Zero-emission vehicles, their batteries & subsidies/rebates for them.- No politics regarding the subsidies!

[j_j]

The grid readiness issue is real, and will likely get worse for quite a while before it gets better.

Indeed. Of course, the same people who don't want electric vehicles are also, by and large, opposed to photovoltaic and wind power. If you look at the post that restarted this thread, you'll see that very clearly.

Yes, a more diffuse grid is necessary, and places that make it impossible or economically infeasible to install solar are also for the most part those opposed to electric cars.

You figure.

As to "rare earth" thank you for catching that whopper. I missed it in the original Gish Gallop. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop

 

[captainbeefheart]

The sea level rise is tested, measured, documented, and utterly proven. Taking the most extreme predictions ever offered and using them as an excuse to carry on wrecking things is inexcusable.

Sea levels have been rising long before cars were invented, since the last ice age actually.

It's the fact these extreme predictions, also called scare tactics never come true. The earth climate is always going to be changing, it's not going to sit in any one state for very long regardless of humans.

 

[captainbeefheart]

As to "rare earth" thank you for catching that whopper.

It's moot if they are rare due to low abundance in our earth or because of the difficulty to mine them. Either way the end result is rarity and high cost.

 

[j_j]

Sea levels have been rising long before cars were invented, since the last ice age actually.

It's the fact these extreme predictions, also called scare tactics never come true. The earth climate is always going to be changing, it's not going to sit in any one state for very long regardless of humans.

Ah, there we go, the classic apologia "climate is always going to be changing", yes, and how fast? The speed of change is measurable, and that's what's alarming. You object to derivatives of measurements now? The value of both temperature and derivative thereof are tested, established facts, and completely deny your unwarranted rejection of human contributions. Until you can convince me that CO2 and CH4 in the atmosphere do not work the same as they do in the lab, you're doing nothing but denying the best scientific understanding.

 

[EJ3]

This scare tactic has been said for decades. Yet waterfront property is still there after all the projections that said they were supposed to be underwater decades ago.

Oil is plentiful and less costly to extract, why not use it until we have something that actually can replace it? The fact of the matter is we don't have anything in place that can actually replace hydrocarbons and until we do why not take advantage of the natural resources? What leaves the tailpipe is mostly CO2 which plants breathe. They need to live also. We give them CO2 to breathe they give us Oxygen, symbiotic relationship.

The claim batteries will come down in price is ridiculous since they need rare earth metals, key word rare. If everyone is forced to go EV then the demand will increase far beyond the supply and price would substantially increase.

Our grid can't even handle the EV cars now. Look at California, they ask not to charge your car or else it causes blackouts and brownouts and you people want everyone to drive one? It's a bad joke all day long from the climate cultists.

Ask anyone from Miami Beach about that, then, or Venice, or Majorca, or San Diego, or ....

The sea level rise is tested, measured, documented, and utterly proven. Taking the most extreme predictions ever offered and using them as an excuse to carry on wrecking things is inexcusable.

Funny, the waterline at my dock (on an Island off of the South Carolina coast) is the same as it was in 1964 when we built the dock. So the water at my dock is the only place in the world that has not gotten deeper? Or the water rose, the bedrock under the end of my 70 foot dock rose the exact same amount AND the land at the foot of my dock also rose by the exact same amount, right? If that is what's happening, I'll never flood. Cool!

 

[Timcognito]

It's insanity.

A seawall for half of Florida now that's insanity. The sun shines every day and wind blows. Free shipping from 93 million miles away. Amazon can't beat that.

 

[blueone]

Indeed. Of course, the same people who don't want electric vehicles are also, by and large, opposed to photovoltaic and wind power. If you look at the post that restarted this thread, you'll see that very clearly.

Yes, a more diffuse grid is necessary, and places that make it impossible or economically infeasible to install solar are also for the most part those opposed to electric cars.

You figure.

Actually, IMHO, watching the travails of a family member who used be associated with electrical transmission in the US, a big issue seems to be local residents and environmentalists who use the legal system to fight transmission lines and power plants. Even with the federal government using eminent domain it takes years, often many years, to get a transmission line built. And where large-scale wind and solar power projects are located are seldom close to population centers. And I'm not hopeful anything is going to change soon enough to improve the national grids in the near term.

 

[j_j]

It's moot if they are rare due to low abundance in our earth or because of the difficulty to mine them. Either way the end result is rarity and high cost.

No, it's not moot. The fact of the matter allows for modern process development, while actually scarcity does not allow for that. You do know why Ytterby Sweden is so famous, yes?

 

[blueone]

It's moot if they are rare due to low abundance in our earth or because of the difficulty to mine them. Either way the end result is rarity and high cost.

Actually, that point is why I picked that link. It says essentially that. If we want rare elements to be less rare we're going to have to tolerate mining on a larger scale.

 

[j_j]

Actually, IMHO, watching the travails of a family member who used be associated with electrical transmission in the US, a big issue seems to be local residents and environmentalists who use the legal system to fight transmission lines and power plants

Around here the fight against power lines and "smart meters" has primarily become a reactionary behavior, but indeed, there are still those who, in my view, have gone so far one way they have completed the circle.

 

[j_j]

Actually, that point is why I picked that link. It says essentially that. If we want rare elements to be less rare we're going to have to tolerate mining on a larger scale.

Also you need to include modern chemical separation techniques, which both increases extraction efficiency and the ability to do mass separation of the lanthanides.

We have to mine more lanthanides, but much less iron and coal, oil, etc.

And let's not forget, please, the upcoming battery systems that avoid quite a bit of those elements entirely. Yes, for magnet structures in motors, some of the lanthanides will be necessary. Everything is a tradeoff, but we need to look at both sides, not just one side like some here would have us do.

 

[captainbeefheart]

Actually, that point is why I picked that link. It says essentially that. If we want rare elements to be less rare we're going to have to tolerate mining on a larger scale.

Right so we have just moved the emissions from a regulated car tailpipe amount to mega sized equipment burning diesel with no emission standards in third world countries. Not to mention the physical damage done from vast mining operations.

 

[Timcognito]

"In countries with advanced programmes, such standards have reduced national energy-related CO2 emissions by 7-10%.

One of the most common concerns about applying such standards to appliances is that they will raise the purchase price for consumers. However, the data show that those countries with long‑running appliance standards in place have actually seen the average purchase price of these appliances falling steadily, by around 2-3% per year. This means consumers are benefiting from lower purchase costs and lower running costs.

For example, in the United States such programmes delivered annual electricity cost savings of USD 40 billion in 2020, which translates into an annual reduction in the average household energy bill of around USD 320."

A call to action on efficient and smart appliances – Analysis - IEA

A call to action on efficient and smart appliances - Analysis and findings. An article by the International Energy Agency.

www.iea.org

 

[j_j]

Right so we have just moved the emissions from a regulated car tailpipe amount to mega sized equipment burning diesel with no emission standards in third world countries. Not to mention the physical damage done from vast mining operations.

Sweden is a third world country?

A Visit to Ytterby, Sweden, The Only Place in the World With Four Elements Named After It

Tom Scott visits the Swedish village of Ytterby, the only place in the world with four elements named after it.

laughingsquid.com

Yes, there are also deposits in "third world countries". Given the amount of elements used, the claim of 'vast mining operations" is a bit of an overstatement, as well. Since vast mining for iron ore, coal, and drilling for oil will continue in your scenario, there's no difference there in "physical damage". Have you ever been to Mingo County? I have.

 

[captainbeefheart]

Ah, there we go, the classic apologia "climate is always going to be changing", yes, and how fast? The speed of change is measurable, and that's what's alarming. You object to derivatives of measurements now? The value of both temperature and derivative thereof are tested, established facts, and completely deny your unwarranted rejection of human contributions. Until you can convince me that CO2 and CH4 in the atmosphere do not work the same as they do in the lab, you're doing nothing but denying the best scientific understanding.

You think a lab is the same as the earth's complexity? Your beloved models aren't perfect either, you can make a model do whatever you want. I posted an article where scientists are speaking out about how meridional transport is not accurately considered in the current "models".

The rate of change will always increase in many systems as it progresses. It's not set in stone that it's because of humans, many systems behave this way.

 

[captainbeefheart]

Humans/animals breathe out CO2.

Where are the climate cultists cries for population control? Are you going to stop us from breathing? The world has never seen population at these levels does that mean we have to end people?

This is the argument you people are giving us.

 

[Randy Bessinger]

I hate the “you people“ phrase. Yuck. A real divider…that just inflames.

 

[j_j]

You think a lab is the same as the earth's complexity? Your beloved models aren't perfect either, you can make a model do whatever you want. I posted an article where scientists are speaking out about how meridional transport is not accurately considered in the current "models".

The rate of change will always increase in many systems as it progresses. It's not set in stone that it's because of humans, many systems behave this way.

Apparently you don't understand what can be shown in the lab. Can you refute the reflection and absorption spectra of CO2 and CH4? It comes down to that.

 

[j_j]

The rate of change will always increase in many systems as it progresses. It's not set in stone that it's because of humans, many systems behave this way.

Just no.

 

[j_j]

Humans/animals breathe out CO2.

Where are the climate cultists cries for population control? Are you going to stop us from breathing? The world has never seen population at these levels does that mean we have to end people?

This is the argument you people are giving us.

No, that is not in the least the argument anyone is making, except you.