Puppeteer

Author Topic: The future of electric Vehicles.  (Read 41930 times)

AdeV

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 637
    • View Profile
Re: The future of electric Vehicles.
« Reply #105 on: April 14, 2018, 06:57:25 PM »


  The damage from nuclear accidents is over stated . Look at the other environmental damage from other industry and nuclear is a tiny fraction.
   Is lead , cadmium, arsenic, asbestos,  PCB’s , plastics and dioxins a hazard to health? They just lack nuclear which causes some weaker folk to have an irrational knee jerk reaction and panic.
   How about the millions of people living on ground zero of two atomic warhead blasts . Does  Hiroshima and Nagasaki come to mind ?
   Here is no alternative for economical, clean and safe baseload power except nuclear .


Does Fukushima and Chernobyl Register with you at all?  There is no way to fully state the amount and severity of the damage from any nuke accident let alone over state it. That's already been proven beyond doubt.


Chernobyl, being less than 1000 miles (and only a couple of small seas) away from here, is one that, despite happening some time ago, is still comparatively fresh. It's also brought up by every anti-Nuclear campaigner (or even non-campaigners, people like you who just don't like nuclear)...

Here's the thing about Chernobyl:

It was (until Fukishima), the biggest nuclear accident on the planet, released the most radioactive material over a larger area (most of Europe was, eventually, overpassed by the resulting radioactive clouds (there are stories of glow-in-the-dark sheep in the hills of Wales to this day), and it was news for weeks.  Thousands of Russians (as they were then - Ukrainians these days) were evactuated from Pripyat, the town just outside of which the Chernobyl reactor is located, which is about 150kms north of Kiev.

You know how many people are known to have died as a direct result of this enormous accident of deadly proportions?

I'll tell you.

Twenty nine.

29. Not even 30 people died as a result of the nuclear explosion, fire, or resulting fallout.


Of course.... I'm not saying that's a green light to scatter Chernobyls all over the world, that would just be silly. But it does show that even a dreadful nuclear accident actually isn't as deadly as people think it is.

More people die every single day around the world putting their trousers on than have been killed by Chernobyl.





Anyway. Whatever one's view is on nuclear power, it's a dead-in-the-water industry anyway. The nuclear scaremongers have frightened enough of the global population to make reactor construction and running costs so expensive that burning Amazonian butterflies would probably be cheaper; it's still a "fossil" fuel - Uranium is not a particularly common element, and as there's a finite supply there is therefore a finite amount of energy to be extracted.

IMHO the future is fusion power. There's two major onoging projects - ITER in Europe, and Polywell in the US. I believe the Polywell fusor is doing rather better than ITERs, and is likely to be producing usable power earlier. Fusion power produces virtually no harmful by-products (I believe there is some residual short-lived radioactivity in the materials which form the torus of ITER caused by plasma fusion effects, I don't know about Polywell), is self-extinguishing if anything goes wrong (it's completely impossible for a fusion reactor to explode, at least as a result of the fusion anyway), and - when it works, really DOES have the potential to deliver effectively unlimited energy at a knock-down price. That is, so long as the anti-Nuclear brigade don't get their teeth into it & somehow successfully conflate "Nuclear fusion" with "Nuclear fission".
Cheers!
Ade.
--------------
1x Lister CS Start-o-Matic (complete, runs)
0x Lister JP4 :( - Sold to go in a canal boat.

LowGear

  • Casey
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2130
  • What? My diesel had fries for lunch?
    • View Profile
Re: The future of electric Vehicles.
« Reply #106 on: April 14, 2018, 07:53:31 PM »
Quote
Quote
Firstly and most importantly folks like Mr Buickand Deere and Bruce M are entitled both to express an opinion and to have that opinion listened to or disagreed with without suffering personal attacks.  To coherently attack their arguements would be the work of an intelligent and thoughtful man.  To attack them personally, just because you happen to disagree with them . . .
As you may have noticed I have been pretty quiet on this part of this thread.  It's because I'm blindingly ignorant about nuclear.  But I normally play nice with others.  Just like my reading impairment I have a hearing impairment.  Once the school boy crap starts apparently I not only go illiterate but my listening becomes challenged as well.  Another lesson from Donald John Trump.  He has taught me so much.  Especially about myself.

I'm just guessing that there isn't going to be a lot of mind shifting on nuclear on this website.  I do feel it's unfortunate that some of us don't think smoking is bad for our health.  The smoking - health pathology should teach or remind us that death, for most of us, comes in baby steps.  One coal car at a time.  One glass of tainted water at a time.  One hour of stopped in traffic at a time.  But if the gobernment libertard (do you respect me now) inspired health warnings don't convince you that smoking is bad for your health then what possibly could.  For me; I have buried a mother, father and brother all with cardiovascular causes of death that came about after thousands and thousands of puffs or pinches of tobacco.  Tobacco makes heroin, cocaine, fentanyl and all the other chemistry that are fought by most all national governments look like toy guns.  So where is nuclear power in all of this.  A tool we need to actually understand before go forward trying to save the world with it.  And understanding that the stuff we don't see, smell, hear or feel can be far more dangerous than the car wrecks we like to focus upon.  This is my rant for the morning.

Off to "Green Car Reports".

Aloha,
« Last Edit: April 15, 2018, 01:04:43 AM by LowGear »
NPR Tipper/Dump Truck
Kubota BX 2230
Witte BD Generator
SunnyBoy 6000 + SolarWorld 245

BruceM

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2960
    • View Profile
Re: The future of electric Vehicles.
« Reply #107 on: April 14, 2018, 09:31:42 PM »
The economics of the present fission plants has been their downfall, not nuclear "whiners".  I have tried to make this point by referencing an article in Forbes explaining just that; Forbes is one of the most pro-industry right wing mags there is.  I suppose that subtlety was lost to folks here. In our world, the old adage of "follow the money" works pretty reliably.  Of course humans are irrational and emotional but that has not a lot to do with what industry or governments do except when they can exploit it for their own mean$.

As for the Chernobyl butchers bill, the figure of 29 people is an early figure from the Russian government of immediate fatalities. The range of people killed over time looks more like 4000 in the near term, and much, much higher for people made seriously ill.  Increasing radiation is much like other toxic exposures in that specific causality is impossible to prove.  And of course, it is a very good point that the true butcher's/toxic exposure bill of energy production system should be considered, and that relative risks and costs need to be evaluated objectively.

From Wikipedia:
"During mid-1986 the official Soviet death toll rose from 2 to 31, a figure that has often been repeated. Following the disaster itself, the USSR organized an effort to stabilize and shore up the reactor area, still awash in radiation, using the efforts of more than 600,000 “liquidators” recruited from all over the USSR. Some organizations claim that deaths as a result of the immediate aftermath and the cleanup operation may number at least 6,000,[8] but that exceeds the number of workers believed, by the National Committee for Radiation Protection of the Ukrainian Population, to have died from all causes (including, for example, old age and traffic accidents). The UNSCEAR report cites only evidence for thyroid cancers among children and teens (adults are quite resistant to iodine-131 poisoning) and some small amount of leukemia and eye cataracts among the most irradiated of the workers; no evidence for hard cancers has been found, despite waiting beyond the elapse of the usual ten year latency period.[1] For further information on the indirect health implications, see Chernobyl disaster's effects on human health.

The total number of deaths, including future deaths, is highly controversial, and estimates range from "up to" 4,000 (by a team of over 100 scientists[9][2]) to 93,000 or even 200,000 (by Greenpeace[10]). The controversy arises because most of the deaths cannot be measured: any cancer deaths that may be caused by the accident are negligible compared to background rates of cancer. Therefore, estimates must rely instead on controversial models such as LNT.[11]"


I'm all for continued research work on fusion,  but I'd like to see advanced development (refinement) of safer and less waste producing fission such as molten salt thorium as well, since sustained fusion has been elusively "just around the corner" since around 1970.  Since adopting enriched solid fuel fission, virtually no progress on anything else has happened.

We went down the wrong path with enriched solid fuel fission reactors, and we should not ignore the lesson that a system requiring a massive active cooling system to prevent a radioactive pollution disaster is a bad design choice when other proven, safer designs have existed since the early 70s.

Japan got lucky that the radioactive plume from the plant at Fukishima went out over the sea (and US Navy sailors on disaster relief ships) instead of populated areas.  That radiation event was so serious that those ships were subsequently taken out of service for a serious decontamination effort.  That lesson got Japan's attention, and others, as it should.  Calling a near miss a triumph of nuclear safety seems illogical to me.  Despite considerable effort to regulate this industry, the plant at Fukishima (by the sea) had it's backup generators located in a low level room that immediately flooded from tsunami.  This after the public is told that this plant is a safe modern design, well operated, etc.  This was NOT a Homer Simpson OR George Burns type event, where operator error or ignoring safety for profit was done; it was a failure by incredibly bad design that was missed by the plant design engineers, the operator TEPCO, and by the regulatory agencies.   

That error of design was compounded by the inherent design flaw of the present solid fueled fission reactors; a massive active cooling system MUST operate for an extended period during "shut down"; there is no f'ing OFF switch. 










LowGear

  • Casey
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2130
  • What? My diesel had fries for lunch?
    • View Profile
Re: The future of electric Vehicles.
« Reply #108 on: April 15, 2018, 01:18:05 AM »
Is it me and my sick sense of humor but when you watch the tsunamis of Fukishima are you kind of wondering when Rodan or Godzilla are going to come around the corner and push all the water back.  Totally amazing to watch even today. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2ZOmMH4WHA

I'm thinking we still have back up generators below storm sewer level here in the states. 
« Last Edit: April 15, 2018, 01:29:25 AM by LowGear »
NPR Tipper/Dump Truck
Kubota BX 2230
Witte BD Generator
SunnyBoy 6000 + SolarWorld 245

BruceM

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2960
    • View Profile
Re: The future of electric Vehicles.
« Reply #109 on: April 15, 2018, 02:19:00 AM »
A good technical post mortem on Fukishima:
http://carnegieendowment.org/2012/03/06/why-fukushima-was-preventable-pub-47361

As previously noted in the article on Thorium/Molten Salt reactors, there is not one word in this assessment critical of the inherent safety problem of our present fission designs.  Everyone working in this field has accepted that this danger is inherent to fission power and is acceptable, since the know nothing of the alternatives that were proven viable since the early 1970s.

There is something basic in human wetware that has us accept whatever has been well established, never question it.

ajaffa1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1402
    • View Profile
Re: The future of electric Vehicles.
« Reply #110 on: April 15, 2018, 01:27:32 PM »
Not quite sure how we got from electric vehicles to nuclear fission but this link suggests that allowing powerful corporations access to nuclear technology may be a mistake. https://uk.news.yahoo.com/fukushima-nuclear-plant-tsunami-wall-131403275.html

What a surprise, profits before sustainability and the health of the planet, it`s people and all other species.
Bob

LowGear

  • Casey
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2130
  • What? My diesel had fries for lunch?
    • View Profile
Re: The future of electric Vehicles.
« Reply #111 on: April 15, 2018, 01:58:56 PM »
No Bob,

Tell me this is all a whimsical moment of liberal / progressive hatred suggesting that anyone, much less a no one or corporate entity as their sometimes called would put profits above public health.   "No!" I write.  No!

The US spends almost 20% of it's GNP on sickness care (you may know it as health care but they don't want to deal with you when you're healthy).  Gosh.  Let's not rinse this concept of greed over purpose across any part of our economy other than nuclear.    Sweet dreams brothers and sisters.
NPR Tipper/Dump Truck
Kubota BX 2230
Witte BD Generator
SunnyBoy 6000 + SolarWorld 245

BruceM

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2960
    • View Profile
Re: The future of electric Vehicles.
« Reply #112 on: April 15, 2018, 04:53:07 PM »
Good link, Bob.  I stand corrected, the "Mr. Burns" (profits first) effect was an significant factor.  I also found that the incidence of earthquakes in Japan is astonishing- around 1000 per year, they live on a fault line.  Per the Carnegie report, safety evaluations of Fukishima  in 2008 showed that the critical cooling pumps were well submerged with estimated worst case tsunami levels...those pumps were not submersible type pumps.  The safety report was ignored for the obviou$ reason.  A failure of both TEPCO and Japans regulatory agencies.

Also astonishing to me is that most of the control and monitoring systems didn't have a secure power source, ala UPS, so that when power failed, and backup power failed, they had no way to even monitor the status of anything or know what was going on. They had no remote monitoring capability, either. 


« Last Edit: April 15, 2018, 05:36:20 PM by BruceM »

ajaffa1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1402
    • View Profile
Re: The future of electric Vehicles.
« Reply #113 on: April 16, 2018, 12:01:29 AM »
Hey Bruce, the Carnegie report make interesting reading. The most astonishing thing to me is that the technical staff remained at their posts and attempted to prevent this disaster. They must have been aware that they were risking their lives by doing so.
To compound the problems these guys were facing, some of them would have lost family and friends to the tsunami. Despite the risks they faced they managed to get some of the control equipment back online by cannibalising their own motor vehicles.
So a big thumbs up for team Homer and a big thumbs down for Mr Burns and the toothless regulators.

ajaffa1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1402
    • View Profile
Re: The future of electric Vehicles.
« Reply #114 on: April 16, 2018, 12:15:39 PM »
Glort is absolutely right in his assessment that the electricity grid is completely unable to provide the megawatts required to charge the Australian fleet of vehicles. At present our grid is incapable of supplying sufficient energy to cover air conditioning on hot days. The idea that my ability to travel to work or to go to the shops (100 km round trip) should be determined by an already over stretched distribution/generation system frightens the life out of me.

So what can we do about this? I believe that Glort has comprehensively proved that PV systems can produce more electricity than he knows what to do with, at a very low capital expenditure. The problem as always is storage/distribution of this energy and the gubermints dependence on the revenue from fossil fuels.

Perhaps what is needed is a complete change in the way we tackle this issue, imagine a motor vehicle with multiple fuel capabilities. It could recharge and store power from solar PV systems when you are at home but also act as a generator when the grid goes out or possibly provide an off grid supply. I don`t know how to build such a vehicle but I suspect that someone on this forum probably does and I look forward to their input.

Bob


 

buickanddeere

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 802
    • View Profile
Re: The future of electric Vehicles.
« Reply #115 on: April 16, 2018, 10:48:39 PM »
  The Fukishima incident was much compounded by plant managers that did not want to loose face and be embarrassed by having to vent hydrogen gas from the units. If the explosive hydrogen had been gotten rid of.  The Fukishima reactor buildings would have remained intact. With the over heated fuel collecting in the basement.
   As for Chernobyl being "Toxic". Somebody forget to tell the abundant and thriving wildlife in the restricted sector around the facility. No three eyed fish and no more than the average amount of  animals with cancerous lumps.
   Too bad the anti NUC's have no idea or don't want to hear how radioactive that Coleman Lamp mantles are. Or smoke detectors , granite counter tops, home basements or the broad band blast of energy they receive from the sun while on the beach.

LowGear

  • Casey
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2130
  • What? My diesel had fries for lunch?
    • View Profile
Re: The future of electric Vehicles.
« Reply #116 on: April 17, 2018, 06:19:00 PM »
No three eyed fish - No problems.

How many kilo tons or is it mega tons of concrete have they poured on the reactor or where the reactor used to be and continue to pour?
NPR Tipper/Dump Truck
Kubota BX 2230
Witte BD Generator
SunnyBoy 6000 + SolarWorld 245

BruceM

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2960
    • View Profile
Re: The future of electric Vehicles.
« Reply #117 on: April 17, 2018, 07:37:53 PM »
Here's an example of the kind of ignorant, tin hat wearing, nuclear phobic person B&D is referring to:

Admiral Rickover was the developer of the US nuclear navy and renowned engineer. Here's a quote from Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyman_G._Rickover

"Given Rickover's single-minded focus on naval nuclear propulsion, design, and operations, it came as a surprise to many[46] in 1982, near the end of his career, when he testified before the U.S. Congress that, were it up to him what to do with nuclear powered ships, he "would sink them all." At a congressional hearing Rickover testified that:

    "I do not believe that nuclear power is worth it if it creates radiation. Then you might ask me why do I have nuclear powered ships. That is a necessary evil. I would sink them all. I am not proud of the part I played in it. I did it because it was necessary for the safety of this country. That's why I am such a great exponent of stopping this whole nonsense of war. Unfortunately limits — attempts to limit war have always failed. The lesson of history is when a war starts every nation will ultimately use whatever weapon it has available. ... Every time you produce radiation, you produce something that has a certain half-life, in some cases for billions of years. ... It is important that we control these forces and try to eliminate them." (Economics of Defense Policy: Hearing before the Joint Economic Committee, Congress of the United States, 97th Cong., 2nd sess., Pt. 1 (1982))"

Rickover knew by then that there is no such thing as a safe level of radiation; the incidence of illness just increases with accumulated exposure.  The incidence of thyroid disease globally continues to rise, thus more overweight, fatigued people who have difficulty thinking and are depressed.  I've struggled with thyroid disease along with other autoimmune diseases from a toxic exposure myself and it is no party.

The US Navy has one of the best nuclear safety records in the world.  I'd much rather they were operating our present civilian solid fuel fission plants until we can do something much inherently safer.







« Last Edit: April 18, 2018, 03:09:15 AM by BruceM »

buickanddeere

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 802
    • View Profile
Re: The future of electric Vehicles.
« Reply #118 on: April 17, 2018, 08:18:56 PM »
Glort is absolutely right in his assessment that the electricity grid is completely unable to provide the megawatts required to charge the Australian fleet of vehicles. At present our grid is incapable of supplying sufficient energy to cover air conditioning on hot days. The idea that my ability to travel to work or to go to the shops (100 km round trip) should be determined by an already over stretched distribution/generation system frightens the life out of me.

So what can we do about this? I believe that Glort has comprehensively proved that PV systems can produce more electricity than he knows what to do with, at a very low capital expenditure. The problem as always is storage/distribution of this energy and the gubermints dependence on the revenue from fossil fuels.

Perhaps what is needed is a complete change in the way we tackle this issue, imagine a motor vehicle with multiple fuel capabilities. It could recharge and store power from solar PV systems when you are at home but also act as a generator when the grid goes out or possibly provide an off grid supply. I don`t know how to build such a vehicle but I suspect that someone on this forum probably does and I look forward to their input.

Bob

Extra cost, extra space required and extra weight will make the larger batteries impractical . When and where is there going to be surplus power to re-charge these batteries after driving to work or driving home . Having these batteries provide enough power to carry the utility grid ......then where and when will they be re-charged enough to drive the vehicle to work or home from work.
    How many electric vehicles would it require to supply the utility grid with an extra 1000 Mw for eight hours .
« Last Edit: April 18, 2018, 05:18:40 AM by buickanddeere »

BruceM

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2960
    • View Profile
Re: The future of electric Vehicles.
« Reply #119 on: April 18, 2018, 03:46:40 AM »
By most reporting there is excess grid capacity in the US, especially after the evening peak, though in some locales distribution will have to be upgraded.  As for solar during the day-  if your home PV is feeding the grid, and your car is slow charging at work after the morning peak is over, you have a net zero carbon situation. The power co's will love this as they will no doubt get a nice profit from your home PV power.

I think every region will have to rely on a different mix of renewables and power storage.  It will all shake out after climate change gets severe enough to wake people up...such as when food production is seriously affected.  The power co.s will still own the grid and despite all their whining they are guaranteed to profit no matter how that role evolves.

I disagree with Glort on public opinion against nukes. I think he's way too optimistic about the public. I think that if solid fueled nuclear fission plants were more profitable, a well funded propaganda campaign would easily manipulate the American public to accept them (or almost anything). Even without changing to safer designs, it would be easy to "safety wash" some trivial new safety feature such as calling them "smart nuclear" and sell it to the public. 

 “No matter how cynical you get, it is impossible to keep up.”  Lily Tomlin

I personally think electric cars will add to the daily EMF exposure burden and along with continued expansion of pulsed microwaves and soon millimeter waves (5G) will cause even more serious chronic illness. At some point chronic illness will cripple society. Humans have tremendous propensity to ignore warnings and discredit or marginalize those who either become ill or are the messengers.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2018, 07:00:42 PM by BruceM »