|
So why the obsession with EVs? Why not hydrogen?
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 19:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 09:47 |
|
|
incontinence 100 posted:So why the obsession with EVs? Why not hydrogen? Storing and distributing hydrogen is a bit more difficult than electricity
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 19:48
|
|
|
We already happen to have a well established distribution network for electricity I'm a little surprised that Weber's hasn't actually installed a few fast-chargers in the lots on both sides. It's not a terrible idea. Come for the charge, stay for the crappy burging nostalgia!
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 20:19
|
|
|
Why not just end the growth economy based on endless consumption of scarce resources, which necessitates the ownership of a private vehicle while destroying our ability to live on earth? 
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 20:21
|
|
|
RBC posted:kraftwerk why don't you tell us what kind of job forces you to commute to 4 different cities on a regular basis. That's weird as gently caress and it's also weird as gently caress that you somehow believe this is representative of a lot of other people. It isn't because there are things that exist like telephones and the internet. This is my favorite "class conciousness" post in the last few pages. Who the hell works at more than one physical location indeed? Why don't you just have your remote telepresence swing that hammer, comrade?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 20:25
|
|
|
Rime posted:Why not just end the growth economy based on endless consumption of scarce resources, which necessitates the ownership of a private vehicle while destroying our ability to live on earth? How will we make money then Rime?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 20:41
|
|
|
I work in the chemical industry. My vendors, plants and customers are location sensitive. Freight can eat your margins up if you’re in the wrong place at the wrong time. We never left the 1970s. Also I suggest you stop being so drat flippant and demeaning when discussing issues like how people should alter their lifestyles to suit your political beliefs. I happen to believe you guys are right. But you should learn from Pinterest Mom and Vyelkin on how to articulate your points without being abrasive. The majority of the world isn’t as forgiving as I am and would sooner react by doubling down with the conservatives for what they perceive as a slight to their lifestyles. Also it just so happens modern living and the conveniences it provides is highly addictive. Have you ever tried to get between an addict and his vice? If you’ve ever owned a car (particularly a fuel efficient one like a Prius or Corolla) it’s extremely addictive to just feel like going somewhere and then being able to do so with zero barriers simply by getting behind the wheel and going where you need to go. It’s especially great when you’re grumpy in the morning and stick your thermos full of coffee in the cup holder while you ride to work in peace and quiet and caffeinate enough to be in a presentable mood once you enter the office. Kraftwerk fucked around with this message at 20:54 on May 22, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 20:41
|
|
|
Got an email from federal NDP inviting me to an announcement on May 31st. They say they’ll announce a “concrete climate plan” and that it is “no longer time for words but for action”. Let’s hope it’s better than a tax credit for Teslas and solar panels on the roofs of mansions.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 20:55
|
|
|
I mean, it won't be. That'd scare off the people who just aren't sure about climate change
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 21:05
|
|
|
Defenistrator posted:How will we make money then Rime? Who gives a gently caress? Alanis Obomsawin posted:Canada, the most affluent of countries, operates on a depletion economy which leaves destruction in its wake. Your people are driven by a terrible sense of deficiency. When the last tree is cut, the last fish is caught, and the last river is polluted; when to breathe the air is sickening, you will realize, too late, that wealth is not in bank accounts and that you can’t eat money.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 21:13
|
|
|
I mean if we magically figure out how to get the average Canadian to see past their own personal self interest we will solve a lot of things. I don't see any evidence that this is happening though. I don't see any concrete climate action coming until we have had a lot more devastating floods and wildfires etc that directly impact enough peoples lives that it can't be ignored as inconvenient.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 21:18
|
|
|
incontinence 100 posted:So why the obsession with EVs? Why not hydrogen? Lol Does BC transit still have that Ballard bus or is it in a warehouse somewhere?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 21:24
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/stevelambertwpg/status/1131295600329351170 I hope this finally ends Fletchers political career
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 21:29
|
|
|
The city of Penticton, BC, has come up with an interim (not final!) solution for their homeless problem.https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/british-columbia/article-sitting-and-sleeping-on-downtown-sidewalks-could-net-100-fine-in/ posted:Sitting and sleeping on some downtown sidewalks could be banned in Penticton, B.C., this summer as part of the city’s plan to crack down on loitering. One of the councillors who voted against was very concerned that bylaw enforcement might run wild and ticket people sitting as they watched the annual parade.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 21:43
|
|
|
Speaking of fun party nominations, it looks like Terry Lake is running for the Liberals in Kamloops. You may remember Terry as the Health Minister who watched the fentanyl crisis happen and then ran away to work for a weed company rather than explain that to anyone. The conservative candidate will probably get 60% of the vote in Kamloops anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 21:46
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:Lol We've actually got two hydrogen fueling stations in the lower mainland which is 2 more than the rest of this country. Good luck charging your Tesla when the company implodes later this year.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 21:57
|
|
|
incontinence 100 posted:We've actually got two hydrogen fueling stations in the lower mainland which is 2 more than the rest of this country. The infrastructure costs for hydrogen/gas are something else... These two links are Natural Resources Canada grants for "alternative energy" fueling given out in the recent past/present, and you'll note that each hydrogen/natural gas station runs a solid million bucks, versus electric fast chargers at about 50k each. https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/energy/alternative-fuels/fuel-facts/ecoenergy/19464 https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/energy/alternative-fuels/fuel-facts/ecoenergy/21738 It's not like Tesla's infrastructure automatically disappears if/when the company goes bankrupt. Shareholders will get wiped out but someone else such as existing debt holders will pick it up and run it just fine with none of those pesky inconvenient debt/warranty/"free for life" obligations. I wonder what percentage of all the fibre laid during the dot com boom has been lit, here in 2019. Probably still a fairly small amount.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 22:10
|
|
|
incontinence 100 posted:We've actually got two hydrogen fueling stations in the lower mainland which is 2 more than the rest of this country. Most of BC's charging infrastructure isn't superchargers. Going through the Kootenays I noticed that every second or third rest stop on the crowsnest had a rapid charging station available there, free of charge. Forget which company, and they aren't listed on this map. https://chargehub.com/en/charging-stations-map.html You can pretty easily drive even something low range like a Leaf across the country. Right now. Today. It's just going to take you an extra couple of days as the charging times add up. Oh well. This is just the price you will have to pay for convenience and your ridiculously petty demands to live in a tiny bubble of personal space at the expense of life on earth. Rime fucked around with this message at 22:31 on May 22, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 22:20
|
|
|
Build me coast to coast electric train travel
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 22:23
|
|
|
Hydrogen as a fuel for passenger vehicles has a bunch of issues around it. The best way to create hydrogen is through electrolysis, which is incredibly inefficient. It would take more power to create a tank of hydrogen to fuel a passenger vehicle than it would to charge a battery to take you a similar distance. Second, Hydrogen is an incredibly volatile fuel source, a breached fuel cell during a crash risks a lot more, due to the explosive volitility of hydrogen. Thirdly, we actually don't know what the gently caress would happen if we started putting gigatonnes of water vapour into the atmosphere. Would we drive the average humidity of the earth up? How does that affect the atmosphere and warming/cooling? Hydrogen fuel cells will still have a place in flight and freight, because battery technology just isn't at the point where it can effectively power an ocean freighter or plane, and nuclear engines have their own host of problems. We don't want a potential nuclear bomb flying in and out of a city centre hundreds of times a day.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 22:34
|
|
|
Alright cool. So we're fine with mining lithium in perpetuity? I think Tesla has a better chance of making a profit than a viable solid state battery.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 22:46
|
|
|
How about a gravity-powered water car with a big tank on the hood and as the water runs down to a lower tank it spins a paddle that propels the car forward. Re-fueling stations will just be lift bays that take the lower tank and swap it to the top of your car, where the process repeats. Patent pending.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 22:49
|
|
|
I wanna know why giant cruise ships aren't nuclear powered, despite having gross tonnage in excess of a Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 22:54
|
|
|
THC posted:I wanna know why giant cruise ships aren't nuclear powered, despite having gross tonnage in excess of a Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier Because of the public perception of nuclear.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 22:54
|
|
|
James Baud posted:The city of Penticton, BC, has come up with an interim (not final!) solution for their homeless problem. Old people in Penticton love to whine endlessly about kids from Quebec who come out every summer to pick fruit in the orchards and spend their off time on the beaches partying. I'm sure someone will walk up and down the beaches slapping them all with $100 tickets, which will promptly be laughed off and thrown in the trash.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 22:56
|
|
|
James Baud posted:The city of Penticton, BC, has come up with an interim (not final!) solution for their homeless problem. Ah yes, criminalizing homelessness, always a sure fire solution
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 23:08
|
|
|
Argas posted:Because of the public perception of nuclear. People that go on cruises deserve to travel on purely fear based vehicles.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 23:10
|
|
|
DariusLikewise posted:I hope this finally ends Fletchers political career It won't. It's not like he's ever cared about anything but issues that weren't his own personal issues. He just won't be tangentially affiliated with a group of people that loathe him as much as whoever he is currently sharing a room with. Eventually he'll be attached to some other group of shitheads and win a seat in west Winnipeg again where he can continue to only give a poo poo about things to matter himself personally. It's been his entire career cycle.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 23:32
|
|
|
THC posted:I wanna know why giant cruise ships aren't nuclear powered, despite having gross tonnage in excess of a Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier Because nuclear reactors are complicated and expensive, while petroleum fuels are easy and cheap. Also I'm pretty sure the major driver of nuclear power for aircraft carriers is endurance and space, which matters a hell of a lot less when you're putting into port every day or two anyway. I love nuclear power and wish we had way more of it, but  if you trust any cruise ship company to take nuclear safety seriously.
PittTheElder fucked around with this message at 23:39 on May 22, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 23:36
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
THC posted:I wanna know why giant cruise ships aren't nuclear powered, despite having gross tonnage in excess of a Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier I think if you look at Carnival Cruises' safety record and labour practices you'll understand why.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 23:38
|
|
|
You can pay a handful of Filipinos $300/mo to look after nuclear reactors, right?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 23:39
|
|
|
A nuclear reactor run by professionals is safe. A nuclear reactor run by a company that likes to pay its workers $2/hr and has a long history of ship accidents and workplace mishaps, let alone can barely keep poop out of the salad bar, less so.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 23:40
|
|
|
A small reactor sinking every now and then is still better than constant bunker fuel being spewed into the air and spilled into the water from the current fleet. Edit: by every metric except scariness, I guess. Square Peg fucked around with this message at 23:53 on May 22, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 23:46
|
|
|
For the record the power consumption of the largest cruise ship isn't far off that of a Nimitz supercarrier. Adding up the power generators and propulsion the Symphony of the Seas needs around 178 MW. The Nimitz's two nuclear reactors produce around 200 MW. There was an attempt back in the 50s to look at nuclear power for civilian ships but it largely fizzled out. Likely because of the insane cost. The NS Savannah cost the equivalent of half a billion dollars today (and more than half was the reactor cost), which is an order of magnitude more than a conventional ship of the same size. Plus nobody is willing to insure a nuclear vessel. That's a big issue for shipping companies and cruise lines. Other than Russia's nuclear icebreakers there's been exactly four civilian nuclear vessels ever built, and only one is still in use. Mr Luxury Yacht fucked around with this message at 00:09 on May 23, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 23:59
|
|
|
There are probably some security considerations that are easier to handle on the Nimitz, than on your average Disney ship.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 00:07
|
|
|
How about we just ban the cruise industry and deny them entry to our territorial waters? Barring a global movement to seize and scrap without compensation, this is the best we can do.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 00:08
|
|
|
Rime posted:How about we just ban the cruise industry and deny them entry to our territorial waters? Barring a global movement to seize and scrap without compensation, this is the best we can do. Sounds good, but the cruise industry is nothing compared to the international shipping industry for GHG emissions, unless you want to ban sea trade also.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 00:11
|
|
|
Plus if we're already trying to reduce air travel, are we also going to scrap transatlantic passenger ship travel? I mean a good start would be forcing cruise ship companies to actually install emission reduction systems and ban use of the dirtiest fuels.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 00:14
|
|
|
Square Peg posted:Sounds good, but the cruise industry is nothing compared to the international shipping industry for GHG emissions, unless you want to ban sea trade also. Yes, that's kind of the loving point. The foundation of modern consumerism, and our economic reliance on it, has to end.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 00:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 09:47 |
|
|
Mr Luxury Yacht posted:Plus if we're already trying to reduce air travel, are we also going to scrap transatlantic passenger ship travel? Good news is that we're starting to do part of that already http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/GHG/Documents/2020%20sulphur%20limit%20FAQ%202019.pdf What was stated above about why we don't have nuclear ships is 100% correct. Cruise lines will always do things in the cheapest, most short sighted way possible. They do everything in their power to I have no reason to believe cargo shipping is any different. Source: was an engineer for a major cruise line for a number of years, and did co-op training on a crude tanker. Y'all should read this book
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 01:06
|
|
