Are you going to have gasoline in CA in 25 years for your Corvettes?
09-11-2018, 12:10 PM
#1
Race Director
Thread Starter
Are you going to have gasoline in CA in 25 years for your Corvettes?
https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics...218128485.html
https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics...217526750.html
100% renewable probably also means no gasoline or diesel(unless biodiesel) for any vehicles. I doubt they will pass exceptions for collector cars, as that is something only rich people can afford,and its all about equality out there.Sounds like it will be real nice place to live in 25 years. Sarcasm mode ON. Expensive, crowded, and bicycles and buses for transpo, I wonder if anyone told them how much infrastructure would be required to supply electricity for private electric cars if they are all electric?
And how many BTUs of extra electric they would have to generate to replace all those gasoline BTUs?This is definitely something they didn't float past the engineers, just pass law and assume people will come up with a viable solution.
https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics...217526750.html
100% renewable probably also means no gasoline or diesel(unless biodiesel) for any vehicles. I doubt they will pass exceptions for collector cars, as that is something only rich people can afford,and its all about equality out there.Sounds like it will be real nice place to live in 25 years. Sarcasm mode ON. Expensive, crowded, and bicycles and buses for transpo, I wonder if anyone told them how much infrastructure would be required to supply electricity for private electric cars if they are all electric?
And how many BTUs of extra electric they would have to generate to replace all those gasoline BTUs?This is definitely something they didn't float past the engineers, just pass law and assume people will come up with a viable solution.
Last edited by AZDoug; 09-11-2018 at 12:11 PM.
Popular Reply
09-11-2018, 01:28 PM
Race Director
Member Since: May 2000
Location: Redondo Beach USA
Posts: 12,487
Received 1,974 Likes
on
1,188 Posts
Sometimes I think that at some point about 20 years ago I went to sleep and woke up in a parallel universe where science and logic that I knew was completely convoluted and makes no sense.
I recently completed reading a 2012 book, "Energy for Future Presidents", by Richard Muller, a Cal Berkeley physicist and professor. He believes that man made CO2 is "likely" a factor in so-called "climate change", but he is still somewhat of a skeptic, as am I, because we don't understand all the factors and the way they interact that have continuously, in geological time frames, changed the earth's climate over the past 4.5 billion years. Here are some of the major points he makes.
Electric cars are not economically viable because typical analyses we see from the press and politicians do no include battery replacement cost or the cost of recycling the hazardous materials they contain. Further, his analyses yields that if you are charging an electric car with electricity from a coal-fired power plant, you are generating more CO2 than a conventional hydrocarbon powered car. Also, electric cars, overall, are barely more thermally efficient than conventional hydrocarbon powered cars when you take into account generation, transmission, discharging, and charging efficiencies.
China is adding a gigawatt of coal-fired electric power generation every week, and India is not far behind. All of this nonsense about reducing CO2 in California will reduce worldwide anthropogenic CO2 emissions over the next few decades by something like 0.02 percent, and it will devastate California's economy. Even Obama rejected the Copenhagen protocol because he realized that it required all the CO2 reduction from developed countries, while letting China and India off the hook, which would place the developed countries at an economic disadvantage, while the huge increase in CO2 from developing countries would continue to increase global average temperature, assuming the climate models are reasonably accurate. Any reductions from the developed countries would be essentially noise level compared to the added CO2 from coal-fired power plants in developing countries.
Fuel cell cars are a no-go because when you take into account the CO2 emissions from producing the hydrogen, which is derived from methane (CH4, with a byproduct of CO2 from the carbon atom) and fuel cell/motor efficiencies, you will generate less CO2 than if the car was methane powered.
In a survey that asked who is the most well known American scientist the top answer was Al Gore. AL GORE... he has a frigging degree in journalism! BTW, in a very polite and non-pejorative way Muller takes apart Gore's infamous movie.
Everyone should read this book, especially the elected politicians and unelected bureaucrats who push all this nonsense while the press cheers on... yeah, all those "scientists" with journalism degrees.
Muller has several other books in print, and his writing style is quick-paced and easy to digest for the non-scientist. Among his many other accomplishments and honors, he was part of the interdisciplinary team or scientists (headed by geologist Walter Alvarez and his father, physicist Luis Alvarez who was Muller's thesis advsior) that proved the dinosaurs were wiped out by a 10 kilometer wide asteroid (or maybe a comet) that impacted the earth off the current Yucatan peninsula about 66 million years ago. (Read Walter Alvarez' book, "T. Rex and the Crater of Doom" if you want to know the full story behind this decade-plus long endeavor to prove the original hypothesis in the mist of often acrimonious ridicule from much of the scientific community. It's a very interesting story.)
You can probably find Muller's and Alvarez' books at your local library.
Duke
I recently completed reading a 2012 book, "Energy for Future Presidents", by Richard Muller, a Cal Berkeley physicist and professor. He believes that man made CO2 is "likely" a factor in so-called "climate change", but he is still somewhat of a skeptic, as am I, because we don't understand all the factors and the way they interact that have continuously, in geological time frames, changed the earth's climate over the past 4.5 billion years. Here are some of the major points he makes.
Electric cars are not economically viable because typical analyses we see from the press and politicians do no include battery replacement cost or the cost of recycling the hazardous materials they contain. Further, his analyses yields that if you are charging an electric car with electricity from a coal-fired power plant, you are generating more CO2 than a conventional hydrocarbon powered car. Also, electric cars, overall, are barely more thermally efficient than conventional hydrocarbon powered cars when you take into account generation, transmission, discharging, and charging efficiencies.
China is adding a gigawatt of coal-fired electric power generation every week, and India is not far behind. All of this nonsense about reducing CO2 in California will reduce worldwide anthropogenic CO2 emissions over the next few decades by something like 0.02 percent, and it will devastate California's economy. Even Obama rejected the Copenhagen protocol because he realized that it required all the CO2 reduction from developed countries, while letting China and India off the hook, which would place the developed countries at an economic disadvantage, while the huge increase in CO2 from developing countries would continue to increase global average temperature, assuming the climate models are reasonably accurate. Any reductions from the developed countries would be essentially noise level compared to the added CO2 from coal-fired power plants in developing countries.
Fuel cell cars are a no-go because when you take into account the CO2 emissions from producing the hydrogen, which is derived from methane (CH4, with a byproduct of CO2 from the carbon atom) and fuel cell/motor efficiencies, you will generate less CO2 than if the car was methane powered.
In a survey that asked who is the most well known American scientist the top answer was Al Gore. AL GORE... he has a frigging degree in journalism! BTW, in a very polite and non-pejorative way Muller takes apart Gore's infamous movie.
Everyone should read this book, especially the elected politicians and unelected bureaucrats who push all this nonsense while the press cheers on... yeah, all those "scientists" with journalism degrees.
Muller has several other books in print, and his writing style is quick-paced and easy to digest for the non-scientist. Among his many other accomplishments and honors, he was part of the interdisciplinary team or scientists (headed by geologist Walter Alvarez and his father, physicist Luis Alvarez who was Muller's thesis advsior) that proved the dinosaurs were wiped out by a 10 kilometer wide asteroid (or maybe a comet) that impacted the earth off the current Yucatan peninsula about 66 million years ago. (Read Walter Alvarez' book, "T. Rex and the Crater of Doom" if you want to know the full story behind this decade-plus long endeavor to prove the original hypothesis in the mist of often acrimonious ridicule from much of the scientific community. It's a very interesting story.)
You can probably find Muller's and Alvarez' books at your local library.
Duke
09-11-2018, 12:21 PM
#2
64's Rock!
All I saw was a bill to have 100% renewable energy production for the electric grid. Didn't see a mention of no carbon fuels for cars, though I did just quickly skim the articles.
09-11-2018, 12:31 PM
#3
Race Director
Thread Starter
Yup, you are right. Electric gen only.
Thanks for clarifying. Its still gonna be expensive, though. And how many more Ca Condors and Bald eagles are gonna get pureed by all the extra wind turbines?
Doug
Thanks for clarifying. Its still gonna be expensive, though. And how many more Ca Condors and Bald eagles are gonna get pureed by all the extra wind turbines?
Doug
09-11-2018, 12:51 PM
#4
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Jan 2009
Location: High Mountains of New Mexico
Posts: 3,268
Received 1,391 Likes
on
683 Posts
2023 C2 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
2021 C2 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
2015 C3 of the Year Finalist
Considering the cost of anything and everything in Cali (and the drastic increases coming), and the political environment, I can't understand why most people are not leaving for anyplace else.
09-11-2018, 01:02 PM
#5
64's Rock!
I hear your concern. It will be many decades before gasoline engines go the way of the horse and buggy, but it will eventually happen. They will be priced or regulated out of the mainstream market at some point. Not likely in my lifetime though. Until then enjoy them as often as you can!
09-11-2018, 01:25 PM
#6
Race Director
Member Since: Nov 2003
Location: Cottonwood AZ
Posts: 10,698
Received 3,048 Likes
on
1,934 Posts
C1 of Year Finalist (performance mods) 2019
I hear your concern. It will be many decades before gasoline engines go the way of the horse and buggy, but it will eventually happen. They will be priced or regulated out of the mainstream market at some point. Not likely in my lifetime though. Until then enjoy them as often as you can!
Remember when you where a kid watching the Jetsons? We all thought that by the time we were 50 years old we would all be driving jet cars. Things don't happen as fast as we think they might.
Last edited by 68hemi; 09-11-2018 at 01:28 PM.
09-11-2018, 01:28 PM
#7
Race Director
Member Since: May 2000
Location: Redondo Beach USA
Posts: 12,487
Received 1,974 Likes
on
1,188 Posts
Sometimes I think that at some point about 20 years ago I went to sleep and woke up in a parallel universe where science and logic that I knew was completely convoluted and makes no sense.
I recently completed reading a 2012 book, "Energy for Future Presidents", by Richard Muller, a Cal Berkeley physicist and professor. He believes that man made CO2 is "likely" a factor in so-called "climate change", but he is still somewhat of a skeptic, as am I, because we don't understand all the factors and the way they interact that have continuously, in geological time frames, changed the earth's climate over the past 4.5 billion years. Here are some of the major points he makes.
Electric cars are not economically viable because typical analyses we see from the press and politicians do no include battery replacement cost or the cost of recycling the hazardous materials they contain. Further, his analyses yields that if you are charging an electric car with electricity from a coal-fired power plant, you are generating more CO2 than a conventional hydrocarbon powered car. Also, electric cars, overall, are barely more thermally efficient than conventional hydrocarbon powered cars when you take into account generation, transmission, discharging, and charging efficiencies.
China is adding a gigawatt of coal-fired electric power generation every week, and India is not far behind. All of this nonsense about reducing CO2 in California will reduce worldwide anthropogenic CO2 emissions over the next few decades by something like 0.02 percent, and it will devastate California's economy. Even Obama rejected the Copenhagen protocol because he realized that it required all the CO2 reduction from developed countries, while letting China and India off the hook, which would place the developed countries at an economic disadvantage, while the huge increase in CO2 from developing countries would continue to increase global average temperature, assuming the climate models are reasonably accurate. Any reductions from the developed countries would be essentially noise level compared to the added CO2 from coal-fired power plants in developing countries.
Fuel cell cars are a no-go because when you take into account the CO2 emissions from producing the hydrogen, which is derived from methane (CH4, with a byproduct of CO2 from the carbon atom) and fuel cell/motor efficiencies, you will generate less CO2 than if the car was methane powered.
In a survey that asked who is the most well known American scientist the top answer was Al Gore. AL GORE... he has a frigging degree in journalism! BTW, in a very polite and non-pejorative way Muller takes apart Gore's infamous movie.
Everyone should read this book, especially the elected politicians and unelected bureaucrats who push all this nonsense while the press cheers on... yeah, all those "scientists" with journalism degrees.
Muller has several other books in print, and his writing style is quick-paced and easy to digest for the non-scientist. Among his many other accomplishments and honors, he was part of the interdisciplinary team or scientists (headed by geologist Walter Alvarez and his father, physicist Luis Alvarez who was Muller's thesis advsior) that proved the dinosaurs were wiped out by a 10 kilometer wide asteroid (or maybe a comet) that impacted the earth off the current Yucatan peninsula about 66 million years ago. (Read Walter Alvarez' book, "T. Rex and the Crater of Doom" if you want to know the full story behind this decade-plus long endeavor to prove the original hypothesis in the mist of often acrimonious ridicule from much of the scientific community. It's a very interesting story.)
You can probably find Muller's and Alvarez' books at your local library.
Duke
I recently completed reading a 2012 book, "Energy for Future Presidents", by Richard Muller, a Cal Berkeley physicist and professor. He believes that man made CO2 is "likely" a factor in so-called "climate change", but he is still somewhat of a skeptic, as am I, because we don't understand all the factors and the way they interact that have continuously, in geological time frames, changed the earth's climate over the past 4.5 billion years. Here are some of the major points he makes.
Electric cars are not economically viable because typical analyses we see from the press and politicians do no include battery replacement cost or the cost of recycling the hazardous materials they contain. Further, his analyses yields that if you are charging an electric car with electricity from a coal-fired power plant, you are generating more CO2 than a conventional hydrocarbon powered car. Also, electric cars, overall, are barely more thermally efficient than conventional hydrocarbon powered cars when you take into account generation, transmission, discharging, and charging efficiencies.
China is adding a gigawatt of coal-fired electric power generation every week, and India is not far behind. All of this nonsense about reducing CO2 in California will reduce worldwide anthropogenic CO2 emissions over the next few decades by something like 0.02 percent, and it will devastate California's economy. Even Obama rejected the Copenhagen protocol because he realized that it required all the CO2 reduction from developed countries, while letting China and India off the hook, which would place the developed countries at an economic disadvantage, while the huge increase in CO2 from developing countries would continue to increase global average temperature, assuming the climate models are reasonably accurate. Any reductions from the developed countries would be essentially noise level compared to the added CO2 from coal-fired power plants in developing countries.
Fuel cell cars are a no-go because when you take into account the CO2 emissions from producing the hydrogen, which is derived from methane (CH4, with a byproduct of CO2 from the carbon atom) and fuel cell/motor efficiencies, you will generate less CO2 than if the car was methane powered.
In a survey that asked who is the most well known American scientist the top answer was Al Gore. AL GORE... he has a frigging degree in journalism! BTW, in a very polite and non-pejorative way Muller takes apart Gore's infamous movie.
Everyone should read this book, especially the elected politicians and unelected bureaucrats who push all this nonsense while the press cheers on... yeah, all those "scientists" with journalism degrees.
Muller has several other books in print, and his writing style is quick-paced and easy to digest for the non-scientist. Among his many other accomplishments and honors, he was part of the interdisciplinary team or scientists (headed by geologist Walter Alvarez and his father, physicist Luis Alvarez who was Muller's thesis advsior) that proved the dinosaurs were wiped out by a 10 kilometer wide asteroid (or maybe a comet) that impacted the earth off the current Yucatan peninsula about 66 million years ago. (Read Walter Alvarez' book, "T. Rex and the Crater of Doom" if you want to know the full story behind this decade-plus long endeavor to prove the original hypothesis in the mist of often acrimonious ridicule from much of the scientific community. It's a very interesting story.)
You can probably find Muller's and Alvarez' books at your local library.
Duke
Last edited by SWCDuke; 09-12-2018 at 01:30 PM.
The following 7 users liked this post by SWCDuke:
AmericanPie (09-13-2018),
Bob's 64 (09-11-2018),
ghostrider20 (09-13-2018),
Mike Geary (09-12-2018),
Mikegerm_C5 (09-14-2018),
and 2 others liked this post.
09-11-2018, 02:15 PM
#8
Racer
For every bird killed by a wind turbine, thousands are killed by fossil fuel and nuclear power plants.
I’m not a fan of land based turbines, but offshore turbines are a great idea.
The following users liked this post:
jerry gollnick (09-12-2018)
09-11-2018, 02:31 PM
#9
Race Director
Thread Starter
https://apnews.com/b8dd6050c702467e8be4b1272a3adc87
https://bismarcktribune.com/news/sta...8e60be503.html
https://www.eagles.org/take-action/w...ne-fatalities/
Doug
09-11-2018, 02:34 PM
#10
Safety Car
Member Since: Jan 2000
Location: Poway CA
Posts: 4,845
Received 1,295 Likes
on
560 Posts
2023 C1 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
2022 C1 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
2021 C1 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
2019 C1 of Year Finalist (stock)
2016 C1 of Year Finalist
Here we go.
Doomsday sayers were common in the 70's when California led the way in emissions reduction.
But it's worked beyond a shadow of a doubt: https://news.nationalgeographic.com/...h-environment/
Electric cars CENTRALIZE the electric generation rather than every car emitting it's own pollution. This enables more rapid evolution to cleaner generation as technology evolves. People scoffed at solar just 20 years ago.. they are not laughing any longer.
Doomsday sayers were common in the 70's when California led the way in emissions reduction.
But it's worked beyond a shadow of a doubt: https://news.nationalgeographic.com/...h-environment/
Electric cars CENTRALIZE the electric generation rather than every car emitting it's own pollution. This enables more rapid evolution to cleaner generation as technology evolves. People scoffed at solar just 20 years ago.. they are not laughing any longer.
The following 2 users liked this post by SDVette:
jerry gollnick (09-12-2018),
Loren Smith (09-13-2018)
09-11-2018, 03:20 PM
#11
Team Owner
I will just get like an alky carb and double the fuel pump volume and go alky! I have run cars before on alcohol! It does cut your mileage in half!
09-11-2018, 03:38 PM
#12
Racer
?? Nuke plants? Thousands of condors and bald eagles killed by nuke plants? How are coal and gas plants killing birds?
https://apnews.com/b8dd6050c702467e8be4b1272a3adc87
https://bismarcktribune.com/news/sta...8e60be503.html
https://www.eagles.org/take-action/w...ne-fatalities/
Doug
https://apnews.com/b8dd6050c702467e8be4b1272a3adc87
https://bismarcktribune.com/news/sta...8e60be503.html
https://www.eagles.org/take-action/w...ne-fatalities/
Doug
As far as birds killed by power plants, here’s some light reading. Plenty of other data available online.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/...5X.2012.746993
Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s terrible when a single eagle or condor is killed for any reason. But I often see birds as a reason not to build offshore wind farms. When you compare the total effect on the environment (including birds) by wind generated power vs nuke and fossil fuel power plants, there’s no comparison.
Another way to look at it, is wind turbines mostly just kill birds. Nuclear and fossil fuel power plants are killing every living thing on the planet.
In case you can’t tell, I’m a big proponent of wind power. Sorry to derail the thread. Carry on.
The following users liked this post:
jerry gollnick (09-12-2018)
09-11-2018, 03:42 PM
#13
Tech Contributor
How many c1-c3 owners will be able to drive them in another 25 years?
The following users liked this post:
856666 (09-12-2018)
09-11-2018, 03:57 PM
#14
Race Director
Member Since: Jun 2006
Location: Inverness FL
Posts: 17,891
Received 727 Likes
on
621 Posts
St. Jude Donor '07
While the tip speed can be fairly high, wind turbines only operate at 10-20 rpm.
tip speeds are often supersonic, that's where the noise comes from
For every bird killed by a wind turbine, thousands are killed by fossil fuel and nuclear power plants.
I disagree
I’m not a fan of land based turbines, but offshore turbines are a great idea.
09-11-2018, 03:58 PM
#15
Maybe we won't have California in 25 years. We could sell it to Mexico and use the money to pay for the wall.
The following users liked this post:
66 big block (09-12-2018)
09-11-2018, 04:02 PM
#16
09-11-2018, 04:13 PM
#17
Drifting
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-solar-bird-deaths-20160831-snap-story.html
.
but offshore turbines are a great idea.? Electricity and salt water don't mix well. Corrosion and maintance on elevated towers , Hindrance to navigation and wind averages a 35% capacity factor.
Last edited by Stingxray; 09-11-2018 at 04:16 PM.
09-11-2018, 06:10 PM
#18
Racer
09-11-2018, 06:31 PM
#19
Racer
As far as I know, blades that are designed to work at subsonic speeds are very inefficient at supersonic speeds. So it wouldn’t be a good idea to allow turbine tips to reach supersonic speeds. Typical maximum tip speeds of wind turbines are less than 200mph. You don’t have to believe me, plenty of data avaible on this.
Much less birds offshore.
If the weather breaks, I’ll fishing offshore in a couple of days. If I see a hundred birds, I’ll be shocked. And you better believe I’ll be looking for them, cuz birds=fish.
Wind turbines are not perfect, neither is solar. But power has to come from somewhere. And wind driven generators has very low impact on the environment.
I’d rather be called a fool and know I’m right, than argue with all of you expert arguers. Cya
If the weather breaks, I’ll fishing offshore in a couple of days. If I see a hundred birds, I’ll be shocked. And you better believe I’ll be looking for them, cuz birds=fish.
Better to keep quiet and people think your a FOOL that to Post and remove All Doubt ....... Oh And by the way Solar farms kill birds ........ Ivanpah Solar Plant. ...............( 6000 a year)............................. Ignorant
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-solar-bird-deaths-20160831-snap-story.html
.
but offshore turbines are a great idea.? Electricity and salt water don't mix well. Corrosion and maintance on elevated towers , Hindrance to navigation and wind averages a 35% capacity factor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTpS8HJ7wkI
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-solar-bird-deaths-20160831-snap-story.html
.
but offshore turbines are a great idea.? Electricity and salt water don't mix well. Corrosion and maintance on elevated towers , Hindrance to navigation and wind averages a 35% capacity factor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTpS8HJ7wkI
I’d rather be called a fool and know I’m right, than argue with all of you expert arguers. Cya
Last edited by Drothgeb; 09-11-2018 at 06:33 PM.
The following users liked this post:
jerry gollnick (09-12-2018)
09-11-2018, 06:40 PM
#20
Enjoy while you can.
Member Since: May 2008
Location: 10th District Court OHIO
Posts: 17,170
Received 2,686 Likes
on
1,273 Posts
Ohio Events Coordinator
2023 C8 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
2022 C2 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
C2 of Year Finalist (stock) 2019
St. Jude Donor '14-'15-'16-'17-‘18-'19-'20-'21-'22-'23-'24
Enjoy em while you can!
The following users liked this post:
vjjack04 (09-11-2018)