[grannyknot]

[QUOTE


In the 1960s & 70s, the US had no problem increasing generation capacity for the rise of air conditioning, and it'll have no problem increasing generation capacity for EVs ... What power companies are waiting for are indicators of persistent demand increases so they can cost justify the massive capital needed for new plants, something that's not yet materialized with EVs at 2%.

I'm very confident in capitalism: given the demand, supply is always met.
[/QUOTE]

How? Generators powered by what?

[GrussGott]

Originally Posted by dscabra

Plenty of electricity and we even have indoor plumbing, but I imagine most people wouldn't take too kindly to someone plugging your EV into any of their outlets.

Ah, I get it, you're an entrepreneur!

Since electricity is basically already everywhere, then popping up an EV charge site in your neighborhood - or really anywhere - is pretty trivial ... so you figure, hey, might as well toss one up in my neighborhood before someone beats me to it! Clever!

Gawd damn, you're prolly gonna make a fortune ... good thing you're thinking ahead of everyone else!

[dscabra]

Originally Posted by GrussGott

Ah, I get it, you're an entrepreneur!

Since electricity is basically already everywhere, then popping up an EV charge site in your neighborhood - or really anywhere - is pretty trivial ... so you figure, hey, might as well toss one up in my neighborhood before someone beats me to it! Clever!

Gawd damn, you're prolly gonna make a fortune ... good thing you're thinking ahead of everyone else!

It must be the voices in your head, because it isn't anything I've said. It could just be the Cali Kool-Aid talking, too.

It's obvious you just want to be difficult, so enjoy. I'm going to go for a drive.

[GrussGott]

Originally Posted by dscabra

because it isn't anything I've said

oh Well, I'm not mad, I'm just disappointed.

[synchronicityii]

Originally Posted by grannyknot

How? Generators powered by what?

There are literally hundreds of studies at this point demonstrating how we can transition to a 100% WWS (wind, water, sunlight) energy infrastructure while maintaining or exceeding current levels of grid reliability. Here are a few: Earth's Future, Applied Energy, Applied Energy, Energy, Energy.

A transition like this will require significant global investment, but modeling indicates that investment would be more than repaid, at least over time, by reductions in negative externalities associated with burning fossil fuels.

[________]

Originally Posted by synchronicityii

There are literally hundreds of studies at this point demonstrating how we can transition to a 100% WWS (wind, water, sunlight) energy infrastructure while maintaining or exceeding current levels of grid reliability. Here are a few: Earth's Future, Applied Energy, Applied Energy, Energy, Energy.

A transition like this will require significant global investment, but modeling indicates that investment would be more than repaid, at least over time, by reductions in negative externalities associated with burning fossil fuels.

In 5-10 years?

[synchronicityii]

Originally Posted by Onesie

In 5-10 years?

Fair question, and no, not at all. In theory, we could, but the cost and societal disruption would be immense, almost beyond comprehension. The folks who study this generally look at 2050 as the target and the models tell them that's do-able.

My hunch is that it's do-able to get to an 80–90% reduction in CO2 emissions by then, and we can make up the rest with actively removing CO2 from the air, either via natural carbon sinks (e.g., forests) or technological means. But that's just a personal opinion.

Every day we wait to start this transition in earnest, though, we're increasing the delta-v, making it that much more challenging when we do get going.

[TAZ007]

Originally Posted by Onesie

In 5-10 years?

More like 35-45 years, but it will get there. Maybe with cold fusion nuclear reactors it will be sooner, but the cold fusion part needs to be developed first.

[________]

Yeah I hope we get clean energy and find alternative sources if we want to move this way.
My 5-10 year question is more tongue in cheek due to the forecast of having trouble finding a gas station in 10 years. That is so unlikely to happen. All of these gloom and doom forecasts sound just like "in the year 2000 we'll have flying cars" I heard when I was a kid.

Still waiting for Venice to disappear.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by TAZ007

More like 35-45 years, but it will get there. Maybe with cold fusion nuclear reactors it will be sooner, but the cold fusion part needs to be developed first.

That would be awesome but a good 20 to 40% of our population hates nuclear and they have since the 1970s. I don’t see them capitulating on this. Although in my opinion nuclear is the way to go. It’s never ending and it’s clean energy. Then they could set up all the little charging stations they want. I hope they put a subway sandwich shop at every charging station.

[dscabra]

The transition goes way beyond what cars we'll be driving in the future. The entire transportation industry has to change as well; trucks, tractors, ships, trains, planes, and all other petrolium-fueled equipment. The build-out of a charging infrastructure for personal transportation is an easy problem in comparison.

[TAZ007]

Originally Posted by Patton250

That would be awesome but a good 20 to 40% of our population hates nuclear and they have since the 1970s. I don’t see them capitulating on this. Although in my opinion nuclear is the way to go. It’s never ending and it’s clean energy. Then they could set up all the little charging stations they want. I hope they put a subway sandwich shop at every charging station.

The only reason the public hates nuclear is because they do not understand it. The only negative is the waste and the new waste treatment facility in Hanford, Washington is a safe way to dispose of it. Putting the waste in leaded glass for safe half life storage.

Yes, I've been in the power industry for 20+ years.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by dscabra

The transition goes way beyond what cars we'll be driving in the future. The entire transition industry has to change as well; trucks, tractors, ships, trains, planes, and all other petrolium-fueled equipment. The build-out of a charging infrastructure for personal transportation is an easy problem in comparison.

Yeah well whoever figures out how to invent something that will be better and more efficient than diesel engines to pull our tractor trailers is going to be one rich dude

[synchronicityii]

Originally Posted by GoneIn4Secs

ICE aint goin nowhere, all these "predictions" are as good as your climate change predictions for the past 40 yrs pfft

This opinion isn't supported by the evidence. A number of studies have been done examining the accuracy of climate change predictions, and generally speaking, a simplified summary would be to say that the researchers have found the predictions to be—on the whole—surprisingly accurate. Here's an excerpt from one well-known paper:

In general, past climate model projections evaluated in this analysis were skillful in predicting subsequent GMST [global mean surface temperature] warming in the years after publication. While some models showed too much warming and a few showed too little, most models examined showed warming consistent with observations… We find no evidence that the climate models evaluated in this paper have systematically overestimated or underestimated warming over their projection period. The projection skill of the 1970s models is particularly impressive given the limited observational evidence of warming at the time, as the world was thought to have been cooling for the past few decades. While climate models have grown substantially more complex than the early models examined here, the skill that early models have shown in successfully projecting future warming suggests that climate models are effectively capturing the processes driving the multidecadal evolution of GMST.

[GoneIn4Secs]

Originally Posted by synchronicityii

This opinion isn't supported by the evidence. A number of studies have been done examining the accuracy of climate change predictions, and generally speaking, a simplified summary would be to say that the researchers have found the predictions to be—on the whole—surprisingly accurate. Here's an excerpt from one well-known paper:

In general, past climate model projections evaluated in this analysis were skillful in predicting subsequent GMST [global mean surface temperature] warming in the years after publication. While some models showed too much warming and a few showed too little, most models examined showed warming consistent with observations… We find no evidence that the climate models evaluated in this paper have systematically overestimated or underestimated warming over their projection period. The projection skill of the 1970s models is particularly impressive given the limited observational evidence of warming at the time, as the world was thought to have been cooling for the past few decades. While climate models have grown substantially more complex than the early models examined here, the skill that early models have shown in successfully projecting future warming suggests that climate models are effectively capturing the processes driving the multidecadal evolution of GMST.

So it warming or cooling?

I just read a dozen weather forecasts telling us to prepare for one of the coldest winters ever!

I just wanna know what direction the earth is heading, what do your various studies out of england have to say??

[grannyknot]

Originally Posted by GoneIn4Secs

So it warming or cooling?

I just read a dozen weather forecasts telling us to prepare for one of the coldest winters ever!

I just wanna know what direction the earth is heading, what do your various studies out of england have to say??

Things will just get more erratic, dress for every season.

[grannyknot]

Originally Posted by synchronicityii

There are literally hundreds of studies at this point demonstrating how we can transition to a 100% WWS (wind, water, sunlight) energy infrastructure while maintaining or exceeding current levels of grid reliability. Here are a few: Earth's Future, Applied Energy, Applied Energy, Energy, Energy.

A transition like this will require significant global investment, but modeling indicates that investment would be more than repaid, at least over time, by reductions in negative externalities associated with burning fossil fuels.

Thanks, those are good articles.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by Patton250

Yeah well whoever figures out how to invent something that will be better and more efficient than diesel engines to pull our tractor trailers is going to be one rich dude

You are confusing efficiency with energy density. Besides, someone already did invent something better and more efficient, the train. More goods would be shipped by train, except the teamsters would never have it. But electric tractor trailers make a lot of sense with batteries that can be switched out. It won't be like flipping on a switch, one day it's ICE and one day it's all electric, but range is into the practical numbers and solid state tech is about to put that into 2-3x those numbers. Charging isn't an issue if you can charge overnight at rest-stops. For many industries, electric may take a while and in some, it may never be practical to be totally electric, like longer-distance aircraft, but for tractor trailers that have plenty of volume to store batteries in existing or new aerodynamic shapes, it's a great application.

[taek]

Originally Posted by Patton250

That would be awesome but a good 20 to 40% of our population hates nuclear and they have since the 1970s. I don’t see them capitulating on this. Although in my opinion nuclear is the way to go. It’s never ending and it’s clean energy. Then they could set up all the little charging stations they want. I hope they put a subway sandwich shop at every charging station.

My state is 60% nuclear power. I'm pretty sure the vast majority of people don't know & don't care.
It's definitely feasible.

[King_Leonard]

Originally Posted by synchronicityii

This opinion isn't supported by the evidence. A number of studies have been done examining the accuracy of climate change predictions, and generally speaking, a simplified summary would be to say that the researchers have found the predictions to be—on the whole—surprisingly accurate. Here's an excerpt from one well-known paper:

In general, past climate model projections evaluated in this analysis were skillful in predicting subsequent GMST [global mean surface temperature] warming in the years after publication. While some models showed too much warming and a few showed too little, most models examined showed warming consistent with observations… We find no evidence that the climate models evaluated in this paper have systematically overestimated or underestimated warming over their projection period. The projection skill of the 1970s models is particularly impressive given the limited observational evidence of warming at the time, as the world was thought to have been cooling for the past few decades. While climate models have grown substantially more complex than the early models examined here, the skill that early models have shown in successfully projecting future warming suggests that climate models are effectively capturing the processes driving the multidecadal evolution of GMST.

An average value is often meaningless and can even be misleading. Global climate changes are so much more complex and nuanced than just a simple GMST. (just sayin)
PS. I'm not a climate change denier.

[WickedBMW]

No one is talking about how these EV cars are more expensive than ICE cars. How much is it going to cost to fix these cars? How long will EV last? What will be done with spent batteries? Do we have infrastructure to dispose these batteries? What’s the environmental impact of these batteries?

[R N M]

Originally Posted by WickedBMW

No one is talking about how these EV cars are more expensive than ICE cars. How much is it going to cost to fix these cars? How long will EV last? What will be done with spent batteries? Do we have infrastructure to dispose these batteries? What’s the environmental impact of these batteries?

All these are unpopular questions!

Whoever asks them is labeled denier of Global Warming.