typical dogooder, living in pure fantasy land, what about and the rest of the world. Also how can I and the rest of us afford to do this shit when alarmist close down where I work. Talk about impractical, replace all the cars with unreliable, expensive cars especially when alarmist nazi have bankrupted the whole western worlds economies, great going dickheads . But nothing will stop alarmist living in dream land, with all there little greenie dogooder dreamer buddies
We've recently started to get smart metres installed around where I live (they just came and switched mine out today). It's pretty cool, except for all the idiots who think they'll cause cancer or something.
How are hybrid cars a method of reducing CO2 output, the reluctance of the manufacturers to disclose full CO2 production for the batteries etc for the prius shows that they know how bad they are. Even if you go with the optomistic numbers on it's co2 ouput over 5 years replacing a car after 5 years because the batteries need replacing. A normal car that can be run for longer with minimal maintainance is far better. lets not mention when china and india get the same standard of living as USA
@rhinoboy111 well the electricity can be generated from non-fossile fuels. the importance of a hybrid is it doesn't make big oil as angry as a pure electric car.
unfortunately shorter product time usage and more maintainance makes money on every selling front. when you say a normal car you mean today's car. the cars of yesterday were less efficient but ran longer and required less maintainance, like most other products. this trend most likely wont stop, its a burden of capitalism/industrialism
Hows the Chevy Volt vs Plug in Prius vs Leaf??? I know leaf can't take gas but I'm talking about carbon foot print of the car. Creating the car and battery and the disposal of the car and battery. How big of a foot print is that? Also what in the next Gen of battery cells? China has a regeneration cells for power? Could that work in a car or phone?
"The ownership strategy of the vehicle battery will have a significant impact on whether using vehicle batteries for grid storage is realistic, as this may reduce the life/reliability of vehicle batteries for not much financial return for the vehicle owner."
Using EV's to back up an intermittent grid will kill the EV.
greenman, what are your thoughts on tariffs which artificially inflate the price of import vehicles? if we are truly interested in the best technology wouldn't it make sense to do away with the tarriffs on our foreign competitors?
you make a good point. I'm not sure where I stand on that, but living in Michigan, I'm torn between anger at the smug, incompetent managers of our auto companies, and the real needs of our large corp of skilled workers - who can compete with anyone.
It would appear that the rising price of energy is making all US products more competitive against foreign imports, due to increased costs of transport.
Carbon tax is a disgusting crime against Humanity. CO2 whether man-made or otherwise doesn't drive global climate, it never has, it never will, the Sun does...
I would have more respect for a man who believed in Santa Claus rather then in electric cars. People who believe in electric cars need to learn about a little something we like to call the laws of physics.
@Theimmortalwhitewolf: Electric cars are promoted on conservation or environmental grounds. It is this that is contrary to the laws of physics. Having cars run on electric instead of being directly fueled by their own engine will always require a GREATER use of fuel. In order to run an electic car you must have battery. A battery must be charged, to get a charge into a battery you must 1st use more power then the battery is capabe of holding. Electric cars mean HIGHER fuel consumption.
@VictorLepanto Well not saying your wrong , but to point out the thermodynamic limit of most steel engines are 37%. However the average range is 18-20%(because 37% assume ideal conditions) . Electric motors convert 75% of the chemical energy from the batteries to power the wheels. So if you can have an efficient means of producing power in the local region, you could beat the overall system efficiency from energy source (oil well) to power delivered to the wheels.
@Theimmortalwhitewolf: The electric motor converting the energy from the battery has nothing to do w/ getting that energy in there in fhe 1st place. I am talking about ability of the battery to actually store the charge. Also, as a battery loses charge there is also a loss out put. No way do electric battering makes sense from an environmental perspective. I haven't even discussed the other drawbacks such as inconvenience & toxins. I've worked w/ electic engines professionally.
There is a quick simple solution to global warming and climate change. It is called Muon Catalysed Fusion. As worked on Star Scientific. NO CO2. NO Greenhouse Gases. NO Toxic Waste. The source is dueterium from the World's Oceans - virtually limitless. It is cheap to produce. WE NEED IT NOW. See the website "Star Scientific Limited", Blog "The Big Picture by Andrew Horvath", Youtube video - "In the Footsteps of Fusion"
I am all for green energy but man made climate change is a farce, that is used to justifies a new carbon tax that will accomplish nothing but make a few rich people richer by making the rest of us poorer, it also justifies world depopulation aka killing mass amounts of people because it views us as a parasite to the planet. I am not saying there is no climate change I am saying we are not causing it.
@greenman3610 I never said I was a climate change denier, I said climate change is not man made. we should label people that believe in man made global warming as "science deniers" or "natural cycle deniers" or "cosmic deniers" man made climate change is an invention to profit from, make every one believe the world is going to end so you can usurer in carbon taxes, sell over priced alternative energy's that should be cheap and depopulate the world because we are viewed as a parasite or virus.
@greenman3610 I don't watch or listen to mr beck, I simply pay attention and can see where this is going so keep drinking that fluoridated water its good for you and enjoy those carbon taxes I am sure it will reduce c02 emissions.
@greenman3610 globalist are playing both sides, one says climate change the other says no climate change, either way big oil makes big money, you barely scratched the surface with the political side of the issue. I am not saying we shouldn't go as green as we can, I agree we should, but not because we are being scared into doing it but because it is better and more efficient, unfortunately big oil has all the patents to many alternative energy's and they will milk oil as long as they can.
Conservatives live in a fantasy world. They still deny the proven fact of world overpopulation, of manmade climate change, and they are self-deluded into believing that the super-rich actually do any more work than the poor. They think banksters who steal trillions of dollars "do valuable work" for society.
Only true radicals and animal rights vegans care about humanity, patriotism, and are realistic.
That is why you have loads of MW of installed renewable power, but when you see the actual energy produced numbers, the mix makes a whole different picture.
5) Don't get me wrong. We're going to face uranium/coal/oil depletion soon and the solutions/challenges presented here will eventually be the future. But we also need to get rid of money in the process and to ensure a safe transition between the current and that society. In that transition,the only viable and sustainable solution is nuclear.
If I told someone from 15 years ago about the type of files I was working with currently on my computer, he woudl have said "nonsense! imagine the number of floppy discs that would take!"
Most of your objections fall along those lines.
I'm too pressed for time right now to go through them, but will return to these posts in coming days.
@greenman3610 I understand that point. But don't compare informatics with energy systems. Power systems have 100 years, computers have 35ish. Moore's law only applies to computers, not power systems...
@T0B0KKE "need to get rid of money" - then I'll take it. Billions of poor people can take it. They SHOULD take it, since it was stolen from them in the first place by criminal banksters and corporate executives and the Fed that prints money like there's no tomorrow and gives it to the already rich.
@mphello I'm saying need to get rid of money as concept. Not just person X getting rid of it to person Y. You're advocating free energy for all (Tesla vision) in this channel, yet you're still putting money in the equation for whatever reason. If you can distribute energy freely for all, food, shelter, water, etc. is just a matter of you wanting to do it. I bet you don't like nukes, but nuking the Fed would be cool, wouldn't it?? :D
@T0B0KKE You just proved you have no serious critical thinking skills, because I never mentioned Tesla or free energy, which I know to be bullshit. Telsa never made any practical wireless-energy-transmission device on a large scale.
Only vegans and animal rights activists have critical thinking skills. Have you seen what goes on in a factory farm? Do you know that that wastes 10X as much crops compared to going vegan?
@mphello I'm sorry but you're being elitist. You're creating stereotypes that only "your kind" of people are able to have critical thinking and all others, just because they don't share some of your ideas, are "mentally inferior subhuman shithead". So far you stated many stuff about injustices, regarding the wealthy people vs. poor people, that I agree with. I am deeply enrolled in the energy scientific field and what I say comes from personal experience and intuition.
@mphello I'm pondering in going vegan too, but that's not a thing I can transitate into because I have family and you know things are complicated. Also I don't quite believe in vegetals quality from where I can get them. Until I can't grow them for myself I won't do that transition.
I challenge you again for a man-to-man argument in skype so you can understand my position. If you're interested just PM me. Thank you very much.
4) The concept of smart grids have existed for more than 30 years now. But it is often mistaken with the new approach to "internet" the power network. I've stated before that the grid in 100 years has grown always to increase its size, and to centralize production. Who works in the economic dispatch knows how stressful is to manage wind power, and how unstable can a grid be with too many wind turbines connected. You end up needing coal/nuclear, just in case wind stops blowing...
Unless of course state entities subside energy selling by batteries, this is nothing more than an utopia and a decentralized waste of resources (batteries).
c) Every energy transfer process has losses associated. You cannot transfer 1 J of one type of energy into 1 J of other type. Entropy must always rise, limiting the efficiency. Every battery charge/discharge cycle will impose losses, so you're not displacing completely the consumption by storing electricity. Some of it is lost.
you are making an argument for distributed energy systems, which is what we are beginning to see with the deployment of renewables. as solar photovoltaic costs go lower than coal over the next 5 years, we will see distributed generation become more and more part of "baseload" power, as the grid becomes more like the internet.
It is an illusion that the electrical grid cannot be changed in less than 100 years.
@greenman3610 I agree with this. I'd love to see that happen. But until we get to that 30 year objective, we need a transition plan and that is my main fight here.
The Germans are going to shut down all nuclear power plants until 2022. You want to bet on energy price levels their energy is going to be until and after then? And replace Nuclear with what in 10 years?? Coal?? This is the incongruities and demagogueries I can't stand.
as I'll show in future videos, coal is not an option in any case. Nuclear takes 10 years to build one plant, and then is a 40 years committment, sucking up the capital we need for the transformation. No one outside of a highly controlled economy, ie france, russia, etc, is building nuclear plants. why? because they cannot stand the test of a market.
I hope I don't have to emphasize that those controlled economies include outlaw states like IRan and n. Korea, where we are told, Nukes won't be allowed on threat of starting WWIII.
parts of germany are already 50 percent wind powered. the renewables are simply competing much more strongly than anyone would have believed 10 years ago, and that is only going to increase as costs come down.
@greenman3610 China is building nuclear (german nuclear specialists were even invited to China lol), Iran is building nuclear, Poland will build nuclear, Baltic countries are building nuclear, Finland is building nuclear. What more??
Building a nuclear plant takes no less than 4 years, things can last 10 years, but that's worst case scenario. Bill Gates is researching traveling wave nuclear reactors what for???
@greenman3610 Bill Gates just gives the money to build the supercomputers that can simulate the particle models. Check is TED talk at 2010 about traveling wave nuclear reactors.
@greenman3610 «“We get sloppy” in the rich world, because we can afford to pay extra for solar or wind power. But in order to make a real impact, the costs have to become competitive with current fossil-based energy. (...) In 80% of the world, energy will be bought where it is economic. (...) You have to help the rest of the world get energy at a reasonable price.»
@T0B0KKE The costs for solar and wind become vastly cheaper than fossil fuels when we outlaw fossil fuels and put people into prison for a long time for using them. That will send a VERY strong message and get people to change their behavior. As always, people are forced to choose between spending thousands of dollars to a lawyer to defend them or go to prison. So, that will make fossil fuels VERY expensive.
@mphello Dude you're highly radical and extremist. Greenman is a good listener and a good person to argue with, but you are just nuts. Throwing people into jail just for burning fossil fuels?? Do you know that we also emit CO2?? Do you want to throw me into jail for breathing too? Be my guest. That is not going to solve anything, and there is no possible way for you to create such as legislation worldwide. You would just force emigration and population displacement.
@T0B0KKE Since you did not provide any justification for calling me "nuts", you just proved yourself to be a mentally inferior subhuman shithead. You don't get it: I take peak oil and AGW and animal rights 1000X as seriosusly as the FBI takes bomb threats and death threats, or the DEA take marijuana consumption.
So far your only point has been: "putting people into prison for any reason whatsoever is always wrong because that is always extreme and radical", then tell that first...
@mphello I take those issues more serious than terrorism too, don't get me wrong. I'm just sayin' that your measures are too extreme. First you suggest population control by extermination, then you say incarcerate people in jail for burning coal. You have to admit that you're too extremist. Just because similar abuses are currently done by other reasons, doesn't make your proposed abuses self righteous, on the contrary actually. Just chill, enjoy life and do your research. Tyvm.
@T0B0KKE ...to the FBI and DEA and extremist nutjobs who run Guantanamo prison, because the hostages illegally held captive there believe THEIR imprisonment is insane and extremist.
So, unless you prove to me why I SHOULDN'T lock up people who overpopulate and pollute far more than their fair share and destroy lives and make people homeless, be my guest.
Until then, don't fuckikng interfere with my or anyone else's freedom of speech.
@T0B0KKE You're not being realistic. It doesn't matter whether you think someone else is "radical" (which I am proud to be, by the way) or "extremist". You are forced to live and work in the same world as they.
You can't claim to want everyone to be involved in the democratic process, and then pick and choose individuals or minority political groups and tell them that they don't have the same right to lobby for and pass laws onto others who force laws onto them.
@greenman3610 "What about distributed energy where every house generates their own and feeds it back into the grid? Gates thinks that is a “cute” idea, but “it’s not gonna happen.” Bigger power generation facilities, such as solar fields in the desert, are necessary. “If you are going for cuteness, go after the those things at the home. If you want to solve the energy problem go after the big things in the desert.”
b) At the current price batteries are, unless these solutions are subsided by state entities (with tax payers money), I don't see any of them making into the real market right now. c) 1 kWh costs around 10 cents. Each PHEV battery can hold no more than 10 kWh. That does 1 €/day of sold energy. Considering we have also to buy those 10 kWh, then I dont see the monetary point of draining my car's battery, just to gain nothing. Bare in mind that batteries have limited number charge/discharge cycles.
3) I'm well aware of the load diagram you showed. There are a lot of misconceptions:
a) The solution you showed is assuming there will still be nuclear and coal plants to satisfy the load. Either way with a PHEV, the energy demands are going to increase. Your car can indeed be stopped 23 out of 24 hours, but the energy you charged during the night will all be most likely consumed in that 1 hour of moving. You seem to have forgot that cars serve the purpose to transport us, not serve as battery..
the example shows that we can move rapidly to electric vehicles without overburdening the system while we develop renewables. renewables with storage are already being deployed, even though the need for storage is overblown, with a well integrated system.
just a decade or so ago, engineers thought that renewables could not be more than 5 percent or so of the system. now there are many examples of grids where renewables are 10 and 20 percent, with plans for more.
Thanks for the video. However, I would like to point out a couple of stuff:
1) Plug-in hybrid vehicles still use oil based fossil fuels, and of course batteries. I'd challenge you to make some calculations on the amount of energy you need to produce those batteries (take into account mining of lithium, processing and etc...)
2) EV1 was a great success and was killed because of great oil interests. GM had profits with these vehicles rent. They were dismantled even... what a waste of resources.
I love how the USA force world best technology out of they country and keep buying resources for the rest of the world.
China is not going to take over the world, USA is going to hand it to them on a plate.
The reason china wants electric cars is the same reason that the USA should, ENERGY INDEPENDENCE. I think conservatives and liberals should at-least agree on that.
Focus on the best way to get there with the cheapest technology and let ideology stand aside.
When my farm equipment can be run on this technology, I will consider it. However, currently the electric pickups I have seen won't handle the loads I need. You city folk can go ahead with your commuter vehicles, but I need the power of diesel to haul my crops to market.
@greenman3610 Yep. I am just worried that legislatures will make laws that hinder the old technology to promote the new. When that happens, you also affect the rural folk who rely on it. I am all for new tech, but don't make it cost prohibitive to those who provide the food on the table for the world. Like all things new, we have to bring about the change such that you don't hinder those who count on the older way to survive. When the technology is cheap enough, people will switch over.
I suspect that this will be a continued role for liquid fuels for several decades - problem will either be solved by breakthroughs in battery or fuel cells, or by more widespread use of bioreactors in agricultural areas that will produce ethanol, bio-diesel, or methane from agricultural products. Probably all of the above.
There is also the possibility of using direct filtration of carbon dioxide out of the air. There has been some promising work in that field. It would allow us to use small oil and gas powered engines without contributing to global warming.
Of course, it would almost certainly be more expensive than sequestering emissions from power plants, or avoiding emissions in the first place with alternative power sources.
Consumer reports just did a review on the Volt and it is a big flop! Last I heard they hadn't even sold 400 cars. That is even with the big tax payer subsidity. The Leaf is not doing much better. The range and power on these electric cars suck bro.
@greenman3610 Hell yeah, bro most conservative live in reality and not in fantasy island! You liberal clowns think you can power the world on rainbow juice but that shit ain't happening Tatoo!!
I dont get why people are prettified about the idea of renewables!!! these things will be done with are without the influences of CC,
anyway why whinge about paying for renewables when your already pays stupid amounts of money for fossil fuels that will only ever increase in price from here an in.
The stark line is the we HAVE to to do this sooner or later.
actually, a billion dollar plant for advanced batteries is being built about a mile from my house, here in the midwest, USA. The chevy volt is being built in Hamtramck, Michigan.
google
Live video: GM celebrates official launch of Chevrolet Volt at Detroit-Hamtramck Assembly
or
watch?v=LsRRAIj2NlI
Climate deniers who wish to keep this country dependent on 19th century technology will insure that this century's new jobs will indeed go overseas.
No doubt some battteries are being built in Korea. I'm sorry, you're wrong about the volt.
google
volt hamtramck
We'll definitely lose our industrial base if we stay on the 19th century energy path that climate deniers advocate.
You're complaint about Arkansas is another variation of the "Ah looked out mah winder, an' it wuz cold, so there cain't be no clahmut change" argument.
Stay tuned. Next week it will rise into the 60s, and your problem will be historic flooding.
@greenman3610 We are losing our industrial base by supporting fake global warming and Obamas Carbon credit bs. How will we compete with china who don't care about how they pollute?
@hawkermustang They are trying to start a factory in the US with billions, form US tax payers, to get these really nice golf carts made here, at subsidy of $230,000 per job. Also, they are subsidizing the cart at 6k to 10k a pop because no one wants to by them. You can buy a really nice car form Ford for half the price and that will buy a lot of gas for the life of the batteries, they last ~ 5 years and cost 10k to 15K to replace.
@hawkermustang Americans may buy products built in Korea and Koreans can buy products built in America. Trade can make everyone better off. Or do you think someone from Arkansas should refuse to buy anything built in Mississippi. The problem of trade is the fossil fuel burnt for transport.
@jffryh I support equal trade with foreign nations. This is what we do not have with countries like China. What we should be doing is utilizing our own resources to create jobs and keep our wealth in our country instead of buying Oil from our adversaries. With conservative estimates we have enough oil to fuel the USA for at least 200 years. There is no reason we should be dependent on foreign oil.
I can see you cannot resist using the Heller-Forgo cooling towers (3:03) emitting H2O! Which part of "cooling tower" do you not understand? It is not smoke above them. It is water vapor!
There is too much extreme rhetoric in this debate. Claiming we may be headed to "the most prosperous period in human history" is no more responsible than the naysayers that claim that decarbonising the economy will lead to massive poverty. We need constructive dialogue, not pies in the sky/doom and gloom.
One thing I didn't understand. Perhaps you could explain it to me. You said that powerplants cannot be turned off on a daily basis to economise when demand is low. Ok i get that. But that they rely on a network of smaller power plants during the afternoon when demand is high which are only on for a few hours per day. What's the difference between these two types of powerplants?
the peaking plants are generally gas turbines, which are much easier to fire up and down, sometimes hydroelectric works for this purpose, sometimes it's nothing more than a giant diesel turbine.
until recently, the cost of natural gas made them impractical as base load units, but that seems to have changed recently.
GM Motors didn't just give up on their electric car program. All of their electric cars were on lease to celebrities like Mel Gibson and Tom Hanks. GM Motors got them all back even though the few people who got to use them loved them.
@Richard482 GM did much worse than just take the cars back - they scrapped them and sicc'ed the cops on the protesters and former owners / lessees who would have paid cold hard cash to keep them with no warranty. I believe Toyota allowed some of the electric RAV4s to stay in citizens' hands after being outed as also trying to scrap them.
The carbon that comes from cars is just a one of the problems they cause. Cars encourage sprawl, bad heath, waste and produce less jobs than mass transit. It also strands the youth, elderly and poor. It divides gene pools of animals. They kill 43,000 people a year and injure many others. The personal auto mobile is the worst invention humans have ever made. This country would be much better if only 10 percent used them regularly and the rest rented occasionally to go were transit can not,
Conservaturds are completely unrealistic. If they keep polluting and destroying people's homes, then environmentally and economically disadvantaged people will simply take back what is rightfully theirs from the conservaturds. They'll force the conservatards to pay for the damage they done via taxes and tough laws.
The time has come for Free energy to be revealed ,But some very powerfull ppl don't want you and me to be free from energy costs,Check this free energy magnet motor at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,Join the energy revolution!
So electric cars is another short term solution to internal combustion cars. I did not know they could reduce overall emissions and have so many advantages, thanks man.
@greenman3610 Strangely, here's a point where we agree. Renewable energy, when feasible, is a better way to go. What you present here are good ideas, and ultimately prove themselves some day. Today's not that day, but tomorrow's another.
Greenman, I have a suggestion for you regarding greener is better. Do a video on Amsterdam, and Copenhagen regarding their use of bicycles.. A bicycle friendly world, is a better, more healthy, more prosperous, and more livable world.. With less pollution.
The concept of cars, ie a personal vehicle that weighs over 1000 kg (metric, thats what I deal in), carries usually 1 person, and takes up a large portion of a road, both for itself and the space it requires to avoid hitting something, is a concept that is faulty within cities, regardless of how it is powered. Sure, cars are great in the country, but, small electric, human powered hybrids (eg velomobiles), as well as properly designed cities on a people scale offer a better solution, in cities.
This is not leading to prosperity. On the contrary, it leads to poverty, and on the long run to collapse of our civilization. Because it's forceful central planning by people who don't have the brain to see new competitive technology. But only old and long obsolete technic, These technics are not suitable to day, and are far to costly, which means they don't produce capital to investment, on the contrary they eat capital which should be used to investment.
One thing you did not mention in your discussion of what Denmark is doing, that, I believe is a technology, that is not new, but is being emraced by countries like Denmark, and The Netherlands. Is the bicycle. Yes the bicycle. It is a simple solution for short trips, helps reduce pollution, reduces obesity, and congestion. It is "off the shelf", and does not require any new technology. Urban sprawl, is anti bicycle, but urban sprawl, has no future anyway.
If you want an idea for renewable energy solution try new urbanism. Saves more energy than electric car and is far more productive in every human aspect.
@KrunchyJD Good point. Don't let the "green bling" of shiny new technologies like this detract from the basic fact that many lifestyles are completely incompatible with the Earth's natural resources. What gives you the right to drive around in a tonne of mined metal that took around 300 GJ (more than many family's yearly energy budget for everything) to produce (see MacKay's free book withouthotair for data). And electric vehicles require even more energy to build due to their li-ion batteries.
Greenman, I really applaud your for your work here on YouTube. Particulary this video series, they've blown me away with stuff I didn't know before.
And speaking of technology, do you have any plans for covering the subject of geoengineering? I read an article about it in a science magazine a few months back, and found it really intriguing.
I would be fine with the idea of using battery-powered vehicles, if only there were an affordable design that could provide longer continuous use by offering more mileage in a day without need to charge for several hours. 200 - 300 miles with an 8 hour or more charging period doesn't really get it for me. I already own a gasoline-powered car that gets 38 mpg-highway. The swapping station might be a viable idea, however. I'm all for cheaper, cleaner energy... be it wind, solar or nuclear.
@greenman3610 Yes, but the problem is that the technology has been around for a very long time and nowhere near enough headway had been made. Cost for the nickel hydride batteries have come down a good bit; from near $8000 - 10,000 down to somewhere under $4000. That's great... but it's taken quite a long while. I'm not saying that it isn't viable. Just that better batteries and charging methods will have to be developed before the general public is going to invest in them.
this is all fascinating, but I have one question. I live in an apartment in the projects, I and hundreds of neighbors don't have a garage, we all simply park on the street. I'm certain that this situation is true for millions of city dwellers throughout the world. If we were to get plug in hybrids, where exactly would we plug them in? I think we're going to need to commit to at least one more change in infrastructure so we can all have outlets available.
When apartment buildings and housing projects figure out that charging stations plus electric vehicles produce revenue, you will see them become available. There are a number of initiatives in several states to set up charging stations.
I see, compared to the potential revenue the grid could gain the investment of setting up charging stations around the block (which could be as simple as a weather protected outlet sticking out of the ground) is a minor cost.
@wakeangel2001 They would not only be charging stations, but would be grid feed stations (in the case where electric cars had solar cells on the roof), so that there is a benefit to the grid which gets more power to meet peak demands, as well as a benefit to the car owner/user who gets to recharge their car. Assuming sunlight, and assuming tough solar cells on car roofs (we recently had a hail storm here that has left a lot of cars on the road looking like golf balls).
The Chinese would be better off burning gasoline as far as co2 is concerned. Despite their electric power plants being all new, they use old technology 40% less efficient than current technology! All these cars do is move the co2 from the tailpipe to the coal fired power plant.
@christo930 Electric cars are more than 80% efficient in converting its energy while gasoline cars' efficiency less than 15%. So even if the electric power plant is 40% less efficient it still makes plenty of sense to switch to electric car.
@tantpwei Their power plants are up to 40% less efficient than our latest plants. Batteries are terribly inefficient (takes 1.6 watts to charge 1 watt). They are also far dirtier. Coal fired power plants produce all kinds of nasty stuff besides co2. Believe me, right now the Chinese are better off with diesel fuel cars.
Yes, there is already an aftermarket developing for Li-on batteries, as they still work for storage even after their "useful" life as car batteries is over.
As we move forward, more advanced designs using cheaper, more widely available materials are already coming out of labs, that will make it even easier in the future.
You can indeed recycle Li-ion batteries. Right now it's generally not done because the supplies of fresh material are too cheap to bother. Also, most of the components (the lithum, iron, and phosphate if it's LiFePO4 for instance) are basically non-toxic.
I love the idea of a feedback system between the car and the national grid. If instead of a petroleum-electric hybrid, a hydrogen-electric hybrid was developed then that would be perfect. This would give unlimited range and freedom while keeping the plug in system so the car to be used as a home generator and battery. This should be possible because the Honda hydrogen car uses a hydrogen fuel cell to charge a battery which powers the motor. How about connecting this battery to the mains?
I love the idea of a feedback system between the car battery and the national grid.
If instead of a petroleum-electric hybrid, a hydrogen-electric hybrid was developed then that would be perfect. Giving emissionless unlimited range and freedom while keeping the home plug-in system so the car can act as a generator. I think this is possible because the Honda hydrogen car uses a fuel cell to charge a battery which then powers the motor of the car. So just plug that battery into the mains.
This looks interesting and positive - only problem I can see here is the materials needed to make all those high powered batteries - though having said that all cars already have batteries, albeit of a smaller size.
It takes twice as much energy to produce electricity as it does just to just burn fossil fuels directly in a car's engine. Fossil fueled power plants need to make up less than 50% of the grid in order to reduce fossil fuel consumption. Although noble in intention, we are putting the cart before the horse.
this is incorrect. The efficiency of electric cars is so much greater than gasoline powered, that even when charging them with coal power, they are a better choice emissions wise.
There's about 32 MJ of energy in a (US) gallon of gasoline. That's about 8.9 kWh. But there is a big problem: burning it in a typical Otto-cycle (gasoline) engine, using that to power wheels, you lose over 80% of it. So you get 1.75 kWh of propulsion.
.
By contrast, the "heat rate" of a modern combined-cycle gas turbine plant is under 7000, making it about 50% efficient. Add in losses in electric cars and you get approximately 40% efficiency: twice as good.
One thing, though: I still think that the major drawback of electric cars is convinience. While hybrids and easily replacable batteries might alivieate that problem a bit, it's still not perfec. Hydrogen-powered cars, otoh, might use the existing network (gas stations are easily converted), while still not generating more energy loss than batteries. What's your opinion?
plug in hybrids offer advantages with no modification needed whatever to the existing gas station network. As batteries get better they will gradually replace plug ins.
Hydrogen has, as yet not been able to compete on price or convenience.
Honda has a hydrogen fuel cell car but it is very expensive, so has not taken off.
This is the best, and most accurate video summary I have seen to date. It is amazing how many folks still need to be educated to the issues at this level.
Do you have a more detailed summary of aggregation and storage and how it relates to transmission. They other topic never discussed is off-grid or local energy networks and the potential of interconnects.
honeybutt...why don't you just admit that you are a liberal/socilalist..........give Maddow a big kiss next time you are adoring it's words of wisdom.......LOL
@submarinerDeep6 =sigh= Okay, a little economics lesson for you. GDP spending is NOT government debt. In fact, diverting 1% of GDP toward solutions to AGW would act to REDUCE the debt.
@robhoneycutt Eco lesson...tax more, less tax REVENUE collected. Tax companies and they pass the cost to the consumer...economy shrinks. Taxing the American people DOES NOT PAY DOWN THE DEBT, IT MAKES SOCIALISTS INCREASE TAXES AND THE CYCLE GOES ON AND ON... THE DEBT BANKRUPTS THE COUNTRY. AS PER JFK.AGW IS FRAUD
typical dogooder, living in pure fantasy land, what about and the rest of the world. Also how can I and the rest of us afford to do this shit when alarmist close down where I work. Talk about impractical, replace all the cars with unreliable, expensive cars especially when alarmist nazi have bankrupted the whole western worlds economies, great going dickheads . But nothing will stop alarmist living in dream land, with all there little greenie dogooder dreamer buddies
vmgqie 1 week ago
We've recently started to get smart metres installed around where I live (they just came and switched mine out today). It's pretty cool, except for all the idiots who think they'll cause cancer or something.
TrueMetis 1 month ago in playlist Renewable Solution of the Month
@TrueMetis
there will always be idiots.
greenman3610 1 month ago
How are hybrid cars a method of reducing CO2 output, the reluctance of the manufacturers to disclose full CO2 production for the batteries etc for the prius shows that they know how bad they are. Even if you go with the optomistic numbers on it's co2 ouput over 5 years replacing a car after 5 years because the batteries need replacing. A normal car that can be run for longer with minimal maintainance is far better. lets not mention when china and india get the same standard of living as USA
rhinoboy111 1 month ago
@rhinoboy111 well the electricity can be generated from non-fossile fuels. the importance of a hybrid is it doesn't make big oil as angry as a pure electric car.
unfortunately shorter product time usage and more maintainance makes money on every selling front. when you say a normal car you mean today's car. the cars of yesterday were less efficient but ran longer and required less maintainance, like most other products. this trend most likely wont stop, its a burden of capitalism/industrialism
MrJarth 3 weeks ago
This is so cool!
Keep me posted :)
Hows the Chevy Volt vs Plug in Prius vs Leaf??? I know leaf can't take gas but I'm talking about carbon foot print of the car. Creating the car and battery and the disposal of the car and battery. How big of a foot print is that? Also what in the next Gen of battery cells? China has a regeneration cells for power? Could that work in a car or phone?
gabrielamaro100 2 months ago
@gabrielamaro100
see the climate crocks blog for a recent post on this -- google
Electric Vehicles New and Old. Musk and Lutz interview.
greenman3610 2 months ago
"The ownership strategy of the vehicle battery will have a significant impact on whether using vehicle batteries for grid storage is realistic, as this may reduce the life/reliability of vehicle batteries for not much financial return for the vehicle owner."
Using EV's to back up an intermittent grid will kill the EV.
iea[dot]org/papers/2011/smartgrids_roadmap.pdf
TheEclipsenow 2 months ago
greenman, what are your thoughts on tariffs which artificially inflate the price of import vehicles? if we are truly interested in the best technology wouldn't it make sense to do away with the tarriffs on our foreign competitors?
cristoballs 4 months ago
@cristoballs
you make a good point. I'm not sure where I stand on that, but living in Michigan, I'm torn between anger at the smug, incompetent managers of our auto companies, and the real needs of our large corp of skilled workers - who can compete with anyone.
It would appear that the rising price of energy is making all US products more competitive against foreign imports, due to increased costs of transport.
greenman3610 4 months ago
Electric cars won't be a solution until most energy is made responsibly.
IKillBabyKittensLOL 5 months ago in playlist More videos from greenman3610
the first e-cat will be sold next month ...cold fusion
pliskin619 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Carbon tax is a disgusting crime against Humanity. CO2 whether man-made or otherwise doesn't drive global climate, it never has, it never will, the Sun does...
The Great Global Warming Swindle [Full Film]
watch?v=T8KgbUvsC_o
Galv140577 5 months ago
I would have more respect for a man who believed in Santa Claus rather then in electric cars. People who believe in electric cars need to learn about a little something we like to call the laws of physics.
VictorLepanto 5 months ago
@VictorLepanto I know its been a while since you message this video, but could you explain how the electric cars violate any of the laws of physics?
Theimmortalwhitewolf 4 months ago
@Theimmortalwhitewolf: Electric cars are promoted on conservation or environmental grounds. It is this that is contrary to the laws of physics. Having cars run on electric instead of being directly fueled by their own engine will always require a GREATER use of fuel. In order to run an electic car you must have battery. A battery must be charged, to get a charge into a battery you must 1st use more power then the battery is capabe of holding. Electric cars mean HIGHER fuel consumption.
VictorLepanto 4 months ago
@VictorLepanto Well not saying your wrong , but to point out the thermodynamic limit of most steel engines are 37%. However the average range is 18-20%(because 37% assume ideal conditions) . Electric motors convert 75% of the chemical energy from the batteries to power the wheels. So if you can have an efficient means of producing power in the local region, you could beat the overall system efficiency from energy source (oil well) to power delivered to the wheels.
Theimmortalwhitewolf 4 months ago
@Theimmortalwhitewolf: The electric motor converting the energy from the battery has nothing to do w/ getting that energy in there in fhe 1st place. I am talking about ability of the battery to actually store the charge. Also, as a battery loses charge there is also a loss out put. No way do electric battering makes sense from an environmental perspective. I haven't even discussed the other drawbacks such as inconvenience & toxins. I've worked w/ electic engines professionally.
VictorLepanto 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There is a quick simple solution to global warming and climate change. It is called Muon Catalysed Fusion. As worked on Star Scientific. NO CO2. NO Greenhouse Gases. NO Toxic Waste. The source is dueterium from the World's Oceans - virtually limitless. It is cheap to produce. WE NEED IT NOW. See the website "Star Scientific Limited", Blog "The Big Picture by Andrew Horvath", Youtube video - "In the Footsteps of Fusion"
2110kop 6 months ago
"Climate Truthers" are absolutely PRICELESS in what they will ignore!
compare the TRUE eco footprint of your green car vs a 1965 Ford that gets 12 mpg
due to the exotics required your hybrid starts out with an Eco-footprint 4x that of the old dinosaur
your eco-steed has batteries that must be replaced EVERY 5 YEARS (IF you are lucky and get that out of them)
unless you are generating your own via solar, wind or whatever. your elecricity has a eco-footprint nearly equal to that of Gasoline.
whodathunkit1960 6 months ago
Flying car /watch?v=aeQL-dUjlOg
arneperschel 6 months ago
@arneperschel
they had something like this back in the 50s.
greenman3610 6 months ago
I've often wondered, why aren't all air-conditioning units solar powered, swapping to grid power only when necessary?
Zantorc 7 months ago
I am all for green energy but man made climate change is a farce, that is used to justifies a new carbon tax that will accomplish nothing but make a few rich people richer by making the rest of us poorer, it also justifies world depopulation aka killing mass amounts of people because it views us as a parasite to the planet. I am not saying there is no climate change I am saying we are not causing it.
ORIANA250 7 months ago in playlist Renewable Solution of the Month
@ORIANA250
please reference where I have advocated depopulation.
Note: the recent oil wars against third world people were started and shilled by climate deniers, ie Dick Cheney, Haliburton, Fox news etc.
My take is, go renewable so we no longer can be blackmailed by climate denial pushers like Exxon.
Obviously, you differ.
greenman3610 7 months ago
@greenman3610 I never said I was a climate change denier, I said climate change is not man made. we should label people that believe in man made global warming as "science deniers" or "natural cycle deniers" or "cosmic deniers" man made climate change is an invention to profit from, make every one believe the world is going to end so you can usurer in carbon taxes, sell over priced alternative energy's that should be cheap and depopulate the world because we are viewed as a parasite or virus.
ORIANA250 7 months ago
@ORIANA250
the science says the current warming is man made. sorry.
again, your "depopulation" rant is Glenn Beck nonsense. I really think you'd be happier on some conspiracy site, don't you?
greenman3610 7 months ago
@greenman3610 I don't watch or listen to mr beck, I simply pay attention and can see where this is going so keep drinking that fluoridated water its good for you and enjoy those carbon taxes I am sure it will reduce c02 emissions.
ORIANA250 7 months ago
@ORIANA250
fluoridated water?
google
"precious bodily fluids"
greenman3610 7 months ago
@greenman3610 globalist are playing both sides, one says climate change the other says no climate change, either way big oil makes big money, you barely scratched the surface with the political side of the issue. I am not saying we shouldn't go as green as we can, I agree we should, but not because we are being scared into doing it but because it is better and more efficient, unfortunately big oil has all the patents to many alternative energy's and they will milk oil as long as they can.
ORIANA250 7 months ago
@ORIANA250 correction. We are not the sole cause of climate change is more correct; 60% by us human,
40% natural.... To say we have nothing to do with climate change is also a farce or to say that all climate change is purely natural is also a farce.
kuvceebxab1 7 months ago
Conservatives live in a fantasy world. They still deny the proven fact of world overpopulation, of manmade climate change, and they are self-deluded into believing that the super-rich actually do any more work than the poor. They think banksters who steal trillions of dollars "do valuable work" for society.
Only true radicals and animal rights vegans care about humanity, patriotism, and are realistic.
mphello 8 months ago
That is why you have loads of MW of installed renewable power, but when you see the actual energy produced numbers, the mix makes a whole different picture.
5) Don't get me wrong. We're going to face uranium/coal/oil depletion soon and the solutions/challenges presented here will eventually be the future. But we also need to get rid of money in the process and to ensure a safe transition between the current and that society. In that transition,the only viable and sustainable solution is nuclear.
T0B0KKE 8 months ago
@T0B0KKE
If I told someone from 15 years ago about the type of files I was working with currently on my computer, he woudl have said "nonsense! imagine the number of floppy discs that would take!"
Most of your objections fall along those lines.
I'm too pressed for time right now to go through them, but will return to these posts in coming days.
greenman3610 8 months ago
@greenman3610 I understand that point. But don't compare informatics with energy systems. Power systems have 100 years, computers have 35ish. Moore's law only applies to computers, not power systems...
T0B0KKE 8 months ago
@T0B0KKE "need to get rid of money" - then I'll take it. Billions of poor people can take it. They SHOULD take it, since it was stolen from them in the first place by criminal banksters and corporate executives and the Fed that prints money like there's no tomorrow and gives it to the already rich.
mphello 8 months ago
@mphello I'm saying need to get rid of money as concept. Not just person X getting rid of it to person Y. You're advocating free energy for all (Tesla vision) in this channel, yet you're still putting money in the equation for whatever reason. If you can distribute energy freely for all, food, shelter, water, etc. is just a matter of you wanting to do it. I bet you don't like nukes, but nuking the Fed would be cool, wouldn't it?? :D
T0B0KKE 8 months ago
@T0B0KKE You just proved you have no serious critical thinking skills, because I never mentioned Tesla or free energy, which I know to be bullshit. Telsa never made any practical wireless-energy-transmission device on a large scale.
Only vegans and animal rights activists have critical thinking skills. Have you seen what goes on in a factory farm? Do you know that that wastes 10X as much crops compared to going vegan?
mphello 8 months ago
@mphello I'm sorry but you're being elitist. You're creating stereotypes that only "your kind" of people are able to have critical thinking and all others, just because they don't share some of your ideas, are "mentally inferior subhuman shithead". So far you stated many stuff about injustices, regarding the wealthy people vs. poor people, that I agree with. I am deeply enrolled in the energy scientific field and what I say comes from personal experience and intuition.
T0B0KKE 8 months ago
@mphello I'm pondering in going vegan too, but that's not a thing I can transitate into because I have family and you know things are complicated. Also I don't quite believe in vegetals quality from where I can get them. Until I can't grow them for myself I won't do that transition.
I challenge you again for a man-to-man argument in skype so you can understand my position. If you're interested just PM me. Thank you very much.
T0B0KKE 8 months ago
4) The concept of smart grids have existed for more than 30 years now. But it is often mistaken with the new approach to "internet" the power network. I've stated before that the grid in 100 years has grown always to increase its size, and to centralize production. Who works in the economic dispatch knows how stressful is to manage wind power, and how unstable can a grid be with too many wind turbines connected. You end up needing coal/nuclear, just in case wind stops blowing...
T0B0KKE 8 months ago
@T0B0KKE
see my wind videos
watch?v=llIbjC49Fjs
watch?v=WO3V2uXTM6k
greenman3610 8 months ago
Unless of course state entities subside energy selling by batteries, this is nothing more than an utopia and a decentralized waste of resources (batteries).
c) Every energy transfer process has losses associated. You cannot transfer 1 J of one type of energy into 1 J of other type. Entropy must always rise, limiting the efficiency. Every battery charge/discharge cycle will impose losses, so you're not displacing completely the consumption by storing electricity. Some of it is lost.
T0B0KKE 8 months ago
@T0B0KKE
you are making an argument for distributed energy systems, which is what we are beginning to see with the deployment of renewables. as solar photovoltaic costs go lower than coal over the next 5 years, we will see distributed generation become more and more part of "baseload" power, as the grid becomes more like the internet.
It is an illusion that the electrical grid cannot be changed in less than 100 years.
In the next 30 it will be completely remade.
greenman3610 8 months ago
@greenman3610 I agree with this. I'd love to see that happen. But until we get to that 30 year objective, we need a transition plan and that is my main fight here.
The Germans are going to shut down all nuclear power plants until 2022. You want to bet on energy price levels their energy is going to be until and after then? And replace Nuclear with what in 10 years?? Coal?? This is the incongruities and demagogueries I can't stand.
T0B0KKE 8 months ago
@T0B0KKE
as I'll show in future videos, coal is not an option in any case. Nuclear takes 10 years to build one plant, and then is a 40 years committment, sucking up the capital we need for the transformation. No one outside of a highly controlled economy, ie france, russia, etc, is building nuclear plants. why? because they cannot stand the test of a market.
greenman3610 8 months ago
@greenman3610
I hope I don't have to emphasize that those controlled economies include outlaw states like IRan and n. Korea, where we are told, Nukes won't be allowed on threat of starting WWIII.
parts of germany are already 50 percent wind powered. the renewables are simply competing much more strongly than anyone would have believed 10 years ago, and that is only going to increase as costs come down.
greenman3610 8 months ago
@greenman3610 China is building nuclear (german nuclear specialists were even invited to China lol), Iran is building nuclear, Poland will build nuclear, Baltic countries are building nuclear, Finland is building nuclear. What more??
Building a nuclear plant takes no less than 4 years, things can last 10 years, but that's worst case scenario. Bill Gates is researching traveling wave nuclear reactors what for???
T0B0KKE 8 months ago
@T0B0KKE
you support my point about controlled economies. By the way, check out how "well" that Finnish plant is doing, google
Areva Finnish Nuclear Plant Overruns Approach Initial Cost After Provision
and
In Finland, Nuclear Renaissance Runs Into Trouble
that the inventor of Windows thinks nuclear is a good idea, is not comforting.
greenman3610 8 months ago
@greenman3610
moreover, by the time traveling wave reactors are ready, if ever, the revolution will be over.
greenman3610 8 months ago
@greenman3610 Bill Gates just gives the money to build the supercomputers that can simulate the particle models. Check is TED talk at 2010 about traveling wave nuclear reactors.
T0B0KKE 8 months ago
@greenman3610 «“We get sloppy” in the rich world, because we can afford to pay extra for solar or wind power. But in order to make a real impact, the costs have to become competitive with current fossil-based energy. (...) In 80% of the world, energy will be bought where it is economic. (...) You have to help the rest of the world get energy at a reasonable price.»
Quoted from Bill Gates 1 month ago.
T0B0KKE 8 months ago
@T0B0KKE The costs for solar and wind become vastly cheaper than fossil fuels when we outlaw fossil fuels and put people into prison for a long time for using them. That will send a VERY strong message and get people to change their behavior. As always, people are forced to choose between spending thousands of dollars to a lawyer to defend them or go to prison. So, that will make fossil fuels VERY expensive.
mphello 8 months ago
@mphello Dude you're highly radical and extremist. Greenman is a good listener and a good person to argue with, but you are just nuts. Throwing people into jail just for burning fossil fuels?? Do you know that we also emit CO2?? Do you want to throw me into jail for breathing too? Be my guest. That is not going to solve anything, and there is no possible way for you to create such as legislation worldwide. You would just force emigration and population displacement.
T0B0KKE 8 months ago
@T0B0KKE Since you did not provide any justification for calling me "nuts", you just proved yourself to be a mentally inferior subhuman shithead. You don't get it: I take peak oil and AGW and animal rights 1000X as seriosusly as the FBI takes bomb threats and death threats, or the DEA take marijuana consumption.
So far your only point has been: "putting people into prison for any reason whatsoever is always wrong because that is always extreme and radical", then tell that first...
mphello 8 months ago
@mphello I take those issues more serious than terrorism too, don't get me wrong. I'm just sayin' that your measures are too extreme. First you suggest population control by extermination, then you say incarcerate people in jail for burning coal. You have to admit that you're too extremist. Just because similar abuses are currently done by other reasons, doesn't make your proposed abuses self righteous, on the contrary actually. Just chill, enjoy life and do your research. Tyvm.
T0B0KKE 8 months ago
@T0B0KKE ...to the FBI and DEA and extremist nutjobs who run Guantanamo prison, because the hostages illegally held captive there believe THEIR imprisonment is insane and extremist.
So, unless you prove to me why I SHOULDN'T lock up people who overpopulate and pollute far more than their fair share and destroy lives and make people homeless, be my guest.
Until then, don't fuckikng interfere with my or anyone else's freedom of speech.
mphello 8 months ago
@T0B0KKE You're not being realistic. It doesn't matter whether you think someone else is "radical" (which I am proud to be, by the way) or "extremist". You are forced to live and work in the same world as they.
You can't claim to want everyone to be involved in the democratic process, and then pick and choose individuals or minority political groups and tell them that they don't have the same right to lobby for and pass laws onto others who force laws onto them.
mphello 8 months ago
@greenman3610 "What about distributed energy where every house generates their own and feeds it back into the grid? Gates thinks that is a “cute” idea, but “it’s not gonna happen.” Bigger power generation facilities, such as solar fields in the desert, are necessary. “If you are going for cuteness, go after the those things at the home. If you want to solve the energy problem go after the big things in the desert.”
T0B0KKE 8 months ago
b) At the current price batteries are, unless these solutions are subsided by state entities (with tax payers money), I don't see any of them making into the real market right now. c) 1 kWh costs around 10 cents. Each PHEV battery can hold no more than 10 kWh. That does 1 €/day of sold energy. Considering we have also to buy those 10 kWh, then I dont see the monetary point of draining my car's battery, just to gain nothing. Bare in mind that batteries have limited number charge/discharge cycles.
T0B0KKE 8 months ago
3) I'm well aware of the load diagram you showed. There are a lot of misconceptions:
a) The solution you showed is assuming there will still be nuclear and coal plants to satisfy the load. Either way with a PHEV, the energy demands are going to increase. Your car can indeed be stopped 23 out of 24 hours, but the energy you charged during the night will all be most likely consumed in that 1 hour of moving. You seem to have forgot that cars serve the purpose to transport us, not serve as battery..
T0B0KKE 8 months ago
@T0B0KKE
the example shows that we can move rapidly to electric vehicles without overburdening the system while we develop renewables. renewables with storage are already being deployed, even though the need for storage is overblown, with a well integrated system.
just a decade or so ago, engineers thought that renewables could not be more than 5 percent or so of the system. now there are many examples of grids where renewables are 10 and 20 percent, with plans for more.
greenman3610 8 months ago
Thanks for the video. However, I would like to point out a couple of stuff:
1) Plug-in hybrid vehicles still use oil based fossil fuels, and of course batteries. I'd challenge you to make some calculations on the amount of energy you need to produce those batteries (take into account mining of lithium, processing and etc...)
2) EV1 was a great success and was killed because of great oil interests. GM had profits with these vehicles rent. They were dismantled even... what a waste of resources.
T0B0KKE 8 months ago
I love how the USA force world best technology out of they country and keep buying resources for the rest of the world.
China is not going to take over the world, USA is going to hand it to them on a plate.
The reason china wants electric cars is the same reason that the USA should, ENERGY INDEPENDENCE. I think conservatives and liberals should at-least agree on that.
Focus on the best way to get there with the cheapest technology and let ideology stand aside.
rorymccallum 9 months ago
When my farm equipment can be run on this technology, I will consider it. However, currently the electric pickups I have seen won't handle the loads I need. You city folk can go ahead with your commuter vehicles, but I need the power of diesel to haul my crops to market.
qhack 10 months ago
@qhack
it's coming.
we'll let you country folk know when it's ready.
greenman3610 10 months ago
@greenman3610 Yep. I am just worried that legislatures will make laws that hinder the old technology to promote the new. When that happens, you also affect the rural folk who rely on it. I am all for new tech, but don't make it cost prohibitive to those who provide the food on the table for the world. Like all things new, we have to bring about the change such that you don't hinder those who count on the older way to survive. When the technology is cheap enough, people will switch over.
qhack 10 months ago
@qhack
I suspect that this will be a continued role for liquid fuels for several decades - problem will either be solved by breakthroughs in battery or fuel cells, or by more widespread use of bioreactors in agricultural areas that will produce ethanol, bio-diesel, or methane from agricultural products. Probably all of the above.
greenman3610 10 months ago
greenman
There is also the possibility of using direct filtration of carbon dioxide out of the air. There has been some promising work in that field. It would allow us to use small oil and gas powered engines without contributing to global warming.
Of course, it would almost certainly be more expensive than sequestering emissions from power plants, or avoiding emissions in the first place with alternative power sources.
Rovinpiper 8 months ago
Consumer reports just did a review on the Volt and it is a big flop! Last I heard they hadn't even sold 400 cars. That is even with the big tax payer subsidity. The Leaf is not doing much better. The range and power on these electric cars suck bro.
hawkermustang 11 months ago
@hawkermustang
wait and see what 5 dollar gas does to sales.
greenman3610 11 months ago
@greenman3610 It should cause Obama to get voted out of office. He really sucks.
hawkermustang 11 months ago
@hawkermustang
Most people that say that voted for Bush twice.
greenman3610 11 months ago
@greenman3610 Hell yeah, bro most conservative live in reality and not in fantasy island! You liberal clowns think you can power the world on rainbow juice but that shit ain't happening Tatoo!!
hawkermustang 11 months ago
@hawkermustang
I rest my case.
greenman3610 11 months ago
The mans got a point, better is actually better.
Dakayrus 11 months ago
I dont get why people are prettified about the idea of renewables!!! these things will be done with are without the influences of CC,
anyway why whinge about paying for renewables when your already pays stupid amounts of money for fossil fuels that will only ever increase in price from here an in.
The stark line is the we HAVE to to do this sooner or later.
pathfinder756 11 months ago
Do you know of any other YTers focusing on just the raw facts about renewable sources of energy like this?
lazyperfectionist1 11 months ago
Solar panels and wind mills are a joke. They make up 0.7% of the USA's total energy needs. Total waste of time and money.
hawkermustang 11 months ago
Did the experts tell you that the Chevy Volt is being built in Mexico and the batteries are being built in Korea?
Mexico and Korea should thank Obama for creating green jobs for them with our tax dollars.
hawkermustang 11 months ago
@hawkermustang
actually, a billion dollar plant for advanced batteries is being built about a mile from my house, here in the midwest, USA. The chevy volt is being built in Hamtramck, Michigan.
google
Live video: GM celebrates official launch of Chevrolet Volt at Detroit-Hamtramck Assembly
or
watch?v=LsRRAIj2NlI
Climate deniers who wish to keep this country dependent on 19th century technology will insure that this century's new jobs will indeed go overseas.
greenman3610 11 months ago
@greenman3610 Wrong! the volt is being built in Mexico and the batteries in Korea!
Oh yeah, this global warming scam is some BS, I'm in Ar. and were under 8 inches of snow right now.
hawkermustang 11 months ago
@hawkermustang
No doubt some battteries are being built in Korea. I'm sorry, you're wrong about the volt.
google
volt hamtramck
We'll definitely lose our industrial base if we stay on the 19th century energy path that climate deniers advocate.
You're complaint about Arkansas is another variation of the "Ah looked out mah winder, an' it wuz cold, so there cain't be no clahmut change" argument.
Stay tuned. Next week it will rise into the 60s, and your problem will be historic flooding.
greenman3610 11 months ago
@greenman3610 We are losing our industrial base by supporting fake global warming and Obamas Carbon credit bs. How will we compete with china who don't care about how they pollute?
hawkermustang 11 months ago
@hawkermustang
we're losing our industrial base because we've supported the agenda of the fossil fuel industry, wars for oil, and the casino of financial services.
This started with Ronald Reagan, when he took the solar panels off the white house and devoted America to enriching Exxon.
Whether you believe in AGW or not, clearly the nation that learns to run itself on free energy will dominate the new century.
We could, if we choose, lead the new industrial revolution, but time's wasting.
greenman3610 11 months ago
@greenman3610 not sure if it's helpful to mock someone for having an accent.
jffryh 11 months ago
@hawkermustang They are trying to start a factory in the US with billions, form US tax payers, to get these really nice golf carts made here, at subsidy of $230,000 per job. Also, they are subsidizing the cart at 6k to 10k a pop because no one wants to by them. You can buy a really nice car form Ford for half the price and that will buy a lot of gas for the life of the batteries, they last ~ 5 years and cost 10k to 15K to replace.
cupera1 11 months ago
@hawkermustang Americans may buy products built in Korea and Koreans can buy products built in America. Trade can make everyone better off. Or do you think someone from Arkansas should refuse to buy anything built in Mississippi. The problem of trade is the fossil fuel burnt for transport.
jffryh 11 months ago
@jffryh I support equal trade with foreign nations. This is what we do not have with countries like China. What we should be doing is utilizing our own resources to create jobs and keep our wealth in our country instead of buying Oil from our adversaries. With conservative estimates we have enough oil to fuel the USA for at least 200 years. There is no reason we should be dependent on foreign oil.
hawkermustang 11 months ago
@hawkermustang
The 200 year figure is utter nonsense, no matter what kind of fuel you are talking about.
greenman3610 11 months ago
@greenman3610 OK 300 years is more like it.
hawkermustang 11 months ago
@greenman3610
This is one of your better efforts.
I can see you cannot resist using the Heller-Forgo cooling towers (3:03) emitting H2O! Which part of "cooling tower" do you not understand? It is not smoke above them. It is water vapor!
judomagyar 1 year ago
There is too much extreme rhetoric in this debate. Claiming we may be headed to "the most prosperous period in human history" is no more responsible than the naysayers that claim that decarbonising the economy will lead to massive poverty. We need constructive dialogue, not pies in the sky/doom and gloom.
GorterPoss 1 year ago
@greenman3610
One thing I didn't understand. Perhaps you could explain it to me. You said that powerplants cannot be turned off on a daily basis to economise when demand is low. Ok i get that. But that they rely on a network of smaller power plants during the afternoon when demand is high which are only on for a few hours per day. What's the difference between these two types of powerplants?
Richard482 1 year ago
@Richard482
the peaking plants are generally gas turbines, which are much easier to fire up and down, sometimes hydroelectric works for this purpose, sometimes it's nothing more than a giant diesel turbine.
until recently, the cost of natural gas made them impractical as base load units, but that seems to have changed recently.
greenman3610 1 year ago
GM Motors didn't just give up on their electric car program. All of their electric cars were on lease to celebrities like Mel Gibson and Tom Hanks. GM Motors got them all back even though the few people who got to use them loved them.
Richard482 1 year ago
@Richard482 GM did much worse than just take the cars back - they scrapped them and sicc'ed the cops on the protesters and former owners / lessees who would have paid cold hard cash to keep them with no warranty. I believe Toyota allowed some of the electric RAV4s to stay in citizens' hands after being outed as also trying to scrap them.
bannor99 1 year ago
The carbon that comes from cars is just a one of the problems they cause. Cars encourage sprawl, bad heath, waste and produce less jobs than mass transit. It also strands the youth, elderly and poor. It divides gene pools of animals. They kill 43,000 people a year and injure many others. The personal auto mobile is the worst invention humans have ever made. This country would be much better if only 10 percent used them regularly and the rest rented occasionally to go were transit can not,
facelessone86 1 year ago
@facelessone86 Best comment so far!
Conservaturds are completely unrealistic. If they keep polluting and destroying people's homes, then environmentally and economically disadvantaged people will simply take back what is rightfully theirs from the conservaturds. They'll force the conservatards to pay for the damage they done via taxes and tough laws.
mphello 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The time has come for Free energy to be revealed ,But some very powerfull ppl don't want you and me to be free from energy costs,Check this free energy magnet motor at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,Join the energy revolution!
offertorycardiacml 1 year ago
So electric cars is another short term solution to internal combustion cars. I did not know they could reduce overall emissions and have so many advantages, thanks man.
ale03000 1 year ago
@greenman3610 Strangely, here's a point where we agree. Renewable energy, when feasible, is a better way to go. What you present here are good ideas, and ultimately prove themselves some day. Today's not that day, but tomorrow's another.
smartalek65 1 year ago
Greenman, I have a suggestion for you regarding greener is better. Do a video on Amsterdam, and Copenhagen regarding their use of bicycles.. A bicycle friendly world, is a better, more healthy, more prosperous, and more livable world.. With less pollution.
KrunchyJD 1 year ago
The concept of cars, ie a personal vehicle that weighs over 1000 kg (metric, thats what I deal in), carries usually 1 person, and takes up a large portion of a road, both for itself and the space it requires to avoid hitting something, is a concept that is faulty within cities, regardless of how it is powered. Sure, cars are great in the country, but, small electric, human powered hybrids (eg velomobiles), as well as properly designed cities on a people scale offer a better solution, in cities.
KrunchyJD 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Belive it or not Free energy is real,But the coverup is very strong,Check this free energy magnet motor at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,Free yourself!
ivylsp 1 year ago
This is not leading to prosperity. On the contrary, it leads to poverty, and on the long run to collapse of our civilization. Because it's forceful central planning by people who don't have the brain to see new competitive technology. But only old and long obsolete technic, These technics are not suitable to day, and are far to costly, which means they don't produce capital to investment, on the contrary they eat capital which should be used to investment.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Free Energy is real and its here! The Oil companies are doing everything in their power to stop these
information. If you want a Free energy machine do a search in youtube for the LT MAGNET MOTOR , Join the
revolution!
cadentavaricegrtrj 1 year ago
One thing you did not mention in your discussion of what Denmark is doing, that, I believe is a technology, that is not new, but is being emraced by countries like Denmark, and The Netherlands. Is the bicycle. Yes the bicycle. It is a simple solution for short trips, helps reduce pollution, reduces obesity, and congestion. It is "off the shelf", and does not require any new technology. Urban sprawl, is anti bicycle, but urban sprawl, has no future anyway.
KrunchyJD 1 year ago
@KrunchyJD
You're right on the money.
I try to use my bicycle more and more for the short trips, and am finding it enjoyable - a great break in the day, and good exercise.
greenman3610 1 year ago
@greenman3610
If you want an idea for renewable energy solution try new urbanism. Saves more energy than electric car and is far more productive in every human aspect.
facelessone86 1 year ago
@KrunchyJD Good point. Don't let the "green bling" of shiny new technologies like this detract from the basic fact that many lifestyles are completely incompatible with the Earth's natural resources. What gives you the right to drive around in a tonne of mined metal that took around 300 GJ (more than many family's yearly energy budget for everything) to produce (see MacKay's free book withouthotair for data). And electric vehicles require even more energy to build due to their li-ion batteries.
RobinLovelace 1 year ago
In Canada we have alot of hydropower so it doesn't pollute
MaddDogg81 1 year ago
if only oil wasn't so dirty
MaddDogg81 1 year ago
Greenman, I really applaud your for your work here on YouTube. Particulary this video series, they've blown me away with stuff I didn't know before.
And speaking of technology, do you have any plans for covering the subject of geoengineering? I read an article about it in a science magazine a few months back, and found it really intriguing.
Farksisten 1 year ago
@Farksisten
will probably treat the topic at some time - not in the queue as of now.
greenman3610 1 year ago
I would be fine with the idea of using battery-powered vehicles, if only there were an affordable design that could provide longer continuous use by offering more mileage in a day without need to charge for several hours. 200 - 300 miles with an 8 hour or more charging period doesn't really get it for me. I already own a gasoline-powered car that gets 38 mpg-highway. The swapping station might be a viable idea, however. I'm all for cheaper, cleaner energy... be it wind, solar or nuclear.
upinarms79 1 year ago
@upinarms79
think just 20 years ago...
These new fangled "cell phones" are fine, but who wants to carry something that's big and heavy like a brick?...."
10 years ago
"Who's going to buy a flat screen TV? They're so expensive! Just a toy for the rich."
greenman3610 1 year ago
@greenman3610 Yes, but the problem is that the technology has been around for a very long time and nowhere near enough headway had been made. Cost for the nickel hydride batteries have come down a good bit; from near $8000 - 10,000 down to somewhere under $4000. That's great... but it's taken quite a long while. I'm not saying that it isn't viable. Just that better batteries and charging methods will have to be developed before the general public is going to invest in them.
upinarms79 1 year ago
(CNN) -- A highway-worthy airplane moves one step closer to production with a recent weight exemption approved by the Federal Aviation Administration.
The Transition Roadable Aircraft, developed by Massachusetts-based engineering firm (...)
Transition is designed for trips of up to about 450 miles and can travel about 100 miles per hour in the air and "highway speeds" on the ground (...)
the Transition will cost $194,000. The first delivery will occur in about 18 months (...)
Supercar!
arneperschel 1 year ago
Thanks for some possitive news!! even if it may not all happen it is good to hear.
tjwarren68 1 year ago
Why feed the energy from the car battery to your grid? Why not just directly power your house with it? Only surplus goes into the grid.
82abhilash 1 year ago
amazing video! this explains a lot of my questions about electric cars! Thanks
FreshZerglings 1 year ago
this is all fascinating, but I have one question. I live in an apartment in the projects, I and hundreds of neighbors don't have a garage, we all simply park on the street. I'm certain that this situation is true for millions of city dwellers throughout the world. If we were to get plug in hybrids, where exactly would we plug them in? I think we're going to need to commit to at least one more change in infrastructure so we can all have outlets available.
wakeangel2001 1 year ago
@wakeangel2001
When apartment buildings and housing projects figure out that charging stations plus electric vehicles produce revenue, you will see them become available. There are a number of initiatives in several states to set up charging stations.
greenman3610 1 year ago
I see, compared to the potential revenue the grid could gain the investment of setting up charging stations around the block (which could be as simple as a weather protected outlet sticking out of the ground) is a minor cost.
wakeangel2001 1 year ago
@wakeangel2001 They would not only be charging stations, but would be grid feed stations (in the case where electric cars had solar cells on the roof), so that there is a benefit to the grid which gets more power to meet peak demands, as well as a benefit to the car owner/user who gets to recharge their car. Assuming sunlight, and assuming tough solar cells on car roofs (we recently had a hail storm here that has left a lot of cars on the road looking like golf balls).
indulis1 1 year ago
Don't forget to vote for Greenman in the Brigher Planet contest.
.
brighterplanet. com/project_fund_projects/138
robhoneycutt 1 year ago
thanks for yr wise words Greenman! :) Better is better!!!
NorthernDancer1111 1 year ago
The Chinese would be better off burning gasoline as far as co2 is concerned. Despite their electric power plants being all new, they use old technology 40% less efficient than current technology! All these cars do is move the co2 from the tailpipe to the coal fired power plant.
christo930 1 year ago
@christo930 Electric cars are more than 80% efficient in converting its energy while gasoline cars' efficiency less than 15%. So even if the electric power plant is 40% less efficient it still makes plenty of sense to switch to electric car.
tantpwei 1 year ago
@tantpwei Their power plants are up to 40% less efficient than our latest plants. Batteries are terribly inefficient (takes 1.6 watts to charge 1 watt). They are also far dirtier. Coal fired power plants produce all kinds of nasty stuff besides co2. Believe me, right now the Chinese are better off with diesel fuel cars.
christo930 1 year ago
SUUUUUUUPAAAAAA CAAAAAAR
wunksta 1 year ago
Hi Greenman, I have one doubt. Is there a recycling process available for electric cars baterries?
alessandramarcarian 1 year ago
@alessandramarcarian
Yes, there is already an aftermarket developing for Li-on batteries, as they still work for storage even after their "useful" life as car batteries is over.
As we move forward, more advanced designs using cheaper, more widely available materials are already coming out of labs, that will make it even easier in the future.
greenman3610 1 year ago
@alessandramarcarian
You can indeed recycle Li-ion batteries. Right now it's generally not done because the supplies of fresh material are too cheap to bother. Also, most of the components (the lithum, iron, and phosphate if it's LiFePO4 for instance) are basically non-toxic.
silatube 1 year ago
in the future 50% of cars will be electric, the rest will be powered by the tears of oil executives
TBman256 1 year ago
Very interesting video. Keep up the good work :)
ShawnD1 1 year ago
I love the idea of a feedback system between the car and the national grid. If instead of a petroleum-electric hybrid, a hydrogen-electric hybrid was developed then that would be perfect. This would give unlimited range and freedom while keeping the plug in system so the car to be used as a home generator and battery. This should be possible because the Honda hydrogen car uses a hydrogen fuel cell to charge a battery which powers the motor. How about connecting this battery to the mains?
mwtbell32 1 year ago
@mwtbell32
Honda's car is cool, but still pretty expensive.
The gas-electric hybrids will be first to market. anybody's guess as to what the
final winning technology will be, but breakthroughs in battery tech give an edge to all electric vehicles.
greenman3610 1 year ago
I love the idea of a feedback system between the car battery and the national grid.
If instead of a petroleum-electric hybrid, a hydrogen-electric hybrid was developed then that would be perfect. Giving emissionless unlimited range and freedom while keeping the home plug-in system so the car can act as a generator. I think this is possible because the Honda hydrogen car uses a fuel cell to charge a battery which then powers the motor of the car. So just plug that battery into the mains.
mwtbell32 1 year ago
This looks interesting and positive - only problem I can see here is the materials needed to make all those high powered batteries - though having said that all cars already have batteries, albeit of a smaller size.
nd017 1 year ago
It takes twice as much energy to produce electricity as it does just to just burn fossil fuels directly in a car's engine. Fossil fueled power plants need to make up less than 50% of the grid in order to reduce fossil fuel consumption. Although noble in intention, we are putting the cart before the horse.
rusty1491 1 year ago
@rusty1491
this is incorrect. The efficiency of electric cars is so much greater than gasoline powered, that even when charging them with coal power, they are a better choice emissions wise.
greenman3610 1 year ago
@rusty1491
There's about 32 MJ of energy in a (US) gallon of gasoline. That's about 8.9 kWh. But there is a big problem: burning it in a typical Otto-cycle (gasoline) engine, using that to power wheels, you lose over 80% of it. So you get 1.75 kWh of propulsion.
.
By contrast, the "heat rate" of a modern combined-cycle gas turbine plant is under 7000, making it about 50% efficient. Add in losses in electric cars and you get approximately 40% efficiency: twice as good.
silatube 1 year ago
@silatube -- oops, that's 32 MJ/liter, not /gallon. The efficiency numbers are correct though.
silatube 1 year ago
Great video!
One thing, though: I still think that the major drawback of electric cars is convinience. While hybrids and easily replacable batteries might alivieate that problem a bit, it's still not perfec. Hydrogen-powered cars, otoh, might use the existing network (gas stations are easily converted), while still not generating more energy loss than batteries. What's your opinion?
Killersepp 1 year ago
@Killersepp
plug in hybrids offer advantages with no modification needed whatever to the existing gas station network. As batteries get better they will gradually replace plug ins.
Hydrogen has, as yet not been able to compete on price or convenience.
Honda has a hydrogen fuel cell car but it is very expensive, so has not taken off.
greenman3610 1 year ago
This is the best, and most accurate video summary I have seen to date. It is amazing how many folks still need to be educated to the issues at this level.
Do you have a more detailed summary of aggregation and storage and how it relates to transmission. They other topic never discussed is off-grid or local energy networks and the potential of interconnects.
prayfortruejustice 1 year ago
@prayfortruejustice
I am now beginning work on a new "renewable " vid which will treat energy storage.
If you have info re energy networks and interconnects, please contact me privately at my channel.
greenman3610 1 year ago
Greenman, you're a great communicator.
StephenRolfer 1 year ago
@StephenRolfer
thank you.
greenman3610 1 year ago
@greenman3610 You give Maddow and Olbermann a big kiss for me too......
bfpccbm 1 year ago
honeybutt...why don't you just admit that you are a liberal/socilalist..........give Maddow a big kiss next time you are adoring it's words of wisdom.......LOL
bfpccbm 1 year ago
Great video Pete!
TMTdorame 1 year ago
Honeynut has a picture of Al Gore in his living room...
bfpccbm 1 year ago
Thanks for a more positive video the the Crock of the Week videos! Keep up the good work.
trwtpc 1 year ago
@treefugger......There is not one doubt in my mind that Janet Reno was your favoriate......
bfpccbm 1 year ago
The game is over when you socialist take over......but we do still have the 2nd amendment.............
bfpccbm 1 year ago
run to your bunker red, remember waco
treeplanter99 1 year ago
@bfpccbm You really DO watch too much Glenn Beck.
robhoneycutt 1 year ago
@robhoneycutt
submarinerDeep6 1 year ago
@robhoneycutt rob...are you in favor of cap-n-trade?
submarinerDeep6 1 year ago
@submarinerDeep6 I am in favor of a market based solution to the problem of AGW.
robhoneycutt 1 year ago
@robhoneycutt MARKET BASEDSOLUTIONS...WHAT BULL CRAP!
submarinerDeep6 1 year ago
@submarinerDeep6 What's the matter, sub? You don't believe in the power of the market place? You some kind of commie or something?
robhoneycutt 1 year ago
@robhoneycutt " Market based solutions?" The famous words of a self proclaimed communist obama czar- VAN JONES, your hero.
submarinerDeep6 1 year ago
@submarinerDeep6 So, really. You don't believe in the market place?
robhoneycutt 1 year ago
@robhoneycutt 9 trillion dollar debt and counting...
submarinerDeep6 1 year ago
@submarinerDeep6 =sigh= Okay, a little economics lesson for you. GDP spending is NOT government debt. In fact, diverting 1% of GDP toward solutions to AGW would act to REDUCE the debt.
robhoneycutt 1 year ago
@robhoneycutt Eco lesson...tax more, less tax REVENUE collected. Tax companies and they pass the cost to the consumer...economy shrinks. Taxing the American people DOES NOT PAY DOWN THE DEBT, IT MAKES SOCIALISTS INCREASE TAXES AND THE CYCLE GOES ON AND ON... THE DEBT BANKRUPTS THE COUNTRY. AS PER JFK.AGW IS FRAUD
submarinerDeep6 1 year ago