel ourselves not some study or chart that has been specifically tailored to scare people awa in turn this puts pressure on car companies that must comply. All of this to get a very nice cut of money. I offered you a book, but you refused.

I live in Portugal, south of Europe and no, it doesn't belong to Spain, although many americans seem to think it is.
I remember to have 4 distinctive season along the year. Hot in the summer, cold in winter, autumn was when leaves started to fall from the trees, and in the spring flowers start to bloom in the fields.
Lately, i can have a day with 23ºC in the winter and sunny, or a 18ºC windy day with rain and hail in the summer. Leaves, started to fall almost in the winter and born again almost in the summer. I never saw a tornado and now almost every year there's a part of the country that occurs. In France, a few days ago, there was more than 30ºC in Paris, and hail falling in another place. This is what i see and trust. I DON'T LIVE INSIDE OF A SHELL. Maybe it's already late, but people are starting to change, and more and more i see people care about the environment.

Well, here we haven't had tornadoes too and few years ago there was one. But there is still no reason for me to say "CLIMATE CHANGE DID IT" because the last time it happened was well over 80 years ago. Weather and climate is way too complex for any computer to simulate much less to say a few PARTS PER MILLION of CO2 can have such severe impact, the atmosphere just can't be so "fragile" that an increase of 50ppm of CO2 will wreak havoc (that’s 0,000050%)

There are weather manipulating devices out there, why aren't they used to dissolve storms or potential threats I dont know, but the tech to avoid disasters is there.

Much better to the eyes is when you read about Milankovitch cycles and that explains some of the sharper and sudden seasons.

[Brake Horse Power]

The Milankonvitch cylce has a frequency of 26.000 years.. A climate change is now measured in a period of 100 years. Can you explain that?

Even tough the CO2 PPM doesn't seem that much, the CO2 in the atmosphere has risen 30% since the 1960's. That is much more a period which is in line with the climate change...

[roon]

well you lot need to accept the problem of increasing eg by 2000% the supply of zero-carbon electricity

it's gonna be too hard
better not try

There's that British fighting spirit that won the war. Good on ya, Tommy.

[Just_a_fan]

Fighting spirit won't build an entire EV-supporting zero-carbon infrastructure, sadly.

[izzy]

Weather and climate is way too complex for any computer to simulate much less to say a few PARTS PER MILLION of CO2 can have such severe impact, the atmosphere just can't be so "fragile" that an increase of 50ppm of CO2 will wreak havoc (that’s 0,000050%)

The weather is so complex that ONLY computers can analyse it. Since 1955 co2 levels in the atmosphere have increased by 30%. This June was nearly 1 degree C hotter than average and 9 of the hottest 10 junes ever have happened in the last 10! This is why the ice is melting and all kinds of weather patterns are changing.

So we really do need to have fewer babies and run our vehicles and homes with renewable energy

[izzy]

Fighting spirit won't build an entire EV-supporting zero-carbon infrastructure, sadly.

people used to say "you'll never be able to have everyone streaming 4K"

[Big Tea]

The Milankonvitch cylce has a frequency of 26.000 years.. A climate change is now measured in a period of 100 years. Can you explain that?

Even tough the CO2 PPM doesn't seem that much, the CO2 in the atmosphere has risen 30% since the 1960's. That is much more a period which is in line with the climate change...

Not taking one side or the other, but where does the 30% come from? That seems impossible unless it was previously measured on a mountain top and now measured in a carpark.

Not doubting you just suspicious where the figure comes from. There is a temperature station near me that used to be a wooden building in a field that cooled as soon as the sun set and is now a 4 story brick building with a 200 car car park and they complain the temperature average is way up even though it is in the middle of a storage heater.

Not disagreeing with anything, just see some of it as erm, lets say apples and bananas


Edit, been 'flicking through' and is this figure for 'c02 emissions'? rather than the amount of c02 in the air?

[izzy]

Not taking one side or the other, but where does the 30% come from? That seems impossible unless it was previously measured on a mountain top and now measured in a carpark.

Not doubting you just suspicious where the figure comes from. There is a temperature station near me that used to be a wooden building in a field that cooled as soon as the sun set and is now a 4 story brick building with a 200 car car park and they complain the temperature average is way up even though it is in the middle of a storage heater.

Not disagreeing with anything, just see some of it as erm, lets say apples and bananas

The 30% comes from measurements all over the world, especially the Keeling Curve

[Big Tea]

Not taking one side or the other, but where does the 30% come from? That seems impossible unless it was previously measured on a mountain top and now measured in a carpark.

Not doubting you just suspicious where the figure comes from. There is a temperature station near me that used to be a wooden building in a field that cooled as soon as the sun set and is now a 4 story brick building with a 200 car car park and they complain the temperature average is way up even though it is in the middle of a storage heater.

Not disagreeing with anything, just see some of it as erm, lets say apples and bananas

The 30% comes from measurements all over the world, especially the Keeling Curve
https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keeli ... record.png

So Its on an island in the middle of the Pacific?


Edit.
Is it based on this?
https://radioviceonline.com/wp-content/ ... ration.pdf

[Tommy Cookers]

95% of greenhousing is done by water vapour and it saturates (water vapour is about 30000 ppm)
CO2 greenhousing saturates at somewhere around 600 ppm
warming increases water vapour - so increasing cloud cover - so opposing warming
water vapour limits the temperature

these are basic old-school arguments against runaway warming
NASA now disagrees that warming increases cloud cover in a way that opposes warming


short rapid periods of natural warming and cooling are proven by forensic archaeology etc
eg the medieval warm period (when Greenland was green and settled) and in Roman times
(Farage said 95% of papers referring to natural warming etc are archaeological)
solar particle emissions are cyclic - and they drive cloud formation
the Danish Govt lab tested particles and proved cloud nucleiation was far greater than climate models assume
there's a cycle iirc of c.200 years and a more powerful but less conspicuous one iirc of c.900 years
caused by variation of planets gravitational vector on the Sun

[henry]

much less to say a few PARTS PER MILLION of CO2 can have such severe impact, the atmosphere just can't be so "fragile" that an increase of 50ppm of CO2 will wreak havoc (that’s 0,000050%)

Your body has 20ppm of iodine. With too little you’ll be ill, with too much ditto. Just because a number is small doesn’t mean it’s not significant.

[V12-POWER]

Weather and climate is way too complex for any computer to simulate much less to say a few PARTS PER MILLION of CO2 can have such severe impact, the atmosphere just can't be so "fragile" that an increase of 50ppm of CO2 will wreak havoc (that’s 0,000050%)

The weather is so complex that ONLY computers can analyse it. Since 1955 co2 levels in the atmosphere have increased by 30%. This June was nearly 1 degree C hotter than average and 9 of the hottest 10 junes ever have happened in the last 10! This is why the ice is melting and all kinds of weather patterns are changing.

So we really do need to have fewer babies and run our vehicles and homes with renewable energy

You sure? Cause I’m not even gonna argue if you really believe computers can accurately model the atmosphere. (How come many of these computer modeled predictions have failed?)

That June argument was already brought by others here, and it’s sorta a meaningless stat. Not gonna comment on that

And the user who compared me with the atmosphere lol, really nice job at the apples vs oranges game. I think there are a good thousand more chemicals and long complex reactions inside the body versus the atmosphere where it’s just a vast amount of gases. This doesn’t mean it’s “simple” or easy to model, quite the opposite, but it is what it is, a vast amount of gases and nothing else. The human body on the other hand...

[djos]

Lol my school system teached all these global warming predictions and the general consensus that we’re destroying the planet thanks to ICEs

Apparently, grammar wasn't part of the curriculum.