..See " money masters" we're in way too deep. Congress, economy, war over oil?( and we thought we were fighting for world peace?)What a sad trick on the American citizens. Do yourself a favor, run your vehicles on hydrogen ...before you lose access to your local fuel pump. That's , sad to say.. just around the bend!
Anything "Bio" that has to be grown for fuel is the problem! Our food supply growth space is minimal. You choose "Food to eat or bio fuel to burn?"..no brainer? See" HHo Ecogreen" for a real ecogreen answer.
That Biochar thing does seem to be a much better way of getting energy from biomass, I'm impressed. Didn't understand that radiative forcing chart. Was it meant to show that N2O is a strong greenhouse gas?
Not sure about this vid. I'm sure the makers have good inrentions, but they made a couple of errors. First of all, with the biofuel issue they should have picked up on the point that if we rely to heavily on them they will cut into food supplies, which is dangerous. Secondly, when they showed the greenest option, the electric car, they dismissed it by stating you'd need green supply of electricity. That's already possible, so where's the problem?
Thanks for all those links greyflcn. First of all, those trucks in the first two links can recharge in 10 mins, not 1 min, though I'm sure that's just a typo. If you're looking to impress people with electric car tech, I'm surprised you didn't pick the Zap-X, which does 350 miles on a single 10 min charge. I know you know about it because I found out about it from a reply you made to another video.
Impressed by the statements they made about the improved battery in the second truck link. I was surprised to learn that the Prius and other hybrids don't allow you to plug into the mains as standard, incredibly stupid (maybe they have links to the petrol companies, didn't want to piss them off too much).
Finally, though I'm glad Bush is taking an interest in reducing oil consumption, listen to what he's actually saying. It's all about what they aim to do, funding research rather than frontline action, and he talks about alternative fuels (ethanol fuel industry).
I think the reason he has done this is because petrol companies (ExxonMobil, Shell, etc...) still want us to fill up our cars with a fuel they can control, and so Bush sees this as a way to appease big businesses and make his intentions look green. Simple fact is we won't be able to rely on these fuels without affecting food supplies, scale of ethanol production would be massive. Time will tell on this, I suppose at least it would break our dependence on one fuel source.
Interesting facts about electricity greyflcn, however we can't fix problems of global warming with unsustainable solutions like natural gas, coal, etc... If we're going to make a decent impact on this problem, needs to be investment in truly green sources of energy (solar, wind, tidal, etc...). I expect you know this anyway. Electric cars are the greenest form of transport we have, so good to know even more reasons to back it
Greyflcn, I'm glad you've woken up to the realities of biofuels like ethanol, the benefits are outweighed by the downsides. The More4 link didn't work, hopefully it had more scientific basis than the atrocious 'Great Global Warming Swindle' programme they put out.
As for the plug in vs standard Prius study, I agree that electric cars are beneficial to the environment, but the reason that Calfornia is the greenest state is because they have made the investment in green tech like solar and wind. More states need to make those changes. Here in the UK, things are slowly moving in the right direction, almost despite our government.
I didn't know about about the natural gas situation in California, thanks for sharing. However, natural gas is not a renewable resource (well, not with the timescale we would need). According to Wikipedia we are expected to run out of natural gas by 2085. There are other technologies being developed at this time to produce gas for energy purposes, but I don't really know enough about those to comment.
Seems a bit strange to be based around methane though, considering how strong a greenhouse gas it is (around 23x as strong as CO2). Do you have any info that could allay my fears? Also, where did you get that info on the UK electricity grid? Not doubting you, would just like to see it for myself.
The reason I said the UK was getting somewhere with its green energy production was mainly due to companies like Ecotricity who are helping with green energy capacity in the UK, rather than the govt who do very little. We are also going down the biofuel route, really short sighted.
Maybe I'm just being dumb, but are you saying that burning natural gas turns the methane into CO2? Would still make it a pollutant, right? Don't even get me started on nuclear power, unless we develop nuclear fusion it's not worth it. Issues with raw materials (mining and transport), nuclear waste and world security. If you would like me to go into further detail, I will.
Ah, so the More4 link was about palm oil. I knew it was a problem, but not that bad!! Quickest way to stop its production would be to boycott companies using it I suppose. I took a look at all three of those 'Great Global Warning Swindle' links, took me ages! Keep on learning more about the tricks they used to dupe people, really irritating. Take a look at this link for another interesting read about it... tinyurl . com / yqlbvz
Channel 4 is generally quite good when it comes to interesting documentaries, just a shame that they broadcast this one when it was so clearly distorting the truth.
Awesome footage. I got some good information on this from fasteconomicalcars (.) com
nutritiousacne99 1 year ago
..See " money masters" we're in way too deep. Congress, economy, war over oil?( and we thought we were fighting for world peace?)What a sad trick on the American citizens. Do yourself a favor, run your vehicles on hydrogen ...before you lose access to your local fuel pump. That's , sad to say.. just around the bend!
2br2br2 3 years ago
Anything "Bio" that has to be grown for fuel is the problem! Our food supply growth space is minimal. You choose "Food to eat or bio fuel to burn?"..no brainer? See" HHo Ecogreen" for a real ecogreen answer.
2br2br2 3 years ago
Green is gay!
YamYamMiniGran1 4 years ago
Oh yeah, and synthetic fertilizers usually come from oil.
Funny that, eh?
greyflcn 4 years ago
Oops, here's the link to the biochar thing.
greyfalcon. net/ biofuels3
greyflcn 4 years ago
That Biochar thing does seem to be a much better way of getting energy from biomass, I'm impressed. Didn't understand that radiative forcing chart. Was it meant to show that N2O is a strong greenhouse gas?
blahdelablah 4 years ago
--Didn't understand that radiative forcing chart. Was it meant to show that N2O is a strong greenhouse gas?
--
Yeah pretty much.
It's basically how much of an increase in heat per meter squared it each component causes from the latest IPCC report.
greyflcn 4 years ago
Heh, one cool thing I came across.
Apparently the best way to cut emmisions with biomass is NOT to burn it.
Apparently the best thing to is the heat it WITHOUT oxygen, and turn it into a high density char + some natural gas.
You then either use the natural gas for other stuff, but the char you use as a soil amendment.
This cuts the need for sythetic fertilizers, which emit lots of N2O. N2O is 297x more potent than CO2.
greyfalcon. net/ forcing3.png
greyflcn 4 years ago
Well, this should fix the More4 thing on biofuels
greyfalcon. net/ biofuels2
I can also comment on the global warming swindle
greyfalcon. net/ swindle
greyfalcon. net/ swindle2
greyfalcon. net/ swindle3
_
Ironically, apparently Channel 4 has a liberal spin to it. But they are rather open with who can come on, so Swindle took em by suprise.
greyflcn 4 years ago
Not sure about this vid. I'm sure the makers have good inrentions, but they made a couple of errors. First of all, with the biofuel issue they should have picked up on the point that if we rely to heavily on them they will cut into food supplies, which is dangerous. Secondly, when they showed the greenest option, the electric car, they dismissed it by stating you'd need green supply of electricity. That's already possible, so where's the problem?
blahdelablah 4 years ago
Well, you don't even need green electricity.
Electric cars powered by Natural gas are 3x greener than a Prius, and 6x greener than a normal car.
Even if powered by coal, an electric car would be inbetween a Camry and a Prius.
greyflcn 4 years ago
Heh, some stats for that
greyfalcon. net/ electriccar2.png
Here for instance is a full sized truck which gets 130 mile range, and can recharge to 80% capacity in 1 minute (given enough voltage)
greyfalcon. net/ truck
greyfalcon. net/ truck2
Even Bush gets in on the action
greyfalcon. net/ plugins
greyfalcon. net/ plugins2
greyflcn 4 years ago
Thanks for all those links greyflcn. First of all, those trucks in the first two links can recharge in 10 mins, not 1 min, though I'm sure that's just a typo. If you're looking to impress people with electric car tech, I'm surprised you didn't pick the Zap-X, which does 350 miles on a single 10 min charge. I know you know about it because I found out about it from a reply you made to another video.
blahdelablah 4 years ago
Impressed by the statements they made about the improved battery in the second truck link. I was surprised to learn that the Prius and other hybrids don't allow you to plug into the mains as standard, incredibly stupid (maybe they have links to the petrol companies, didn't want to piss them off too much).
blahdelablah 4 years ago
Finally, though I'm glad Bush is taking an interest in reducing oil consumption, listen to what he's actually saying. It's all about what they aim to do, funding research rather than frontline action, and he talks about alternative fuels (ethanol fuel industry).
blahdelablah 4 years ago
I think the reason he has done this is because petrol companies (ExxonMobil, Shell, etc...) still want us to fill up our cars with a fuel they can control, and so Bush sees this as a way to appease big businesses and make his intentions look green. Simple fact is we won't be able to rely on these fuels without affecting food supplies, scale of ethanol production would be massive. Time will tell on this, I suppose at least it would break our dependence on one fuel source.
blahdelablah 4 years ago
Interesting facts about electricity greyflcn, however we can't fix problems of global warming with unsustainable solutions like natural gas, coal, etc... If we're going to make a decent impact on this problem, needs to be investment in truly green sources of energy (solar, wind, tidal, etc...). I expect you know this anyway. Electric cars are the greenest form of transport we have, so good to know even more reasons to back it
blahdelablah 4 years ago
Actually, a report I was just reading about which did a more thorough evaluation.
aceee. org/ pubs/ t061.htm
They compared a Plugin Prius with a normal Prius.
In California the Prius is 3x greener
And in the LEAST green region of the entire US, it would only make it put up 1% more CO2 than a normal Prius.
So basically, Coal electric cars are no worse than they were on Oil.
From there, things can only get better.
greyflcn 4 years ago
And "No worse than Oil" isn't something which liquid fuels can guaruntee....
Infact, they can be much worse than Oil
greyfalcon. net/ ethanol
MUCH worse.
greyfalcon. net/ biofuels
I'm actually currently suffering from some backlash to being suckered in by biofuels.
greyflcn 4 years ago
Greyflcn, I'm glad you've woken up to the realities of biofuels like ethanol, the benefits are outweighed by the downsides. The More4 link didn't work, hopefully it had more scientific basis than the atrocious 'Great Global Warming Swindle' programme they put out.
blahdelablah 4 years ago
As for the plug in vs standard Prius study, I agree that electric cars are beneficial to the environment, but the reason that Calfornia is the greenest state is because they have made the investment in green tech like solar and wind. More states need to make those changes. Here in the UK, things are slowly moving in the right direction, almost despite our government.
blahdelablah 4 years ago
Actually the main reason California is so green is that asside from various renewables, primarily all of our electricity comes from natural gas.
Natural gas is roughly 3x less carbon intense than coal. Thats pretty much all.
UK has a similar natural gas carbon intensity as california.
And UK grid electricity is only 2x worse than all natural gas. 0.19 kgco2/kwh, versus 0.43 kgco2/kwh
greyflcn 4 years ago
I didn't know about about the natural gas situation in California, thanks for sharing. However, natural gas is not a renewable resource (well, not with the timescale we would need). According to Wikipedia we are expected to run out of natural gas by 2085. There are other technologies being developed at this time to produce gas for energy purposes, but I don't really know enough about those to comment.
blahdelablah 4 years ago
Seems a bit strange to be based around methane though, considering how strong a greenhouse gas it is (around 23x as strong as CO2). Do you have any info that could allay my fears? Also, where did you get that info on the UK electricity grid? Not doubting you, would just like to see it for myself.
blahdelablah 4 years ago
The reason I said the UK was getting somewhere with its green energy production was mainly due to companies like Ecotricity who are helping with green energy capacity in the UK, rather than the govt who do very little. We are also going down the biofuel route, really short sighted.
blahdelablah 4 years ago
And the nuclear route ;D
With nuclear taxes, and explozerated reprocessing facilities.
greyflcn 4 years ago
Sure.
Burning Natural Gas (CH4), and turning it into Carbon (CO2) reduces it's Global Warming Potential by 23x
So burning any natural gas which would have escaped is actually quite a good thing, as long as it doesn't muck up the air quality.
Landfill gas for instance.
"Biogas" can also be rather sustainable.
Germany figures they could shift all the way to Biogas by 2020.
And Switzerland is already way ahead on Biogas tech.
greyflcn 4 years ago
Maybe I'm just being dumb, but are you saying that burning natural gas turns the methane into CO2? Would still make it a pollutant, right? Don't even get me started on nuclear power, unless we develop nuclear fusion it's not worth it. Issues with raw materials (mining and transport), nuclear waste and world security. If you would like me to go into further detail, I will.
blahdelablah 4 years ago
Ah, so the More4 link was about palm oil. I knew it was a problem, but not that bad!! Quickest way to stop its production would be to boycott companies using it I suppose. I took a look at all three of those 'Great Global Warning Swindle' links, took me ages! Keep on learning more about the tricks they used to dupe people, really irritating. Take a look at this link for another interesting read about it... tinyurl . com / yqlbvz
blahdelablah 4 years ago
Channel 4 is generally quite good when it comes to interesting documentaries, just a shame that they broadcast this one when it was so clearly distorting the truth.
blahdelablah 4 years ago