Jump to content
Due to a large amount of spamers, accounts will now have to be approved by the Admins so please be patient. ×
IGNORED

My bet to a workmate over the future of cars


danny_galaga

Recommended Posts

On 19/04/2022 at 12:22 AM, danny_galaga said:

And was that caterpillar tractor electric or diesel 😉

Some good news for my friends side of the bet:

Diesel but imagine the crap that can get buried in the mass electronics in an electric?.

Here's a fun fact you may not be aware of.

Once a diesel engine has started, it needs no further electrical power to keep it going. You stop the engine only by cutting the fuel to it or when it runs out of fuel.

They are extremely reliable by design because of this and then Catapillar throw in a heap of, "un-necessary to keep the motor running electronics", making it unreliable "by design".

Your bet is 2030, no more new fuel cars being sold in Australia, yes?.

Do you think the world's car makers are still going to be building cars in the same countries in 2030?

I don't. I think manufacturing will be moved to "Non climate change compliant countries" where electricity will be substantially cheaper in 2030 as well as labor costs.

This shift is already happening with BMW, Mercedes and a few others making cars in Africa and a host of other "carbon ignorant countries". Indonesia is another country many have little idea cars are being made there right now but it's happening all around the world and always targeting these "Non climate change compliant countries".

Now if you add to this, around 2030 a lot of those "carbon compliant penalties" are really going to start hurting those countries that made agreements all those years ago by "previous governments that are no longer around" shifting the wealth exactly as intended to those countries where the world's cars are then being built.

All that "penalty money" pouring into those current 3rd world countries will quickly turn them into 1st world countries and it will be those countries dictating what the world gets car wise however they aren't restricted or penalised by "carbon compliant penalties" so what do you think they will make for there now wealth populations?.

As for those former 1st world countries, us included, we won't be in any position to argue maybe not by 2030 but definately by 2040 and by 2050, the role reversal will be complete, exactly as intended.

Yes, I know, a totally different perspective but worthy of considering.

I think only time will tell whether or not a lot smarter and more deceitful people than you or I have worked this all out for a desired outcome but I try to keep an open mind.

I just can't understand how speeding up the progress of 3rd world countries to 1st world country status artifically can possibly lower the world's carbon dioxide levels which is the reason we signed such agreements in the first place.

Look what happened to China and it's Co2 output with world money pouring in and it gets to continue as is, no restrictions till 2060.

You think they and other 3rd world country status countries are going to penalise themselves like us and others have done when they become the 1st world countries?. I'm thinking no.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some good points Steve. Did you know however, that per capita, China puts out way less CO2 than Australia? And because they are at a unique place in history, they can leap frog the most polluting aspects of becoming a first World country and use the latest technologies. 

Some hopeful news for the 'townspeople' 

 

https://www.drive.com.au/news/electric-car-charger-blitz-planned-for-for-rural-victoria/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was that per capita figure used by the world to rope Australia in on there plan originally.

Australia went in with our estimated carbon sequestration rates our trees and landmass naturally reabsorb carbon at but this figure was ignored as it showed Australia was not only carbon neutral, we were taking care of a lot of other countries "problems" which would have put this nation in a fine position to take advantage of the "carbon offset plan" where nations and large corporates pay there sins away to countries that have an abundence of trees.....

A Carbon Tax as we come to know it here and come very close to actually having to pay into it rather than receive money from others. Seems we provide that service to others for free to this day at great cost to us in the way of tree felling legislation that just about every farmer in every state knows about as it resticts what trees he can legally remove on his land he owns freehold.

Like I say, this is a north hemisphere created problem. The answer is trees. We just need to plant more of them if this is actually all about Co2.

Personally, I doubt it but my mind is open.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you know a grass paddock absorbs more CO2 & expels more O2 than a paddock of the same area filled with trees.

Only downside is the animals feeding on the grass paddock produce a lot more Methane.

Edited by Gemini2544
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve, seriously, there is nothing to doubt about the science of climate change anymore. And every year that passes only makes it more solid. What needs to happen is to not link politics with science. 

Back to the subject at hand 

 

https://insideevs.com/news/580747/bmw-says-tesla-electric-vehicle-dominance-is-over/amp/

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve, they've always hung extra stuff off diesels to make them more 'civil' or environmentally friendly. The thing we did the most was to replace broken EDIC motors on Toyota's with a Bowden cable, pull to stop.

Bad news for my bet 

 

https://www.motor1.com/news/580975/toyota-invests-in-four-cylinder-engines-in-us/amp/

 

Edited by danny_galaga
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, razorsedge said:

 

 

That is very silly. Not withstanding that perpetual motion in any mechanical/ electrical sense is not possible, if somehow you could get 100% efficiency out of that setup ((which you can't, that pulley alone probably loses 5%), then all you could do is watch it run. The moment you tried to get anything or of it, you've reduced it below 100% efficiency and it would stop quick smart.

I watched my friends father waste many years trying to make a perpetual motion machine. What a waste of talent 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, danny_galaga said:

That is very silly. Not withstanding that perpetual motion in any mechanical/ electrical sense is not possible, if somehow you could get 100% efficiency out of that setup ((which you can't, that pulley alone probably loses 5%), then all you could do is watch it run. The moment you tried to get anything or of it, you've reduced it below 100% efficiency and it would stop quick smart.

I watched my friends father waste many years trying to make a perpetual motion machine. What a waste of talent 

Agree completely. Reminds me of a conversation I had with someone who was convinced if we pump water uphill then have it run back downhill through a series of paddles then they could drive a turbine to generate more power than it cost to pump up the hill.... unfortunately didn't understand the concept that you can't create something out of nothing and in any mechanical system there are losses.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, danny_galaga said:

That is very silly. Not withstanding that perpetual motion in any mechanical/ electrical sense is not possible, if somehow you could get 100% efficiency out of that setup ((which you can't, that pulley alone probably loses 5%), then all you could do is watch it run. The moment you tried to get anything or of it, you've reduced it below 100% efficiency and it would stop quick smart.

I watched my friends father waste many years trying to make a perpetual motion machine. What a waste of talent 

Lol ; Guess what it works.

 

Yeah I got taught bullsh!t too. Oh well, have to move onward by accepting it.

 

Heard of some guy named Nicola Tesla?? :classic_cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does require special arrangement of particular neodymium magnets though. Of course one has to investigate interfering magnetic fields a bit, and reconsider some of what we learned at school. It's all in there. Many obviously just brush off without even considering, observing, or trying it, and go with the preconceived notions and assumption instead. With regard to free anything, the system is Propagating failures, and suppressing successes. We all know it! Lol

Edited by razorsedge
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, robm said:

Agree completely. Reminds me of a conversation I had with someone who was convinced if we pump water uphill then have it run back downhill through a series of paddles then they could drive a turbine to generate more power than it cost to pump up the hill.... unfortunately didn't understand the concept that you can't create something out of nothing and in any mechanical system there are losses.

Actually that is Liberal plan for Snowy Mountain Scheme
use off-peak power to pump water up at night, then release the water during the day to generate more profitable power

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Pop Bumper Pete said:

Actually that is Liberal plan for Snowy Mountain Scheme
use off-peak power to pump water up at night, then release the water during the day to generate more profitable power

People get confused about the teaching of the 'perpetual motion' myth. Completely distracts from the issues. Nobody is 'making energy from nothing' or anything like that. We have just been deceived about how broad energy is, and how it can be derived or harnessed. Energy is everywhere. There are means for circulation. (:

 

With the hydroelectric storage and generation, still the energy is derived from somewhere, even if it is the weather or the rain, the atomosphere, then there is Nicolas Hydro Generator!?, people should look some of this stuff up, seriously. Find out Why is it so? . How is einstein a fraud? . Fascinating accounts!

 

The 'Self Powered Motor' a few posts back there is really one of Teslas patents from the early 20th century, rediscovered and improved with tech. Yes it was bought by... overlords. No, they don't want everyone to comprehend. No it is not part of the 'propaganda'. Lol

Same as the LFTR.

 

We've been using the WRONG nuclear. They have us into the crappy toxic volatile kind, instead of the sensible environmentally moral kind.

 

Thorium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember reading about Nicola Tesla's experiments with collecting energy from Earths own Magnetic fields. Might have merit however Nicola Tesla never knew about Ionic or magnetic radiation, So his great discoveries could have killed us all with Cancer.

Vintage Vhs GIF by vhspositive

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, as a half Serbian i am proud of what Tesla achieved in his heyday. But by the 20th century he was totally outclassed by the latest science and had no chance of comprehending the latest physics. People nowadays treat him almost like some sort of wizard...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the biggest threats to me winning my bet of course is cost. An argument for my friends position

https://www.cnet.com/google-amp/news/sell-gas-guzzler-buy-electric-car-ev-fuel-prices/

 

One of the reasons I might win the bet (climate change or no, this new vehicle is pathetically inefficient)

https://www.cnet.com/google-amp/news/usps-sued-by-16-states-over-mail-trucks/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...