Leaderboard

I'm surprised you have not yet claimed that China is the root of such problems.

Uh-oh... https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/evergrande-shares-halted-hong-kong-court-orders-liquidation-rcna136103 I guess the CCP is gonna print some money to spread around to "those in need"...

Are you this ignorant? Large portions if not all of the Great plains were moving sand dunes 700 years ago and 2000yrs ago and roughly every ~700 years or ~300 year amplitude period going back as far as we can where older versions are only seen for LARGE desertification instances such as 4000yrs ago as well. The great plains of North America when the white man showed up in the 16th century were called the Great Desert, not the Great Plains. If one goes by the C14 etc dating methods, the Great Plains via basic patterns should be becoming a desert slowly again. How severe this interval will be? No one knows. Of course currently, rainfall has INCREASED over last few decades across Eastern USA, but Western USA has dried out or stayed the same, but has warmed up while Eastern USA has not warmed up much at all. All of western Nebraska are sand dunes which currently have some wheat/corn on them, but mostly cows. We know this from C14 buried by sand throughout the areas as it goes between sand--> Grass--> trees--> Grass--> Sand-->Grass etc Where were the CO2 flattuence fear mongers then? Surely both of those Long duration desertification periods were caused by CO2 ignorant so called "scientists". If CO2 heating were true, according to IPCC etc it should be showing up in Tropical Troposphere first with increased heating, but this area shows NEGATIVE ratio to ground level stations in terms of heating and has done so since roughly ~20 years ago. Shows how corrupt the ground based thermometer system is as so called "scientists" keep the ever expanding city island heat effect data inside their data sets. So much for "science". .

The recent decline in new electric vehicle registrations in Germany, particularly the sharp drop in battery electric vehicle (BEV) registrations in January, reflects the impact of reduced government support payments and changes in subsidy structures. The decision to cut support payments for new e-cars in mid-2022 aimed to adjust to the increasing attractiveness of electric vehicles (EVs) without substantial incentives. In December, there was a surge in BEV registrations as buyers rushed to avail the full subsidy, resulting in a significant drop in registrations the following month. The lower support rates at the beginning of this year, ranging from 3,000 to 4,500 euros for battery electric or fuel cell cars, have evidently affected the appeal of EVs to potential buyers. While the car industry association VDA anticipates a slight increase in battery electric vehicle sales in 2023 compared to the previous year, the overall EV market is expected to experience an eight percent decline. Plug-in hybrid car sales are projected to drop by 30 percent. VDA emphasizes the importance of bolstering public trust in e-mobility to counteract the impact of reduced support payments. Addressing concerns such as convenient and widespread charging infrastructure is crucial to ensuring the sustained attractiveness of electric vehicles in the absence of significant premiums. As the EV market undergoes these adjustments, ongoing efforts to enhance charging infrastructure and build confidence in e-mobility are essential components of the strategy to maintain healthy sales figures throughout the year. Check out more information at the official site

excellent point. must be the result of some act of the Chinese, right? The reason could not possibly be the fact that American EVs are shit, now could it?

oh my, oil and coal demand going down the toilet in China?????? Brent $75 is more likely than Brent $100 in 2024 2024 is shaping up to be a disaster in China....stock markets are already down sharply In January so far, mainland China’s CSI 300 Index has dropped by 6 percent, the Shanghai Composite Index has dropped by 7 percent, and Hong Kong’s Hang Seng Index—where most large Chinese firms are listed—has fallen by more than 12 percent, reaching its lowest level in two decades. China is attempting to stabilize the yuan in response. The slide has dampened Beijing’s recent efforts to paint a rosy picture of economic recovery. The government reports that China’s GDP grew by 5.2 percent in 2023, a low figure compared with its decades of high growth but a respectable one. But analysts outside China aren’t so sure, with skeptics at Rhodium Group and elsewhere estimating last year’s GDP growth at as low as 1.5 percent. China’s usual official data fudging seems to have been especially prevalent last year. Economic disaster in both real estate and stocks ..............and a population in decline......... can China's internal consumer demand keep the country from entering a depression?????? China needs to find jobs for all if its youth (so sad the youth in China are all college bound ...and no prospect for new desk jobs) At least solar panel installers in China are in high demand...... Analysis: Clean energy was top driver of China’s economic growth in 2023 the article below is well worth the read https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-clean-energy-was-top-driver-of-chinas-economic-growth-in-2023/#:~:text=Back to top-,Solar power,% year-on-year. Solar powerSolar was the largest contributor to growth in China's clean-technology economy in 2023. It recorded growth worth a combined 1tn yuan of new investment, goods and services, as its value grew from 1.5tn yuan in 2022 to 2.5tn yuan in 2023, an increase of 63% year-on-year.4 days ago Analysis: Clean energy was top driver of China's economic ... In addition, in response to the slowdown in the real-estate sector, the central government introduced a new policy at the start of 2023, to encourage the development of solar power industries on unused and existing construction lands. Meanwhile, during the annual legislative meetings in the spring of 2023, 15 provinces prioritised solar industry development in their government work agendas. Detailed data on the growth in China’s solar installations in the first 11 months of the year is shown in the figure below. (An estimated 200GW was added across the country during 2023 as a whole, more than doubling from the record of 87GW set in 2022.)

The calculations you've provided really put into perspective the scale and feasibility of using solar energy as a major power source. The challenge, as you pointed out, lies in energy storage and ensuring consistent power supply during non-daylight hours. Technological advancements in storage and efficiency of solar panels could play a crucial role in overcoming these obstacles. Speaking of advancements, I recently came across an interesting article on leds.to that discussed some innovative solar panel technologies. It might offer some insights into the future possibilities in this field.

Jinko 75 GW Trina 75 GW JA Solar 60 GW Longi 50 GW First Solar 10 GW Total: 270 GW In the middle of the summer, US max electric power production is about 750Gw. The implication of the above table (projected capacity/shipments for 2023 by the named companies) is that these companies could completely replace all other power generation sources at that peak 'nameplate' capacity in 3 years. Since some parts of the US are already getting 50% of their power from wind and/or solar (or other 'renewable' energy sources), the 'remainder' needed might be closer to 2 years. However, this is 'middle of the day' in the 'middle of the summer' and doesn't account for 24/7 power demand throughout the year. Storing power for the non-daylight hours might require 20 hours x 600 GWh of storage, or 12 TWH of storage over the span of one day. 12 Twh divided by 300 watt-hours per liter (common capacity in LiFePO batteries, and possible in some other chemistries) is 40,000,000,000 liters. This divided by 1000 is 40,000,000 cubic meters. Dividing this by 2 (2 meter high battery banks) yields a ground coverage of 20,000,000 square meters, or 20 square kilometers. This would otherwise be a rectangle 4 Km x 5 Km on a side, or about 2.4 miles x 3 miles. While 'one day's storage' might not be adequate, this illustrates the triviality of the land area in comparison to the area needed for solar panels. All of the capacity and shipment information came from company sites, generally annual or quarterly reports.

Debt went up fastest under trump. As for restraining spending lets talk about putting all trains underground and replacing all stroads. Hahaha

Your math, or real math?

You lack reading comprehension. He was empathizing with the veterans who got fewer laurels than deserved. "sad as many had to fight in Korea and some in Vietnam and never get the same honors"

I knew you/Rob boy were math ignorant, lazy, and refuse to read links people post, continually CLOWNING yourselves, so I did not bother linking the USGS papers on the topic which I have done MULTIPLE TIMES BEFORE which you REFUSE to read... but you might want to look up what a SINE waveform is and why ~300 and ~700 years were mentioned, or use a light bulb and figure out science in dating if you get something within 100 years is pretty spectacular.... Might want to look up the DUST BOWL and why there were so much research and papers published regards to desertification in the 1940's/50's where majority of the great plains desertification patterns, amplitudes of desertification, moving sand dunes, dipping beds of said moving sand dunes etc come from. Had next to nothing to do with human causes in 1930's, but rather months of 100F days and lower rainfall. Give you a hint: There are sand dunes from the top of Alberta down through Mexico. How often they turn into pure sand, or your definition of desertification is another topic. "Climate change" is alive and well, regardless of fear mongers saying CO2 blah blah blah.

uh, is there not already a tax for highway maintenance? and how is it being administered? cannot be too well, 'cause amerika's highways are shit. and, not to mention bridges.

Is it ~700 or ~300? Your "math" is always made up garbage with round numbers.

Wrong. Did you look that up lazy bones or do any actual math? No, you just made up numbers with a huge error range yet again (~25% to 50% is just made up garbage - totally useless). 75%-85% depending on how you do the math? There is only one correct answer with math, everything with you is a made up guess. Real data, the kind that people do math on, much more rarely ends in 5 or zero like your "data" always does. You can use algorithms to check data sets to test for data manipulation; falsified data ends with a 0, 2, or 5 more often than probability would predict. Your would shit would glow red, not that anybody would bother testing such obvious garbage.

I am not going to discuss anything relating to politics with you because you are really ignorant about truth versus falsity.

Of course that is pure propaganda, not an engineering study. You should be able to see that, and read the actual contents how the EVs failed. The actual point is that the EVs ALL suffered distance constraints with the cold weather, which supports the point I was making above. I guess you just plain missed the point again. You are so severely blinkered that you simply ignore the basic points being raised. That is a sign of an acolyte to a cult. Read, "The Tesla Model 3 Long Range was the electric car that came the lowest in severe winter cold with a mileage of over 300 km. Several of the ten electric cars tested had mileages that were less than 200 km. Some cars shut down unexpectedly before the battery was empty. The Hyundai Kona Electric stopped on an uphill hill with 7 percent battery left. - The severe cold has an effect, but in the challenging weather some of the cars were still able to judge the range of the battery really well, and some stopped unexpectedly, says Lauri Ahtiainen who was responsible for the test at Tekniikan Maailma. However, the Tesla Model 3 that won the test was still drivable when the car showed that the battery had zero percent charge. Most electric cars limited power and heating when the charge started to decrease. "

Rob: of course the price and efficiencies are different. The problem is, as I say in the original post, that the inefficiencies of using Hydrogen completely swamp any problems there might be in generating renewable energy closer to home. Say if you wanted to consume renewable power in Europe then generate it in North Africa - plenty of desert - and use a transmission line. That would be vastly more efficient than trying to shift energy around than H2. The use of ammonia just makes the inefficiencies worse - at the very least barely improves on H2. There simply is no business case for the use of either H2 or NH3, end of story.