Honda Plans to Employ Prechamber for Engines of Mass-produced Cars

[Tommy Cookers]

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... -pollution
Sales of two of the most polluting fuels, wet wood and house coal, will be phased out from 2021 to 2023, to give householders and suppliers time to move to cleaner alternatives such as dry wood and manufactured solid fuels.
...John Maingay of the British Heart Foundation said: “Wood and coal burning accounts for 40% of harmful levels of background PM2.5 in the UK, and our research has shown that toxic PM2.5 can enter the bloodstream and damage our heart and circulatory system.

these 'experts' appear to have accepted that public air .... being 30-50 times cleaner than it was pre-catalyst etc .....
isn't an issue ... but private air is

will these 'experts' supervene the EV-obsessed 'experts' ? ....
will the EV-obsessed 'experts' talk to the further 'experts' ?.....
who have mandated that electric heating replaces fuel-based heating - this being antagonistic to EV interests

we in the UK have GWs of subsidised 'dry-is-good' wood burning for generation and CHP and domestic heat
because the previous 'experts' committed us to such huge reductions in carbon emission regardless of particulate increase

btw
we have castrated paint by mandatorily starving it of VOCs (the oily stuff) .....
but tens of thousands of tons of VOCs evaporate from 'bad' coniferous wood '2 year seasoning' to become 'good' ('dry') wood ?
or is coniferous/other resinous wood segregated for immediate non-domestic burning ? (here 'wet-is-good' ?)
while the billions of living conifers spew great tonnages of VOCs into the atmosphere - as do oil crops like rapeseed

this built-in denialism has now been supplanted by acceptance (of biogenics)
eg https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00122-z

[Big Tea]

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... -pollution
Sales of two of the most polluting fuels, wet wood and house coal, will be phased out from 2021 to 2023, to give householders and suppliers time to move to cleaner alternatives such as dry wood and manufactured solid fuels.
...John Maingay of the British Heart Foundation said: “Wood and coal burning accounts for 40% of harmful levels of background PM2.5 in the UK, and our research has shown that toxic PM2.5 can enter the bloodstream and damage our heart and circulatory system.

these 'experts' appear to have accepted that public air .... being 30-50 times cleaner than it was pre-catalyst etc .....
isn't an issue ... but private air is

will these 'experts' supervene the EV-obsessed 'experts' ? ....
will the EV-obsessed 'experts' talk to the further 'experts' ?.....
who have mandated that electric heating replaces fuel-based heating - this being antagonistic to EV interests

we in the UK have GWs of subsidised 'dry-is-good' wood burning for generation and CHP and domestic heat
because the previous 'experts' committed us to such huge reductions in carbon emission regardless of particulate increase

btw
we have castrated paint by mandatorily starving it of VOCs (the oily stuff) .....
but tens of thousands of tons of VOCs evaporate from 'bad' coniferous wood '2 year seasoning' to become 'good' ('dry') wood ?
or is coniferous/other resinous wood segregated for immediate non-domestic burning ? (here 'wet-is-good' ?)
while the billions of living conifers spew great tonnages of VOCs into the atmosphere - as do oil crops like rapeseed
(the WHO decades ago told smog modellers to count rural air as carrying 10% of city levels of pollution)

Experts. People who know more and more about less and less.

[Bence]

No Experimental Evidence for the Significant Anthropogenic Climate Change

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00165.pdf

[Big Tea]

No Experimental Evidence for the Significant Anthropogenic Climate Change

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00165.pdf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JJ3yeiNjf4
If you liked that, you will like this, but I am keeping my powder dry

[Bence]

Fearmongering has reached such an artistic level...

[Andres125sx]

Fearmongering has reached such an artistic level...

Not as much as manipulation of masses with half-trues...


You just have to look at any CO2 graph to notice:

1- CO2 has reached a level around 50% higher than the maximum of last 800.000 years.
2- The increase has been dramatically fast, it is true the half-true naysayers claim about other eras with higher CO2 levels. What they hide is those increases took hundreds thousands years if not millions years, while current increase took only 50 years (!), less than a ten thousand of the normal period it would take, eliminating any chance for any life (animal or vegetal) to adapt to the new CO2 level
3- The start of that increase matches exactly industrial revolution and the start of humans emiting CO2 to the atmosphere

If that is not an evidence of manmade CC, I´m not sure what else do anyone need

[rscsr]

No Experimental Evidence for the Significant Anthropogenic Climate Change

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00165.pdf

That is such a BS paper. It is basically saying that they found local correlations, and don't go into any details why changes are happening, so it fully explains the global changes and the ACC therefore doesn't exist. Additionally since they couldn't be bothered to include any decent source, or not a source they have written themselves, how can you take something like that seriously? And the only proper source just shows that the first order approximation, the IPCC used back in 1990 might not be sufficient.

[ispano6]

IMHO the huge mistake is that from Honda. ICEs are slowly passing away, like it or not. In 2050 no ICE car can be sold in Europe, so starting to develop a new technology in my mind is bold at least, even if ICEs are sold up to 2050, but I hope they will be obsolete much sooner.

There are hundred thousand millions being invested in battery technology, once anyone launch a new battery with better energy density and lower price (there are a lot of candidates with those caracteristics), ICEs will be obsolete instantly, and this development didn´t start yesterday, but several years ago so the development process is advanced.

See Nikola anouncent about his new battery wich will be shown later this year. Obviously there will always be petrolheads purchasing ICEs while they can, but they/we are only a small percentage, while companies and big investments like this must be backed up with a lot of sales

Rule of thumb is don't put all your eggs in one basket. Some people forget that battery electric vehicles aren't the only path for EVs. Honda already has Hydrogen Fuel Cell EV technologies and battery electrics and hybrids are a stop-gap to the Hydrogen future for the countries that adopt it. Hybrid, Battery EVs, Hydrogen Fuel Cell should cover all the bases for the next 30 years. The problem is the infrastructure to support battery charging and Fuel Cell refilling. Flow-battery technology shouldn't be written off either, nor should replaceable power cells. More and more households will have solar panels and powerwall-type storage. Nevertheless, the auto industry should continue to strive to reduce the pollutants that emit from vehicles, especially from diesel and petrol.

[aterren]

There are hundred thousand millions being invested in battery technology, once anyone launch a new battery with better energy density and lower price (there are a lot of candidates with those caracteristics), ICEs will be obsolete instantly, and this development didn´t start yesterday, but several years ago so the development process is advanced.

See Nikola anouncent about his new battery wich will be shown later this year. Obviously there will always be petrolheads purchasing ICEs while they can, but they/we are only a small percentage, while companies and big investments like this must be backed up with a lot of sales

Battery improvements occur at glacially slow rate. The Nikola announcement falls under the 'I'll believe it when I see it' category. https://www.forbes.com/sites/alanohnsma ... 6201617d89

“I have a strong conviction that it’s safe to dismiss this out of hand—their claims are ridiculous,” said Sam Jaffe, managing director of Boulder, Colorado-based consulting firm Cairn Energy Research Advisors, which specializes in energy storage technology. “Why would they claim this without waiting until they could publicly reveal what the chemistry is and the university laboratory they are working with? It’s very fishy.”

Sulfur is one possible alternative to current lithium-ion cells, Jaffe said. “I would assume they’re looking at sulfur in the cathode and lithium metal in the anode. Untold hundreds of university and industry labs are working on that. If you get to those, if you can make it work, it would have a significant improvement on current lithium-ion, but nowhere near what they are claiming.”

[Andres125sx]

Agree with the skepticism, but as I said even a half of their claims would mean ICE are obsolete, so even when I´m also skeptical, I´m also eager to see what´s behind their claims

[nzjrs]

No Experimental Evidence for the Significant Anthropogenic Climate Change

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00165.pdf

Lol, I remember this. Did they ever publish it?

[Big Tea]

I know its not honda, but I did not know where else to put it.
This guy has a new vid on CVVD Engine