Read the ZH article. It’s misallocation of corporate funds to projects that have poor returns. It’s a scam.
I agree. I will read it. Also realize that this kind of activity is possible only because of all the money supply creation over the last 10 years. This is why the Federal Reserve is complicit in activities like this. The ESG type companies are getting more from the big banks after the Fed creates the money and hands it to them. ESG is a big priority for the US government, so dollars get earmarked for them. It is a scam. But the scam is economy wide not just ESG.
https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/j...m/en/afp.com/ce59455d18a3c6f249eebbf0c65cca72 Liberal who attached herself to the net during the French Open. She has the arrogance to do it and make an absolute statement of fact of us having on 1,028 days left. And if she's wrong? She will only become more vocal, more shrill, more defiant, more Liberal... These people are sick. They can't handle reality so they appoint themselves to be God for others to solve the problems that are far beyond their version of reality. That is a comment about their reaction to every problem.
Our economic system works for those who are connected into the government. The only way to change that is to get the government out of the economy. That starts with getting rid of the Federal Reserve. Then going to a gold standard or bitcoin standard. Along the way ending all subsidies, reducing regulations, and ending ESG scores. Then get the government out of insurance/health care, education, real estate industry. Oh, and bring all the troops home. Getting rid of the Fed will more or less do that though.
More evidence that it's just virtue signaling.... New research points to bad math behind corporate renewable energy claims (msn.com)
Vox finally getting at least a touch of sanity. At least they don't think we should be telling children that climate change isn't going to ruin their existence. Link. However, to really end this climate anxiety problem that children have, the media and others need to stop fawning over people like Greta Thunberg.
Greta Thunburg should be held up as a shining example of what can happen to children who are maleducated towards irrationality and fear of some boogeyman (in her case, climate change).
I disagree that it is "just" virtue signaling but i would agree that the virtue signaling is overboard in many places. In that article, this is the thing I have the most problem with... "“Companies can only do so much on a voluntary basis.” Bjørn says. “I think we need new policies to actually reduce emissions, rather than just assuming that companies will do it by themselves.”" A voluntary basis is exactly the right approach. If CEOs and boards have estimated their future and feel that they need to do something...let them. but if others have come to a different projection then let them do their thing as well. I would suggest that recognizing that RECs aren't' having the desired effect and then changing course to PPAs is more than virtue signaling. As for the Vox article, this is the biggest problem i have with the CC movement...They are debating "messaging" instead of the accuracy of the science. The hyperbole of many CC activist is astounding. "This question matters because there’s a fierce debate among activists about whether more pessimistic messaging energizes people to fight climate change or causes them to despair, conclude the world is doomed, and tune out."
The answer to the last question is simple: mental illness. Vox: Stop telling kids that climate change will destroy their world – Watts Up With That?
EV battery can reach 98% charge in less than 10 minutes – pv magazine International (pv-magazine.com) granted this is still under optimum lab conditions but this is how tech advancement generally happens. when this is commercialized, this resolves range anxiety and also battery life anxiety. 1,000 cycles on a battery that provides around 300-350 miles per charge is above 300K life miles. Longer than most ICE vehicles survive these days.
Meanwhile, Ford is recalling ALL of the EV Mustangs and also directing dealers NOT to deliver those which might be on their lots because of an issue WITH the battery that, when it gets hot, can cause the vehicle to simply STOP. Not show degraded performance...dead...on the spot. Ford Halts Mustang Mach-E Deliveries for Battery Recall In other words, if you use the car as instructed, you may be screwed...
If you do what most middle-aged dads do with Mustangs, which is leave them parked in the garage, your car will be fine.
And I'm sure the cause will be an eternal mystery and the engineers will never figure it out and worse yet, they will decide "F-them, we'll continue to sell bad batteries....and they'll like it." ( : - J ) We have decades of recalls on ICE vehicles as well. Not saying a battery recall is "nothing" but there are other examples that have been on the road for a long time and have not had this issue. Battery science is more complicated than oil-science and it will take more development but EV's are making rapid progress and in my opinion, will be the better performing option within just a few years.
You have to be careful with reports like this. There have been multiple reports that solid-state Li+ batteries have been created and it is just a matter of scaling them up. But ask anyone in the industry, we are always "10 years" away from that happening. It was 10 years away 10 years ago. These improvements might be commercialized some day and that will change the industry but it isn't a given.
This makes sense. If the battery pack gets overheated you have to stop it to keep it from exploding and killing everyone. This is a safety feature in the controls. With materials that I help develop you will get 10 minutes to get out before the car explodes. But redundancies are good.
different sources will cite things different ways but i would say this is closer to 6-7% in capacity/performance. However, as adoption increases demand has increased cost, but even with that, the cost per KwH has decreased about 90% in the last 15 years. And now that more players are committing significant engineering resources to it, i think we'll see advancement at an increased rate as well. And i readily acknowledge that many of these articles take the absolute rosiest view of how quick and widely available this tech will be, but 5 years ago, folks were saying these things will never get cost competitive, these things will never charge in 30 minutes, these things only last 3 years, etc. The debate, expectations and targets are now much higher than they were just a few years ago. The items that were being heralded 10 years ago are very different than the items that are being heralded for 10 years from now. The advancements (and even the commercialization of them) is happening, but like all tech advancements we continue to raise the bar on what we want/expect. and that is a good think in my opinion.
Yes, and the price still has to be cut in half again for an EV to be close to a normal car price. Wait another 40 years I guess. But then there are physical barriers that will get in the way of that too.
There was article with a battery insider in the WSJ that addresses your points. In short, he finds your claims ludicrous.
I was talking strictly about solid-state Li+. Shoot the Li+ cell solution chemistry hasn't changed in 10 years, and there is even a new chemistry out there that is more energy efficient. It will probably get into EVs in a couple of years, car designs are being made now with them. But the timelines get pushed out every couple of months.
