Non Footy Chat Thread II

[JohnStoppafarty]

Nothing. It wasn't my number, I was merely pointing out where that figure comes from.

The 11c figure is from the US, which is about right.

It might be right for US but it's not right for us.

 

[hindy111]

If we want to go all green let make higher quality products. Dont allow a cheap tv or $5 kettle that lasts 12 mths.
Build one that has too last 10yrs min. Like this isnt done on purpose ffs.

 

[Gronk]

The difference with a battery could be well over 30-40%.after 3 or 4 yrs. And I hear dead after 7. An engine maybe 5 - 10% worse once hits around 500,000kms. That could take on average 25yrs. Plenty of cabs pushing 700,000kms....So not in modt people lifetime.

Tesla are offering free battery replacement one one of their models now. I suspect they are banking on innovation and economies of scale not to send them broke in 7 or 10 years.

 

[Eelogical]

I can see the Comancheros lining up right now to buy electric bikes. 40 silent bikes pulling in to a servo to get a lick or electricity. Right behind those who tow a caravan.

 

[Bandwagon]

Evidence such as you've provided, I suppose?

I didn't make the assertion, do you think that the onus should be upon me to disprove the statement, when no evidence is offered up in support?

Ultimately, I'm not actually trying to have an argument because there is in fact no argument. You've tried to create one without actually adding anything of your own tbh. In fact you even quoted, and then disregarded, a post where I said the impact on existing fossil-fuel power infrastructure is fairly meaningless unless every single person suddenly bought a Tesla.

Do you disagree that the production and disposal of batteries, over the last twenty odd years right up until now, has in fact been quite toxic? Do you disagree that there is still meaningful environmental damage done in the extraction/production process and the transporting of materials for these batteries? Because that's what you've called bullshit in my case. All I've been saying is that electric cars aren't anywhere near as "green" as many would have you believe. Everything else is some sort of false equivalence of my point with your original misreading of a comment.

Simple as that really. You wanna read anything else into that and I'd suggest you go back to wrangling loons like Cerberus and Walter whatever the f**k he calls himself.

Again, I've called bullshit on a statement, it really is that simple. That you take exception to that for some reason is no skin off my nose.

Should I add a snide remark here to reinforce that point? Or would that just be childish?

 

[JohnStoppafarty]

Tesla are offering free battery replacement one one of their models now. I suspect they are banking on innovation and economies of scale not to send them broke in 7 or 10 years.

You're only thinking about this as to how it affects your hip pocket. There's more to it than that.

Edit due to f**king up the quote function.

 

[Bazal]

I didn't make the assertion, do you think that the onus should be upon me to disprove the statement, when no evidence is offered up in support?

I couldn't honestly care less. I know what I know, and I have no need to prove that to a random on an internet forum who has completely misunderstood what's been said.

You made the assertion that something that was said was "bullshit", so I'm not sure why you believe your assertion is immune from your own requirements. And around we go...

Again, I've called bullshit on a statement, it really is that simple. That you take exception to that for some reason is no skin off my nose.

I take no exception. It's a forum. I simply find it bemusing that you've carried on the way you have here when ultimately my stance is simply a more moderate version of what I can gather yours is. All I've said is that electric cars are still environmentally damaging.

Should I add a snide remark here to reinforce that point? Or would that just be childish?

Probably no need tbh mate, your posts on the whole have pretty much covered snide

 

[Bandwagon]

You have the 40-60% figure for manufacture and then you have the fact that most Aussie power atm is produced from coal which is about 45% efficient to produce..

Sure, but even with coal it can still produces less emissions. But that's not really the point.

As I posted earlier in response to twizzle, it's all very well that we concentrate on cleaning up the emissions of electricity generation, we also need to deal with the fact that our national fleet is a major source of emissions and in order to deal with that effectively we need to be able to leverage off the progress we make in generation into transport.

And the only conceivable way of doing that at the moment is by utilising that energy for transport, so electric vehicles.

 

[hindy111]

I didn't make the assertion, do you think that the onus should be upon me to disprove the statement, when no evidence is offered up in support?



Again, I've called bullshit on a statement, it really is that simple. That you take exception to that for some reason is no skin off my nose.

Should I add a snide remark here to reinforce that point? Or would that just be childish?

Just tell him to f**k off

 

[Eelogical]

I might go out and buy a supercharged V8 Commodore. Sounds like it's better logic than some of the rhetoric in here. As it stands at the moment, we are nowhere near ready to go down the electric car path. This just sounds like more a road orientated version of HELE power stations V wind and solar. They need to get a whole lot of ducks in a row first.

 

[Bandwagon]

I couldn't honestly care less. I know what I know, and I have no need to prove that to a random on an internet forum who has completely misunderstood what's been said.

That;s nice. Are you quite sure that it's me who misunderstood?

You made the assertion that something that was said was "bullshit", so I'm not sure why you believe your assertion is immune from your own requirements. And around we go...

Whatever,

I take no exception. It's a forum. I simply find it bemusing that you've carried on the way you have here when ultimately my stance is simply a more moderate version of what I can gather yours is. All I've said is that electric cars are still environmentally damaging.

And again, I've not claimed otherwise. yet you seem to think I have, are you really sure it's me who has completely misunderstood?

 

[Bandwagon]

Just tell him to f**k off

That actually made me chuckle.

 

[hindy111]

I read pollution wise once gets to 100,000km the electric car break even with pollution of a fuel car e mmisions taking acount the charging and fact to manufacture is twice as much..
But if was charged off solar 100% of time then 30,000kms.

The issue is what do they do with batteries. If they last 7yrs and your average driver is 15,000kms a year then you have the same co2 pollution as a petrol car over that time and a load of batteries to dispose of.
So currently they are not a solution but a bigger problem.

 

[Bazal]

I read pollution wise once gets to 100,000km the electric car break even with pollution taking acount the charging and manufacturing...
But if was charged off solar 100% of time then 30,000kms.

The issue is what do they do with batteries. If they last 7yrs and your average driver is 15,000kms a year then you have the same co2 pollution as a petrol car over that time and a load of batteries to dispose of.
So currently they are not a solution but a bigger problem.

Hey Hindy?

f**k off!

 

[hindy111]

I might go out and buy a supercharged V8 Commodore. Sounds like it's better logic than some of the rhetoric in here. As it stands at the moment, we are nowhere near ready to go down the electric car path. This just sounds like more a road orientated version of HELE power stations V wind and solar. They need to get a whole lot of ducks in a row first.

I reckon make public transport cheaper and better and give some rebate for car pooling perhaps.
Bring in more fuel effiecent cars and dont let people drive big motored SUVS and 4x4 unless its needed and tax the arse out of them.

 

[Bandwagon]

I might go out and buy a supercharged V8 Commodore. Sounds like it's better logic than some of the rhetoric in here. As it stands at the moment, we are nowhere near ready to go down the electric car path. This just sounds like more a road orientated version of HELE power stations V wind and solar. They need to get a whole lot of ducks in a row first.

I'd argue that the whole idea of having a target was about creating an impetus to get a whole lot of ducks in a row.

It's not like we would be going it alone here,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase-out_of_fossil_fuel_vehicles

Now that's full on bans, which is far more extreme than the policy being proposed.

 

[JohnStoppafarty]

If this info is true https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=73&t=11 we can see that coal fired electric produces much more co2 than an internal combustion engine running petrol for the same btu's of energy. Yes the ice will have thermal losses but not enough to make up the difference. Until electric cars can be charged by solar, wind and /or nuclear power,there is no environmental benefit what so ever.

 

[Eelogical]

I'd argue that the whole idea of having a target was about creating an impetus to get a whole lot of ducks in a row.

It's not like we would be going it alone here,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase-out_of_fossil_fuel_vehicles

Now that's full on bans, which is far more extreme than the policy being proposed.

Yet, countries like India and China are chewing up coal like it's going out of style. They will still be burning a bazillion tonnes of coal to charge their electric cars. Coal that we send them. And here we are, closing down coal fired power stations. The hypocrisy from these other countries and Australia.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-worlds-coal-power-plants

 

[Bandwagon]

If this info is true https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=73&t=11 we can see that coal fired electric produces much more co2 than an internal combustion engine running petrol for the same btu's of energy. Yes the ice will have thermal losses but not enough to make up the difference. Until electric cars can be charged by solar, wind and /or nuclear power,there is no environmental benefit what so ever.

We're currently ( 2017 figures ) around 16% renewables and around 63% coal

https://www.energy.gov.au/government-priorities/energy-data/australian-energy-statistics

What guess it will be in ten years time?

 

[JohnStoppafarty]

Sure, but even with coal it can still produces less emissions. But that's not really the point.

As I posted earlier in response to twizzle, it's all very well that we concentrate on cleaning up the emissions of electricity generation, we also need to deal with the fact that our national fleet is a major source of emissions and in order to deal with that effectively we need to be able to leverage off the progress we make in generation into transport.

And the only conceivable way of doing that at the moment is by utilising that energy for transport, so electric vehicles.

I agree we should be doing it from an environmental point of view. The thing is that at this point in time, it is less environmentally friendly to do so. Until we can provide cleaner electricity, that's the way it is.