Page 7 of 8

Re: Global Warming's Terrifying New Math

Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2017 7:36 pm
by Phximiev
PV1 wrote:Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines one step closer. So, how can we make oil worthless?

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/arti ... ing-pledge


We need an airborne bacteria/virus/nano-robot/who-knows-what to turn petrochemicals to stone.

Ho hum....

Re: Global Warming's Terrifying New Math

Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 4:35 pm
by Phximiev
A breath of optimism on the battery front:

http://www.pbs.org/video/2365946487/

Here is the website for Ionic, one of the subjects of the video.

http://ionicmaterials.com

Re: Global Warming's Terrifying New Math

Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2017 12:55 am
by PV1
I saw that on TV the other night. I was getting annoyed at the beginning, but then they got it together on the EV front. I was also surprised that they mentioned Aquion based in Pittsburgh.

I still can't tell if Nova's Koch funding has any effect on the content or if it's just a red herring.

Re: Global Warming's Terrifying New Math

Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2017 8:49 am
by Phximiev
I did peruse Aquion's site and noted that they have a distributor network with one here in Arizona. The product looks quite small in comparison to lead acid batteries and appears cheaper than say a powerwall (but this needs to be confirmed). I sent an inquiry to the AZ distributor about a home configuration. We'll see.

Here's their distributor link: http://aquionenergy.com/distributors/find-distributor/

Re: Global Warming's Terrifying New Math

Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2017 11:33 am
by Phximiev
Tesla Powerwall project (note the PG&E 'Miev also):

http://insideevs.com/pge-brings-online- ... ubstation/

PG&E, it appears, has been involved with the i-Miev for some time (2008 article): http://media.mitsubishicars.com/release ... ee4b06fc7b

Vacaville: http://www.hybridcars.com/vacaville-cal ... -us-27977/

https://youtu.be/YiL3hbD2GxQ

Re: Global Warming's Terrifying New Math

Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 5:22 pm
by Phximiev
Phximiev wrote:A breath of optimism on the battery front:

http://www.pbs.org/video/2365946487/

Here is the website for Ionic, one of the subjects of the video.

http://ionicmaterials.com


More battery optimism with a solid state battery:

https://cleantechnica.com/2017/03/06/ba ... batteries/

http://fortune.com/2017/03/05/lithium-i ... oodenough/

Re: Global Warming's Terrifying New Math

Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 5:04 pm
by Phximiev
More optimism in the Emirates:

https://youtu.be/WCKz8ykyI2E

Re: Global Warming's Terrifying New Math

Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2017 8:07 am
by JoeS

Re: Global Warming's Terrifying New Math

Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2017 1:12 pm
by PV1
That would certainly be nice to see happen.

Even though our i-MiEVs are a quantum leap ahead in energy efficiency over gas-powered cars, electric bicycles are 10-20 times more electrically efficient (achieving 35-80 miles/kWh compared to our 3.5-4 miles/kWh). I went on a group ride yesterday around Pittsburgh. For 7 bikes to travel 20 miles, total electricity consumption was about 2.5 kWh. While true that most of us were pedaling (one wasn't, I was more or less just spinning the pedals), we all ended with nearly the same charge level. To compare, 2.5 kWh would power:

1. A Ford Focus (35 MPG) for 2.4 miles,
2. An i-MiEV for 10 miles,
3. An eBike for 140 miles.

For my 23 mile commute, the 6 kWh my i-MiEV uses on average in one day would power my commute for 10 days on the bike. Even if four people were in the car, we'd still be better off on four bikes.I guess what I'm trying to say is that even though electric cars are a considerable jump in energy efficiency over ICEVs, they are definitely not enough.

Re: Global Warming's Terrifying New Math

Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2017 2:24 pm
by JoeS
PV1, it's wonderful to see the thousands of bicycles in use in, for example, Copenhagen. Bicycles, complemented by electric bicycles, as slowly making inroads into our culture.

In the big picture, there are two considerations -

1. Emissions
2. Energy efficiency

If energy generation can become emissions-free, then efficiency, while laudable, becomes less of a consideration. For example, almost all of my (inefficient) electric-car driving and home power consumption utilizes emissions-free energy. It's adverse emissions we need to curb … no, eliminate, and, as pointed out in the article, figure out how to reverse.

Here's the precursor article (to the one above) talking about 2degC:

http://www.vox.com/2014/4/22/5551004/two-degrees

Unchecked, we're heading for a 4.9degC rise by the end of this century. Terrible legacy we're leaving the next generations, especially when knowing what needs to be done NOW to prevent that. Don't get me going on the absence of political will to do that.

Sadly, a significant percentage of the population still denies that we are facing a crisis.