I'd rather drive a diesel than a nuclear powered electric car!

[maxmoo]

.....:d

 

[turbovan+tdi]

LOL. And a ban or warning in 3-2-1!

 

[Rembrant]

LOL. Electric cars out here in the east are all still powered by coal

 

[turbovan+tdi]

Mine's powered by home heating oil,

 

[Ol'Rattler]

What do you mean by that? A car with an on board reactor or a car that uses batteries powered by a nuclear power plant?

Nuclear PPs have a series logistics problem. What do you do with waste fuel that might have say a 10,000 year half life? If the boneheads on capitol hill can stop politicking and actually work with non corrupt scientists, nuclear might have a chance.

With Diesel, the morons at the EPA are hell bent on enforcing pollution standards that are designed to make diesel emission standards near possible to meet. (NOX)

A very real pollutant that the EPA refuses to look at is VOCs. (Volatile Organic Compounds). Gasoline because of it's extremely low flash point is evaporating VOCs int the air all the way from the refinery to storage and into the gas cars we drive.

Diesel's because of their extremely high flash point evaporate very little VOCs even at some very high ambient temps.

Come on EPA, lets require gas cars the same standard for VOC pollution that Diesels can easily attain. But no, the EPA hammers on NOX and sets the standard to a point that Diesel can't quit meet it but gas cars can.

If we want too drive a diesel in the future, we need to put a leash on the EPA so that standards that are set are reasonable and not part of the EPA's politically powered witch hunt against Diesels.

What these electric car imbeciles seem to gloss over is that the electricity electric cars needs to be produced somehow, and if you overload the power grid, you have done next to nothing for the environment.

 

[Ol'Rattler]

LOL. And a ban or warning in 3-2-1!

Huh? Go over to the Vortex and troll there................

 

[maxmoo]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike_04GolfTDI
"You should check out the Canadian dieselgate thread. VW is working hard in the USA because they were forced to.

To see what VW would do if not forced, look to Canada.

Back in April they were saying Canadians would get a deal that "mirrors" the US deal. Then they found out that they were buying back the cars.

Immediately they changed their tune in Canada and now they're delaying and delaying. July 29th was supposed to be the day they tell us what's happening, but that was a joke. It has come to be known as "The day of silence" because all they did is say they're in negotiations. Next potential update is in December.

The Canadian government isn't really involved in forcing them to do anything, and left to their own devices they don't seem interested in "mirroring" the US deal here anymore, now that they know what that deal actually consists of.


Personally I would rather see this all blow over because I like diesel cars and want to see them proliferate in North America. Unfortunately that ship has sailed."

end quote.


I still think this all blew up partialy to limit the potential demand in personal diesel vehicles.

Diesel demand from transportation, agriculture, heating and military takes priority. Who would buy the gasoline left over from the cracking/refining process?

Also lobbying from the "clean" electric car sector especially the nuclear power industry comes into play.

That other thread was interesting on several levels....even though it had gotten off original topic! .....everything is connected.

 

[maxmoo]

What do you mean by that? A car with an on board reactor or a car that uses batteries powered by a nuclear power plant?

Nuclear PPs have a series logistics problem. What do you do with waste fuel that might have say a 10,000 year half life? If the boneheads on capitol hill can stop politicking and actually work with non corrupt scientists, nuclear might have a chance.

With Diesel, the morons at the EPA are hell bent on enforcing pollution standards that are designed to make diesel emission standards near possible to meet. (NOX)

A very real pollutant that the EPA refuses to look at is VOCs. (Volatile Organic Compounds). Gasoline because of it's extremely low flash point is evaporating VOCs int the air all the way from the refinery to storage and into the gas cars we drive.

Diesel's because of their extremely high flash point evaporate very little VOCs even at some very high ambient temps.

Come on EPA, lets require gas cars the same standard for VOC pollution that Diesels can easily attain. But no, the EPA hammers on NOX and sets the standard to a point that Diesel can't quit meet it but gas cars can.

If we want too drive a diesel in the future, we need to put a leash on the EPA so that standards that are set are reasonable and not part of the EPA's politically powered witch hunt against Diesels.

What these electric car imbeciles seem to gloss over is that the electricity electric cars needs to be produced somehow, and if you overload the power grid, you have done next to nothing for the environment.

I agree. And I meant, " a car that uses batteries powered by a nuclear power plant".

Major energy sources and percent share of total U.S. electricity generation in 2015:1

• Coal = 33%
• Natural gas = 33%
• Nuclear = 20%
• Hydropower = 6%
• Other renewables = 7%
  • Biomass = 1.6%
  • Geothermal = 0.4%
  • Solar = 0.6%
  • Wind = 4.7%
• Petroleum = 1%
• Other gases

.....are diesel cars really so bad?

 

[turbovan+tdi]

Huh? Go over to the Vortex and troll there................

It was a joke, relax a little, you seem uptight. Maybe you need to sniff some NOx to loosen up?

 

[Ol'Rattler]

It was a joke, relax a little, you seem uptight. Maybe you need to sniff some NOx to loosen up?

Sorry. Just trying to be funny me self. Humor is so hard to get right.

 

[turbovan+tdi]

Sorry. Just trying to be funny me self. Humor is so hard to get right.

LOL. You need to use emoticons.

 

[Ol'Rattler]

I agree. And I meant, " a car that uses batteries powered by a nuclear power plant".

Major energy sources and percent share of total U.S. electricity generation in 2015:1

• Coal = 33%
• Natural gas = 33%
• Nuclear = 20%
• Hydropower = 6%
• Other renewables = 7%
  • Biomass = 1.6%
  • Geothermal = 0.4%
  • Solar = 0.6%
  • Wind = 4.7%
• Petroleum = 1%
• Other gases

.....are diesel cars really so bad?

Aw, no. Folks that think they are contributing a zero carbon foot print because they are recharging their cars from a power grid really need to stop drinking the Cool-Aid.

Also, how much does a battery pack weigh? It does take energy having to always have to haul around a battery pack.

 

[tikal]

The health cost of transportation energy

Graph courtesy of wxman:


Reference: National Academy of Sciences, "Hidden Cost of Energy: Unpriced Consequences of Energy Production and Use." (2009),
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12794, Figure 3-7(a), Page 212 (of 506)

 

[VeeDubTDI]

.....:d

With an enlightening post such as this, I'm inclined to believe that this is just a troll thread. However, I'll oblige with the following map of electric vehicle gasoline emissions equivalents of various regional electrical grids.

As you can see, emissions equivalents depend on the source of power generation used to charge an electric vehicle. Some regions are have very low emissions due to high shares of renewable power like hydroelectric, wind, and solar. Other regions with a higher percentage of coal or diesel generation have much higher emissions equivalents. Some regions also have green/renewable power options that you can subscribe to, allowing the end user to decide whether or not they want to pay more for "cleaner" power.

Keep in mind that the grid is getting cleaner with each passing year. The grid is also getting smarter; homes and vehicles will be able to communicate with the grid in the years to come, allowing them to smooth peaks and troughs in energy production.

Don't poo-poo it just because the technology isn't "there" yet.

 

[VeeDubTDI]

Also, compare the above map from 2015 to the map below from 2012...

This illustrates my point that the grid is getting cleaner with each passing year.

 

[turbovan+tdi]

Ok, I am dumb, what does the Map shown mean?

 

[El Dobro]

Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqpLFzJEBig

 

[gatz]

Estimate of the Fukushima costs: https://www.rt.com/news/183052-japan-fukushima-costs-study/

In Connecticut the cost of electricity makes full EV energy costs about the same as a diesel or hybrid. Our (in state) energy generation is 57% natural gas, 40% nuclear and 3% renewable. Natural gas is very abundant due to fracking so, expect to see more of that instead of regulation crippled nuclear. That said, I still think EV's are the way things are headed.

Edit: Just checked, our current rate is 15.4 cents/kWh including delivery. It was over 20 cents/kWh in the previous billing cycle due to supplier cost fluctuations.

 

[El Dobro]

Estimate of the Fukushima costs: https://www.rt.com/news/183052-japan-fukushima-costs-study/

The nice part is that can't happen to a LFTR.

 

[meerschm]

Ok, I am dumb, what does the Map shown mean?

Numbers in the map show MPG a gasoline powered car would have to get to have the same global warming impact of an electric powered car (which is assumed rated at 68 mpge, based on 2014 average for electric cars).

larger the numbers on the map, the cleaner (in terms of global warming potential) the power source is.

 

[AnotherPerson]

What do you mean by that? A car with an on board reactor or a car that uses batteries powered by a nuclear power plant?

Nuclear PPs have a series logistics problem. What do you do with waste fuel that might have say a 10,000 year half life? If the boneheads on capitol hill can stop politicking and actually work with non corrupt scientists, nuclear might have a chance.

With Diesel, the morons at the EPA are hell bent on enforcing pollution standards that are designed to make diesel emission standards near possible to meet. (NOX)

A very real pollutant that the EPA refuses to look at is VOCs. (Volatile Organic Compounds). Gasoline because of it's extremely low flash point is evaporating VOCs int the air all the way from the refinery to storage and into the gas cars we drive.

Diesel's because of their extremely high flash point evaporate very little VOCs even at some very high ambient temps.

Come on EPA, lets require gas cars the same standard for VOC pollution that Diesels can easily attain. But no, the EPA hammers on NOX and sets the standard to a point that Diesel can't quit meet it but gas cars can.

If we want too drive a diesel in the future, we need to put a leash on the EPA so that standards that are set are reasonable and not part of the EPA's politically powered witch hunt against Diesels.

What these electric car imbeciles seem to gloss over is that the electricity electric cars needs to be produced somehow, and if you overload the power grid, you have done next to nothing for the environment.

You put it into a rocket and send it into space. Done.

We are getting cheaper and cheaper rockets now so for what they make off a set it's penny's.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[1854sailor]

You put it into a rocket and send it into space. Done...

Yeah, just like all of the other space junk that keeps falling back to earth? Sheesh...

 

[turbovan+tdi]

Yeah, just like all of the other space junk that keeps falling back to earth? Sheesh...

But then it burns up on re-entry, problem solved.

Didn't anyone see Wally? Sheesh.

Numbers in the map show MPG a gasoline powered car would have to get to have the same global warming impact of an electric powered car (which is assumed rated at 68 mpge, based on 2014 average for electric cars).

larger the numbers on the map, the cleaner (in terms of global warming potential) the power source is.

Thanks.

 

[tadawson]

Yeah, just like all of the other space junk that keeps falling back to earth? Sheesh...

Exactly when did he say "Into orbit"?

 

[Ol'Rattler]

I don't think he did. It could be sent on a trajectory that would send it out of the solar system.

Other than cost, the biggest drawback would be if the missile blew up on take off.

 

[1854sailor]

But then it burns up on re-entry, problem solved. ...

Space craft reentering the atmosphere can reach temperatures of 2000°K or ~3150°F, far lower than the ~5200°F required to even melt the uranium oxide, let alone strip it of its radioactivity.

I don't think he did. It could be sent on a trajectory that would send it out of the solar system...

Sure, let's just dump our waste into space, like we have been dumping trash into the oceans for years. What can go wrong with that?

 

[UhOh]

VOCs ARE "regulated." Go talk to any tanker person and you'll find out that they have hoses to reclaim VOCs: http://www.ncpcm.org/pdf/NCPCMLoadingPet&APIColor.pdf

Hydroelectric is only renewable to the average of 150 years, as that's the life expectancy of dams. Also not factored in here is that dams essentially kill fish: when I was a high-tech junkie I'd reply to folks who were asking me what I was doing with my computer(s) with- "I'm killing fish."

Lithium production is sketchy; ramping up EV production is going to be tough in light of this.

 

[waltzconmigo]

You put it into a rocket and send it into space. Done.

We are getting cheaper and cheaper rockets now so for what they make off a set it's penny's.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

not sure of your age but please recall the event in the following link before making (ridiculous) blanket statements.

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=challenger+explosion&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

sent from someone who thinks that thorium reactors should be strongly considered.

 

[1854sailor]

...sent from someone who thinks that thorium reactors should be strongly considered.

Hear, Hear!

 

[gatz]

Probably this was only mentioned as a joke, but:

http://spacelaunchreport.com/logyear.html

About 5% of launches fail. Also it's part of the reason radioisotope batteries are used sparingly. They're small and encased in a cask capable of withstanding reentry. Try that with your 55 gallon drums...

How about a Dyson swarm, the ultimate green energy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jW55cViXu6s