Lithium batteries, not worth it...

[T]

On 4/14/23 15:43, John Larkin wrote:

Natural gas fuel cells come to mind.
Fuel cells have been the thing of the future since 1838.

The history is really interesting.

Car makers
keep promising hydrogen fuel cell cars but don\'t deliver.

\"IF\" you can find the hydrogen to run them and \"IF\" the
cost does not bankrupt you, they are A-W-E-S-O-M-E!
Everything has been solved, except for the cost and availability of hydrogen

Seems to me that an NG fuel cell car would make more sense than
hydrogen. I suspect that fuel cells aren\'t very practical.

NG fuel cells are just coming on the scene. They are
running large company buildings. Amazon has a few.
Residential roll out is suppose to start later this year.
We will see.

I would love it is Subi did a Forester in NG.

And I would love it if I could get a NG fuel cell
backup generator. No moving parts. No pollution.
Runs forever as long as NG is present. (Never had
a NG outage in my lifetime of 66 years.) \"Supposedly\"
they will be rolling out later in the year. We will
also see.

And as always, the market should dictate what comes
out on top, not the government. I suspect it
will be a mix of different technologies. And
gasoline engines are getting better all the time.

 

[T]

On 4/14/23 16:38, Ed P wrote:

Natural gas fuel cells come to mind.

Also, gasoline engines continue to become
more efficient and less polluting.

Yes, been many advances.    Fact is, not in our lifetime, but in the
future, oil will run out.  It will get expensive as it get harder to
find and process.

That is not actually true. Horizontal fracking brought the
price down a lot. And availability keeps going up and up
as more and more of it is located.

Any shortage is political, not technical. We won\'t run out
for multiple, multiple generations. That run out is a propaganda narrative

Fortunately there are people working on renewable technology to keep
that from becoming a big problem.  Long way to go, but working towards in.

Renewable energy has its place, but it can only meet
about 15 to 20% at best. And they are not without
pollution either in their manufacture and disposal.

Our grandkids and great grandkids will be driving EVs, thank to the
effort made today.

If you mean BEV\'s (Battery EV\'s) or \"coal fired rolling firebombs\" that
pollute like hell and rape the earth, I
sincerely hope not.

What? No propaganda narrative about running out of coal?

Wherever the government gets involved, things always to
sideways.

Let the market decide as it did when whale oil ran
out and kerosene took over and gasoline took over
from kerosene.. etc. etc. etc..

How about you libs let us build a bunch of these
new small nuclear power plants that can\'t melt down?

 

[T]

On 4/14/23 17:00, T wrote:

On 4/14/23 16:38, Ed P wrote:
Natural gas fuel cells come to mind.

Also, gasoline engines continue to become
more efficient and less polluting.

Yes, been many advances.    Fact is, not in our lifetime, but in the
future, oil will run out.  It will get expensive as it get harder to
find and process.

That is not actually true.  Horizontal fracking brought the
price down a lot.  And availability keeps going up and up
as more and more of it is located.

Any shortage is political, not technical.  We won\'t run out
for multiple, multiple generations.  That run out is a propaganda narrative

Fortunately there are people working on renewable technology to keep
that from becoming a big problem.  Long way to go, but working towards in.

Renewable energy has its place, but it can only meet
about 15 to 20% at best.  And they are not without
pollution either in their manufacture and disposal.

Our grandkids and great grandkids will be driving EVs, thank to the
effort made today.

If you mean BEV\'s (Battery EV\'s) or \"coal fired rolling firebombs\" that
pollute like hell and rape the earth, I
sincerely hope not.

What?  No propaganda narrative about running out of coal?

Wherever the government gets involved, things always to
sideways.

Let the market decide as it did when whale oil ran
out and kerosene took over and gasoline took over
from kerosene.. etc. etc. etc..

How about you libs let us build a bunch of these
new small nuclear power plants that can\'t melt down?

I might add that the government\'s pollution
standards should include aggregate pollution,
not just tail pipe emissions. BEV\'s should
include the pollution to create them, the pollution
to fuel them, and the pollution to dispose/recycle
them.

Hmmmm. Maybe even safety standards too when they
catch fire, as in mechanical doors so you can exit
them when they catch fie. (The current electric
doors don\'t work when the electricity stops.)

Maybe add some king of extinguishing system that
actually works.

Interesting, Hydrogen floats upward and away.


A lot of palms are getting waxed here.

 

[T]

On 4/14/23 15:18, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 07:37:37 +0100, alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk>
wrote:

On 14/04/2023 04:57, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Are you greenies nuts?
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/385430139122
Nearly 3 grand for a battery with the same capacity of two deep cycle
lead acid batteries costing £150?

With a brand name of Growatt obviously aimed at the home cannabis farm -
they can afford it.

Growing weed was profitable when it was illegal. Now, anybody can do
it.

Wholesale prices in California dropped from $1200 to $100 per pound.

Used to be that Humboldt Country was a pioneer of solar, off-grid
power, for all the weed farms out in the wilderness.

Awesome!

 

[Rod Speed]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 21:46:21 +1000, Brian Gaff <brian1gaff@gmail.com>
wrote:

I was listening to a science program a couple of weeks ago, and they
seem to
be wondering that when they look at the spectrum of some asteroids they
seem to be giving a high indication of Lithium content. If that is the
case, is it not odd that as the earth was apparently built from this
stuff
that its not abundant here as well? Who nicked it all?

Those bloody Martians.

 

[Ed P]

On 4/14/2023 8:00 PM, T wrote:

On 4/14/23 16:38, Ed P wrote:
Natural gas fuel cells come to mind.

Also, gasoline engines continue to become
more efficient and less polluting.

Yes, been many advances.    Fact is, not in our lifetime, but in the
future, oil will run out.  It will get expensive as it get harder to
find and process.

That is not actually true.  Horizontal fracking brought the
price down a lot.  And availability keeps going up and up
as more and more of it is located.

Fracking is a TEMPORARY solution and has environmental issues of its own.

Any shortage is political, not technical.  We won\'t run out
for multiple, multiple generations.  That run out is a propaganda narrative

It is a finite material. The question is not \"if\" but \"when\". It will
happen so why not start doing something now?

Fortunately there are people working on renewable technology to keep
that from becoming a big problem.  Long way to go, but working towards in.

Renewable energy has its place, but it can only meet
about 15 to 20% at best.  And they are not without
pollution either in their manufacture and disposal.

Our grandkids and great grandkids will be driving EVs, thank to the
effort made today.

If you mean BEV\'s (Battery EV\'s) or \"coal fired rolling firebombs\" that
pollute like hell and rape the earth, I
sincerely hope not.

What?  No propaganda narrative about running out of coal?

Coal will run out too, but much longer time than oil. Coal fired cars
are not very practical yet.

Wherever the government gets involved, things always to
sideways.

Let the market decide as it did when whale oil ran
out and kerosene took over and gasoline took over
from kerosene.. etc. etc. etc..

Right, another temporary solution. Good idea at the time, not time to
look at the future. The market followed technology available at the
time. Let\'s take the next step.

How about you libs let us build a bunch of these
new small nuclear power plants that can\'t melt down?

I don\'t object. Gotta recharge those EV batteries with something

 

[rbowman]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 15:43:39 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

Fuel cells have been the thing of the future since 1838. Car makers keep
promising hydrogen fuel cell cars but don\'t deliver.

https://www.hydrogeninsight.com/transport/toyota-unveils-its-first-new-
hydrogen-car-in-a-decade-to-go-on-sale-this-autumn/2-1-1433307

The fly in the ointment:

https://www.iea.org/reports/the-future-of-hydrogen

\"Supplying hydrogen to industrial users is now a major business around the
world. Demand for hydrogen, which has grown more than threefold since
1975, continues to rise – almost entirely supplied from fossil fuels, with
6% of global natural gas and 2% of global coal going to hydrogen
production.\"

\"While less than 0.1% of global dedicated hydrogen production today comes
from water electrolysis, with declining costs for renewable electricity,
in particular from solar PV and wind, there is growing interest in
electrolytic hydrogen.\"

Someday. Maybe. Gaseous hydrogen storage presents many problems. Carbon
fiber vessels have helped somewhat. BMW played around with liquid hydrogen
although it was for an ICE dual fuel engine. Besides the problem of it
boiling off, what could go wrong with Joe Sixpack filling his pickup with
a -423 F liquid?

 

[rbowman]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 20:42:48 -0400, Ed P wrote:

Coal will run out too, but much longer time than oil. Coal fired cars
are not very practical yet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_liquefaction

You chase blue sky technologies while ignoring those developed over a
hundred years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bergius_process

\"Towards the end of World War II the United States began heavily financing
research into converting coal to gasoline, including money to build a
series of pilot plants. The project was enormously helped by captured
German technology. One plant using the Bergius process was built in
Louisiana, Missouri and began operation about 1946. Located along the
Mississippi river, this plant was producing gasoline in commercial
quantities by 1948. The Louisiana process method produced automobile
gasoline at a price slightly higher than, but comparable to, petroleum-
based gasoline[8] but of a higher quality.[citation needed] The facility
was shut down in 1953 by the Eisenhower administration, allegedly after
intense lobbying by the oil industry.\"

Gee, imagine that! Surprisingly Germany was forbidden by treaty to
continue perfecting the processes. Can\'t have them shortchanging the
Anglo-American energy producers -- then as now.

 

[T]

On 4/14/23 17:42, Ed P wrote:

On 4/14/2023 8:00 PM, T wrote:
On 4/14/23 16:38, Ed P wrote:

That is not actually true.  Horizontal fracking brought the
price down a lot.  And availability keeps going up and up
as more and more of it is located.

Fracking is a TEMPORARY solution and has environmental issues of its own.

A lot of those issues are downright lies. They
are created by ass holes who don\'t like oil
and are willing to lie to get their way.

We have ALWAYS used vertical fracking. We now know
how to drill down and then bend the pipe horizontal.
Horizontal uses a ton less holes than vertical.
Far, far less footprint on the surface. The fracking
is the same technology that has been used for years.

Any shortage is political, not technical.  We won\'t run out
for multiple, multiple generations.  That run out is a propaganda
narrative

It is a finite material.  The question is not \"if\" but \"when\".  It will
happen so why not start doing something now?

It is a long, long way in our future.

Wherever the government gets involved, things always to
sideways.

Let the market decide as it did when whale oil ran
out and kerosene took over and gasoline took over
from kerosene.. etc. etc. etc..

Right, another temporary solution.  Good idea at the time, not time to
look at the future.  The market followed technology available at the
time.  Let\'s take the next step.

EVERY SOLUTION will be temporary. That is the way technology
progresses.

How about you libs let us build a bunch of these
new small nuclear power plants that can\'t melt down?


I don\'t object.  Gotta recharge those EV batteries with something

Oh no no no no no no. Tell me we just did not
agree on something. NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

 

[T]

On 4/14/23 19:41, rbowman wrote:

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 20:42:48 -0400, Ed P wrote:

Coal will run out too, but much longer time than oil. Coal fired cars
are not very practical yet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_liquefaction

You chase blue sky technologies while ignoring those developed over a
hundred years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bergius_process

\"Towards the end of World War II the United States began heavily financing
research into converting coal to gasoline, including money to build a
series of pilot plants. The project was enormously helped by captured
German technology. One plant using the Bergius process was built in
Louisiana, Missouri and began operation about 1946. Located along the
Mississippi river, this plant was producing gasoline in commercial
quantities by 1948. The Louisiana process method produced automobile
gasoline at a price slightly higher than, but comparable to, petroleum-
based gasoline[8] but of a higher quality.[citation needed] The facility
was shut down in 1953 by the Eisenhower administration, allegedly after
intense lobbying by the oil industry.\"

Gee, imagine that! Surprisingly Germany was forbidden by treaty to
continue perfecting the processes. Can\'t have them shortchanging the
Anglo-American energy producers -- then as now.

Let\'s just get the government out of it!

And we have so much natural gas it is mind boggling!

 

[Rod Speed]

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 07:17:46 +1000, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 4/14/23 07:51, Frank wrote:
On 4/14/2023 1:14 AM, T wrote:
On 4/13/23 21:35, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 04:57:37 +0100, Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com
wrote:

Are you greenies nuts?
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/385430139122
Nearly 3 grand for a battery with the same capacity of two deep
cycle lead acid batteries costing £150?

Or.... £446 for 100Ah, when you an get a 130Ah lead acid for £75:
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/114677041217


But, But, But, But lithium batteries rape the earth
to extract the lithium and are a nightmare to
recycle so they are considered green!!!!
I have seen analysis of ores coming out of Peruvian lead mine. There
is nothing green there and it is a nightmare compared to lithium salts
with all the other heavy, toxic metals along with the lead.

And the water used is not toxic to the point of not
being able to be used for a very, very long time.
You know that will eventually, with some palm
waxing, be flushed into the rivers. Oppps,
how did that happen???

No relevant rivers with most of our heavy metal mines.

It has been a problem with one mine in PNG.

 

[Rod Speed]

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 09:38:52 +1000, Ed P <esp@snet.xxx> wrote:

On 4/14/2023 6:14 PM, T wrote:

lithium batteries are just a passing phase of technology.

The future will be either graphene, aluminum or silicone anode.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/01/04/1066141/whats-next-for-batteries/
This year could be a breakout year for one alternative: lithium iron
phosphate (LFP), a low-cost cathode material sometimes used for
lithium-ion batteries.

Yes, there are a lot of technologies being looked into. Something
like sodium would be much cheaper and not have the flammability
concerns even though only slightly heavier.
Natural gas fuel cells come to mind.
Also, gasoline engines continue to become
more efficient and less polluting.

Yes, been many advances. Fact is, not in our lifetime, but in the
future, oil will run out. It will get expensive as it get harder to
find and process.

Fortunately there are people working on renewable technology to keep
that from becoming a big problem. Long way to go, but working towards
in.

We invented nukes which fix the problem LONG ago.

Our grandkids and great grandkids will be driving EVs, thank to the
effort made today.

That remains to be seen.

 

[Rod Speed]

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 10:42:48 +1000, Ed P <esp@snet.xxx> wrote:

On 4/14/2023 8:00 PM, T wrote:
On 4/14/23 16:38, Ed P wrote:
Natural gas fuel cells come to mind.

Also, gasoline engines continue to become
more efficient and less polluting.

Yes, been many advances. Fact is, not in our lifetime, but in the
future, oil will run out. It will get expensive as it get harder to
find and process.
That is not actually true. Horizontal fracking brought the
price down a lot. And availability keeps going up and up
as more and more of it is located.

Fracking is a TEMPORARY solution and has environmental issues of its own.
Any shortage is political, not technical. We won\'t run out
for multiple, multiple generations. That run out is a propaganda
narrative

It is a finite material. The question is not \"if\" but \"when\". It will
happen so why not start doing something now?

Makes more sense to do nukes instead of renewables.

Fortunately there are people working on renewable technology to keep
that from becoming a big problem. Long way to go, but working towards
in.
Renewable energy has its place, but it can only meet
about 15 to 20% at best. And they are not without
pollution either in their manufacture and disposal.

Our grandkids and great grandkids will be driving EVs, thank to the
effort made today.
If you mean BEV\'s (Battery EV\'s) or \"coal fired rolling firebombs\"
that pollute like hell and rape the earth, I
sincerely hope not.
What? No propaganda narrative about running out of coal?

Coal will run out too, but much longer time than oil. Coal fired cars
are not very practical yet.

But we have been able to turn coal into what
can power cars for more than 100 years now.

Wherever the government gets involved, things always to
sideways.
Let the market decide as it did when whale oil ran
out and kerosene took over and gasoline took over
from kerosene.. etc. etc. etc..

Right, another temporary solution. Good idea at the time, not time to
look at the future. The market followed technology available at the
time. Let\'s take the next step.

By far the best next step is nukes, not renewables.

How about you libs let us build a bunch of these
new small nuclear power plants that can\'t melt down?


I don\'t object. Gotta recharge those EV batteries with something

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 12:50:39 PM UTC+10, T wrote:

On 4/14/23 17:42, Ed P wrote:
On 4/14/2023 8:00 PM, T wrote:
On 4/14/23 16:38, Ed P wrote:

<snip>

> >> Any shortage is political, not technical. We won\'t run out for multiple, multiple generations. That run out is a propaganda narrative.

The claim that we have enough gas for multiple generations is another propaganda narrative. It\'s probably true in that if we keep on burning natural gas and dumping CO2 into the atmosphere we\'ll engineer a population crash and there will be so few people in subsequent generations that they won\'t need much gas, even if theye retain the technology to to keep on extracting it

It is a finite material. The question is not \"if\" but \"when\". It will happen so why not start doing something now?

It is a long, long way in our future.

It\'s a long way off in the severely restricted future that the fossil carbon extraction industry is trying to set up.

> >> Wherever the government gets involved, things always to sideways.

From the way the greedy fossil carbon extraction industry want it to go, where they de young but rich.

> >> Let the market decide as it did when whale oil ran out and kerosene took over and gasoline took over from kerosene.. etc. etc. etc..

Back then a single industry didn\'t have the capacity to wreck the carrying capacity of the entire planet.

With greater power comes greater responsiblity, but the powerful are always enthusiastic about evading it.

Right, another temporary solution. Good idea at the time, not time to > look at the future. The market followed technology available at the time. Let\'s take the next step.

EVERY SOLUTION will be temporary. That is the way technology progresses.

Some solutions are remarkably destructive. Let\'s concentrate on solutions that can keep working for the foreseeable future. Your foresight isn\'t up to much, so you don\'t get to pick.

> >> How about you libs let us build a bunch of these new small nuclear power plants that can\'t melt down?

Why do you think that they can\'t melt down? And they will still generate loads of radioactive waste, some of which will stay radioactive for hundreds of thousands of years.
We\'ve had nuclear reactors for some 70 years now, but we haven\'t got a single long repository for nuclear waste that will keep it safely confined for a few hundred thousand years. Your foresight isn\'t up to much, so you may not have noticed.

I don\'t object. Gotta recharge those EV batteries with something.

Oh no no no no no no. Tell me we just did not agree on something. NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Rod Speed]

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 12:48:12 +1000, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 4/14/23 17:42, Ed P wrote:
On 4/14/2023 8:00 PM, T wrote:
On 4/14/23 16:38, Ed P wrote:

That is not actually true. Horizontal fracking brought the
price down a lot. And availability keeps going up and up
as more and more of it is located.
Fracking is a TEMPORARY solution and has environmental issues of its
own.

A lot of those issues are downright lies. They
are created by ass holes who don\'t like oil
and are willing to lie to get their way.

We have ALWAYS used vertical fracking. We now know
how to drill down and then bend the pipe horizontal.
Horizontal uses a ton less holes than vertical.
Far, far less footprint on the surface. The fracking
is the same technology that has been used for years.



Any shortage is political, not technical. We won\'t run out
for multiple, multiple generations. That run out is a propaganda
narrative
It is a finite material. The question is not \"if\" but \"when\". It
will happen so why not start doing something now?

It is a long, long way in our future.


Wherever the government gets involved, things always to
sideways.

Let the market decide as it did when whale oil ran
out and kerosene took over and gasoline took over
from kerosene.. etc. etc. etc..
Right, another temporary solution. Good idea at the time, not time to
look at the future. The market followed technology available at the
time. Let\'s take the next step.

EVERY SOLUTION will be temporary.

Nope, nukes arent.

That is the way technology
progresses.

Plenty of it isnt temporary, most obviously with stainless steel.

How about you libs let us build a bunch of these
new small nuclear power plants that can\'t melt down?

I don\'t object. Gotta recharge those EV batteries with something

Oh no no no no no no. Tell me we just did not
agree on something. NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

 

[Peeler]

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 14:51:09 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin\'s latest trollshit unread>

--
Xeno to senile Rodent:
\"You\'re a sad old man Rod, truly sad.\"
MID: <id04c3F50peU1@mid.individual.net>

 

[Peeler]

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 10:37:52 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin\'s latest trollshit unread>

--
Richard addressing senile Rodent Speed:
\"Shit you\'re thick/pathetic excuse for a troll.\"
MID: <ogoa38$pul$1@news.mixmin.net>

 

[Peeler]

On 15 Apr 2023 02:27:25 GMT, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


> The fly in the ointment:

You big mouth, of course! As always! <BG>

--
Gossiping \"lowbrowwoman\" about herself:
\"Usenet is my blog... I don\'t give a damn if anyone ever reads my posts
but they are useful in marshaling [sic] my thoughts.\"
MID: <iteioiF60jmU1@mid.individual.net>

 

[Peeler]

On 15 Apr 2023 02:41:19 GMT, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:

Gee, imagine that! Surprisingly Germany was forbidden by treaty to
continue perfecting the processes. Can\'t have them shortchanging the
Anglo-American energy producers -- then as now.

Gee, our resident BIGMOUTH is at it again! LOL

--
Gossiping \"lowbrowwoman\" about herself:
\"Usenet is my blog... I don\'t give a damn if anyone ever reads my posts
but they are useful in marshaling [sic] my thoughts.\"
MID: <iteioiF60jmU1@mid.individual.net>

 

[Peeler]

fOn Sat, 15 Apr 2023 16:42:04 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin\'s latest trollshit unread>

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 89-year-old senile Australian
cretin\'s pathological trolling:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/rod-speed-faq.2973853/