A post EV era

[Zynerji]

Have you ever criticized drifting?

I have. It's a colossal wank.

The WWE of car racing!

[Andres125sx]

Yet never read a complain about PM2.5 emissions from drifting (or drag racing), despite the huge, colosal and useless waste of tires... while I´ve read more than once and twice about PM2.5 emissions from EV just because they weight a bit more than ICE cars

[johnny comelately]

Further to the deaths from pollution part of the dicussion:
Pollution kills 9 million people a year, new study finds
The Lancet Planetary Health journal article: according to scientists analyzing 2019 data from the Global Burden of Disease, which is an ongoing study by the University of Washington that assesses overall pollution exposure.
The latest figures put pollution on par with smoking in terms of global deaths. In comparison, COVID-19 killed about 6.7 million people globally since the pandemic began

https://www.dw.com/en/pollution-kills-9 ... a-61833303

[Tommy Cookers]

Further to the deaths from pollution part of the dicussion:
Pollution kills 9 million people a year, new study finds
The Lancet Planetary Health journal article: according to scientists analyzing 2019 data from the Global Burden of Disease, which is an ongoing study by the University of Washington that assesses overall pollution exposure.
The latest figures put pollution on par with smoking in terms of global deaths. In comparison, COVID-19 killed about 6.7 million people globally since the pandemic began
https://www.dw.com/en/pollution-kills-9 ... a-61833303

how many people 'die from pollution' in the developed (Euro 6 etc) world according to the University of Washington ?
most of that pollution coming from 'green' heating of course
generating guilt & fear in the population works for all politicians - those who don't get elected and those who do

last month we were all told that 16 million have died from Covid
still 200 daily in the UK (not counting those taking more than 28 days to die)

[johnny comelately]

Further to the deaths from pollution part of the dicussion:
Pollution kills 9 million people a year, new study finds
The Lancet Planetary Health journal article: according to scientists analyzing 2019 data from the Global Burden of Disease, which is an ongoing study by the University of Washington that assesses overall pollution exposure.
The latest figures put pollution on par with smoking in terms of global deaths. In comparison, COVID-19 killed about 6.7 million people globally since the pandemic began
https://www.dw.com/en/pollution-kills-9 ... a-61833303

how many people 'die from pollution' in the developed (Euro 6 etc) world according to the University of Washington ?
most of that pollution coming from 'green' heating of course
generating guilt & fear in the population works for all politicians - those who don't get elected and those who do

last month we were all told that 16 million have died from Covid
still 200 daily in the UK (not counting those taking more than 28 days to die)

Without Prejudice and with respect
Re: Covid
The 6.7 million versus the 15 million (I heard via BBC) is the WHO's current estimate of excess deaths as opposed to the "standard" measurement, which could of course be changed and probably will.
I think it was Twain, M who said something along the lines of "Lies, damn lies and statistics"
But I'd rather not get dragged into digressions.

Re: Pollution mortality
I for one am not a member of the Flat Earth Society as by any measurement the numbers indicate quite clearly that pollution is both a killer and an anthropogenic climate changer for the worse.
The combustion component is substantial and the ICE subcomponent is significant.
And significant enough for global regulations to have been upgraded since the 70's.
They mathematically (unless it is a global conspiracy of misinformation led by the genuinely, by me at least, esteemed Greta Thunberg) cannot all be scaremongering Henny Pennys, Tommy.
The linked article is published in that august (except for one hiccup) tome, The Lancet, which includes road deaths, the original assertion.
For your reaading pleasure:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanp ... 0/fulltext

If the Washington University publication (amongst many others, that was just current and algorithmically popped up) and being peer reviewed and clearing the editors of The Lancet (all the more pernickety since that hiccup) are not adequate, what would convince thou?
Signed,
Stalwart but realistic combustion addict.

PS, And I am very proud, if that is the right term for an onlooker, of Formula One's contribution to global progress by the reduction of pollutants and the increase in efficiency

[Andres125sx]

generating guilt & fear in the population works for all politicians

Correct

Problem comes when people does not have any sense of responsability, even when situation becomes critical.

Anycase that does not exclude it´s the politicians who allowed the situation to become critical


This is an evidence of main problem of democracy, politicians become statistics readers who only do what they think will increase their votes, and since people didn´t have any real worries about pollution, environment, wild life or the planet, we´ve reached this critical situation.

I´ve read scientific reports claiming this would happen for maybe 20-30 years, making predictions wich have become real. People said they were alarmists without even reading. Most people actually. There are evidences for decades, but people assumed scientifics are as biased as politicians and had some hidden interest, and didn´t concede any credit


Now we´re at a critical situation so they need to generate guilt and fear in the popullation so they can do what they should have done decades ago, while keeping their votes.

Problem is maybe we´re too late. I wonder if we reached the no return point years ago, global weather can´t be changed in 1-2 decades, and the current unbalance is obvious, so it would not be a surprise to me if we reacted too late

But there´re still people claiming CC is a scam and negating the unquestionable and almost infinite evidences, even in this forum wich in theory is for people who like technical aspects and data, so imagine in average popullation

[NL_Fer]

Let’s assume with 30-40 years they find the holy grale and all equator countries become net producers of hydrogen or another combustible made from water, co2 and sunlight as the only powersource to produce this green fuel. Of which there will be an abundance of.

Would 80% still drive a combustion engine with this green fuel, or would the majority still prefer the silence, instant power and lack of vibrations of the EV. Assuming we will have better batteries and 600KW DC quick charge by than?

[Big Tea]

Let’s assume with 30-40 years they find the holy grale and all equator countries become net producers of hydrogen or another combustible made from water, co2 and sunlight as the only powersource to produce this green fuel. Of which there will be an abundance of.

Would 80% still drive a combustion engine with this green fuel, or would the majority still prefer the silence, instant power and lack of vibrations of the EV. Assuming we will have better batteries and 600KW DC quick charge by than?

It would be easier and cheaper to send the power down a wire from these equator countries than it would be to transport Hydrogen. Yes they could produce it at the end of the cable, but is that the obvious solution?

For 90% of people an electric car is a far better option anyway, even if a sporting car. I was a dyed in the wool petro head and have had my share of 'desirable', so not a greenie, and there is no way a ICE car is better than an electric that I can possibly put as an argument.

[Jolle]

Let’s assume with 30-40 years they find the holy grale and all equator countries become net producers of hydrogen or another combustible made from water, co2 and sunlight as the only powersource to produce this green fuel. Of which there will be an abundance of.

Would 80% still drive a combustion engine with this green fuel, or would the majority still prefer the silence, instant power and lack of vibrations of the EV. Assuming we will have better batteries and 600KW DC quick charge by than?

This would now already be possible. The tech is there.. but why indeed store energy in hydrogen? Maybe I’m wrong, but if you use it as an ICE, you still have NOx because of the high temperatures. Besides that, we don’t have 30-40 years anymore.
Hydrogen is in my opinion a bit of a “go to” for the people who want to keep oil in play. Hydrogen cars were introduced in California because car makers could only sell cars there if they offered a zero emissions car as wel. With the introduction of EV’s, all of them stoped right away. There is the least of infrastructure they could get away with. I think only Toyota still makes a H car, because they don’t have an EV yet.

Just imagine they crack cold fusion and no one got an EV..

[NL_Fer]

To make it more clear. I am hypothesizing a superefficient technology, which skips electricity and uses a cathalist to convert the water and carbondioxide into a fuel or hydrogen, using sunlight as the energy source.

[Big Tea]

To make it more clear. I am hypothesizing a superefficient technology, which skips electricity and uses a cathalist to convert the water and carbondioxide into a fuel or hydrogen, using sunlight as the energy source.

They could use it to drive generators. I'll get my coat...

[gruntguru]

But there´re still people claiming CC is a scam and negating the unquestionable and almost infinite evidences, even in this forum wich in theory is for people who like technical aspects and data, so imagine in average popullation

Unfortunately forums aimed at car performance enthusiasts include a disproportionate number of CC deniers. Humans have a tendency towards bias that supports their own lifestyle habits and choices.

[gruntguru]

Let’s assume with 30-40 years they find the holy grale and all equator countries become net producers of hydrogen or another combustible made from water, co2 and sunlight as the only powersource to produce this green fuel. Of which there will be an abundance of.

Would 80% still drive a combustion engine with this green fuel, or would the majority still prefer the silence, instant power and lack of vibrations of the EV. Assuming we will have better batteries and 600KW DC quick charge by than?

If green hydrogen is abundant and cheap one would expect a trend towards HEV rather than BEV.

[Greg Locock]

I don't entirely believe this article but-

During one of those conversations with a guy named Phil Gross, we talked about the approximately 15 million new cars sold in the US each year.
I already knew that 15 million number, so I wasn’t surprised when Phil brought it up. I was surprised, however, when Phil told me that there simply isn’t enough lithium on Earth to keep producing cars at anything like that rate and that North American carmakers would soon be facing, “an existential threat” (his words) as they transition to EVs.

Phil should know. He’s the CEO of Snow Lake Lithium, a hard-rock mining operation up in Snow Lake, Manitoba, Canada, and it is quite literally his job to know (or, at least, try to know) precisely how much lithium is out there … and he’s not terribly optimistic.

“Right now, I can tell you precisely how much lithium is being mined in North America, to the ounce,” he says. “Zero,” he makes an “O” with his hand, driving the point home.

We went on to talk about China and South America and how they didn’t want to export lithium to the US, and the relative merits of hard rock mining vs. extracting lithium from brine solutions, but that’s not what stuck with me.

What did stick was this: no matter how you slice it, or where you look for it, there’s not enough lithium to keep up. If the manufacturers and politicians stick to their EV-only plans

https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2022/ ... us-as-evs/

[gruntguru]

Seems there are twenty something million tons of proven Lithium reserves and something like 50 kg of lithium in an average EV (eg 63 kg in a 100 kW.hr Tesla battery).So at 20 EV's to the ton, proven reserves will only build 400 million EV's. Of course Lithium is used for a lot of things apart from EV's. I guess we need to find more lithium or better batteries or both.