[ajp]

Originally Posted by Bad Anvil Garage

I've got bad news for all those folks out there who love electric cars because they're going to save the planet,,, they run on COAL. Sorry.

Natural Gas is 1st, then coal, and coal is on the decline.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by ajp

Natural Gas is 1st, then coal, and coal is on the decline.

Still the same old carbon-based fossil stuff the electric car fans keep hoping we all forget is ultimately being used, just because we're not putting it into our cars more directly.


Norm

[Mighty Mouce]

Originally Posted by ajp

Natural Gas is 1st, then coal, and coal is on the decline.

Coal runs our Power grid. Electric will feed off our power grid. Some politicians now trying to stop coal production. Whats going to run our PG?

[Mighty Mouce]

Originally Posted by Number 3

The cool thing is that you aren't being ignored. GM still has a VERY robust powertrain group working on ICEs.

You can feel like your are, but you will have ICE choices for many, many years to come.

Now the real issue, and where Trump may be correct, is that most OEMs are adding so much cost and complexity for very small FE gains. Take GM's new 2.0 turbo, a sliding 3 stage camshaft for NO, MID and FULL lift. Then add on cylinder deactivation and stop start. All cost $ to develop and add cost to the product. But other than cost, these are mostly invisible. My 3.6 L V6 in my LaCrosse has a 3 cylinder mode that you can't even feel.

Also, think of this when you hear people slam the President for his comments on CAFE "and engines will run smoother under my plan" remember the number of people on this site that either program cylinder deactivation out or plug in the RANGE device so that...…………...wait for it...…………….the engine runs smoother.

I think Trump has a personal interest in GM because he is or at least was a GM guy. In the 70s and 80s he would be driving the big full size Caddilacs.

[ajp]

Originally Posted by Mighty Mouce

Coal runs our Power grid. Electric will feed off our power grid. Some politicians now trying to stop coal production. Whats going to run our PG?

Eventually it will become too expensive to extract fossil fuels from the Earth, the energy companies will find new ways to make money.

They will probably turn to Renewables and Nuclear, which will become more mainstream.

Maybe in my kids lifetime, maybe my great grand kids

Edit: Also if you look at the eia charts, you will notice that overall energy production in the USA is increasing, which means other sources of energy are replacing Coal. NG wasn't #1 until 2015-2016.

[Lazerbrainz2k3]

Originally Posted by ajp

Eventually it will become too expensive to extract fossil fuels from the Earth, the energy companies will find new ways to make money.

They will probably turn to Renewables and Nuclear, which will become more mainstream.

People have been prophesizing about that possibility, and when it'll happen, for a century. First it was the 1960s, then the 1980s, then 2000, then right about now, then even later. At every turn some "expert" who boldly put out his predicted date for "peak oil" as being set in stone has ended up with egg on his face, because people are smart and find opportunity where others see limitation.

Given enough time, perhaps we will reach the limits of extractable fossil fuels, at least for a time, but that doesn't mean the end of fossil fuels as an energy source. There's potential in technology like thermal depolymerization to create new sources of fossil fuels, without the fossils - in the case of TD, by superheating and breaking down sewage, agricultural and even landfill waste and turning it into oil, methane (either used to power the TD machines or able to be sold as another fuel), and steam. There was a lot of interest in that until economical fracking turned the latest predictions about an imminent fuel crisis into a nothingburger, but it's still there as an alternative if/when we get to that point.

Renewables have a long way to go before they're a real trustworthy energy source, and some of its biggest opponents are the people who are pushing it the most ("We want renewable energy, but don't [put that wind farm here, it'll kill migrating birds!]/[build that dam, it'll mess with natural fish nurseries]/etc). And those same folks absolutely HATE nuclear, the one power source that could actually achieve the emissions goals those people want.

For the forseeable future we're going to be a mixed source energy market, including fossil fuels.

[GroundhogSS]

Since the last nuclear plants were built in this country, the technology to build and run those plants has been developed quite a lot. The chance of problems with a nuclear plant now are substantially less that thirty or forty years ago.

[ajp]

Originally Posted by Lazerbrainz2k3

People have been prophesizing about that possibility, and when it'll happen, for a century. First it was the 1960s, then the 1980s, then 2000, then right about now, then even later. At every turn some "expert" who boldly put out his predicted date for "peak oil" as being set in stone has ended up with egg on his face, because people are smart and find opportunity where others see limitation.

Given enough time, perhaps we will reach the limits of extractable fossil fuels, at least for a time, but that doesn't mean the end of fossil fuels as an energy source. There's potential in technology like thermal depolymerization to create new sources of fossil fuels, without the fossils - in the case of TD, by superheating and breaking down sewage, agricultural and even landfill waste and turning it into oil, methane (either used to power the TD machines or able to be sold as another fuel), and steam. There was a lot of interest in that until economical fracking turned the latest predictions about an imminent fuel crisis into a nothingburger, but it's still there as an alternative if/when we get to that point.

Renewables have a long way to go before they're a real trustworthy energy source, and some of its biggest opponents are the people who are pushing it the most ("We want renewable energy, but don't [put that wind farm here, it'll kill migrating birds!]/[build that dam, it'll mess with natural fish nurseries]/etc). And those same folks absolutely HATE nuclear, the one power source that could actually achieve the emissions goals those people want.

For the forseeable future we're going to be a mixed source energy market, including fossil fuels.

The problem with prophesizing is people focus on the 'when' and lose sight of the bigger picture.

The objections to renewables are no different to the objections to non-renewables, no one wants a coal power station in their backyard either.

I agree that the future of energy is mixed, my original point was that the trend is towards less coal, more LG and other sources.

Interestingly enough, my wife and I had a thought experiment discussion about Greta T, over Sunday breakfast pancakes. The conclusion was that we are a consumer society, so while both sides of the argument will continue to bicker, very few people (meaning the 'green' people) are actually willing to give up luxuries, so nothing will change.

Maybe AI will wipe us out first, or a stray asteroid. In the meantime, I will enjoy my V8.

[V8 Firebird]

The reason of most people buying electric cars isn't really mean they wanting clean air for earth. People buy electric car because they like EV having good performance and convenience.

[MackSteelPrivateEye]

Originally Posted by V8 Firebird

The reason of most people buying electric cars isn't really mean they wanting clean air for earth. People buy electric car because they like EV having good performance and convenience.

1 hour Charge times are not convenient.

[Petrol Head]

Folks with electric cars will inevitably find out how batteries inherently loose their capacitance over time. Maybe they won’t keep the car long enough but give it enough charge cycles, temperature extremes, non-usage, and power demand, and your 300 mile charge becomes a 250 mile charge.

Batteries are just big, fancy capacitors. Ask anyone who’s ever owned vintage audio equipment like stereo receivers and amplifiers from before the 1980s. They’ve all needed re-capping in the main power supply by now.

[Number 3]

All good points, but EVs are still coming.

Major cities are banning gas and diesel. Regardless of it being the cheapest alternative, EVs are coming in droves.

Today, for convenience and transporting it around, liquid fuels can't be touched. But as battery costs come down, and they are, there is a tipping point where it's simply the time to charge and people are spending butt loads of money to address that.

The $$$ spent on an ICE to get nearly infinitesimal improvements vs. the $$$ spent on EVs making huge improvements.

GM's new 2.0T has a 3 phase sliding camshaft adding hundreds of $$ if not more for maybe a few 10ths of a MPG.

I just don't see the tide swinging back.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by V8 Firebird

The reason of most people buying electric cars isn't really mean they wanting clean air for earth. People buy electric car because they like EV having good performance and convenience.

Many other reasons exist. Being an early adopter and seen as "avant-garde" perhaps being a big one.


Norm

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Major cities are banning gas and diesel.

Are any of those cities in the USA? In North America?

I'm not at all comfortable with the concept that people who choose to live in places where the circumstances are significantly different from mine, effectively get to dictate what I am allowed to buy, own, or use. No matter how well-intended their original reasoning might have been


Norm