TailingsPond + 1,008 GE May 1 2 hours ago, Ecocharger said: The kitchen experiment...right. No one takes this seriously. The Norwegian test used real equipment and the results have been generally accepted, the IPCC forcing equations are now no longer generally used. No one took your last junk paper seriously. Some people actually paid attention to this new find of yours (remember, citations = respect). Unfortunately for the Norwegian group the German group found conflicting results. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TailingsPond + 1,008 GE May 1 The Norwegian author has moved on and no longer supports that older paper! The author (Seim) of that 2020 paper wrote a new paper in 2023 saying the 2022 paper by (Harde) was correct. "Of special interest is how IR energy, re-emitted from CO2 gas, behaves in an earth/atmosphere simulated setup. Such an experiment was performed by Hermann Harde and Michael Schnell where they show that IR radiation emitted from CO2 can warm a small black-body metal plate. In a control experiment, we verified this result." Too funny Eco, your own authors have moved on but you remain in the past. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
notsonice + 1,255 DM May 1 3 minutes ago, TailingsPond said: The Norwegian author has moved on and no longer supports that older paper! The author (Seim) of that 2020 paper wrote a new paper in 2023 saying the 2022 paper by (Harde) was correct. "Of special interest is how IR energy, re-emitted from CO2 gas, behaves in an earth/atmosphere simulated setup. Such an experiment was performed by Hermann Harde and Michael Schnell where they show that IR radiation emitted from CO2 can warm a small black-body metal plate. In a control experiment, we verified this result." Too funny Eco, your own authors have moved on but you remain in the past. Too funny Eco, your own authors have moved on but you remain in the past.??? this is what being a Luddite is all about....trying to live in the past Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190 May 1 9 minutes ago, notsonice said: Too funny Eco, your own authors have moved on but you remain in the past.??? this is what being a Luddite is all about....trying to live in the past What is hilarious, is you idiots can't read or know basic science. All they stated is that CO2 acts like every other material in the universe... It emits IR at the temperature it is at +/- its emmissivity compared to null. His quote has nothing to do with previous paper, rather yet another "experiment" proving what we have known for 100+ years, materials collect and emmit IR based on its temperature and emissivity profil of its collective components. Thus the EMS windows water does not block and where CO2 is slightly more dominant, but it is NOT the whole CO2 spectrum as it is covered by other emmissivity windows of more abundant components(in this case gases) 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TailingsPond + 1,008 GE May 1 (edited) 1 hour ago, footeab@yahoo.com said: His quote has nothing to do with previous paper [] materials collect and emmit IR based on its temperature and emissivity profil of its collective components. There are direct citation links to the previous papers. Seim et al. (2020) was cited by Harde et al.(2022) Seim et al. then cited Harde et al. in the 2023 paper. You can literally see them learning and accepting change. The paper Ecocharger is leaning on has been refuted by one of its own authors. IR emissions do not stop at blackbody radiation, they clearly show that the greenhouse gasses behave differently than inert gases at the same temperature. The difference is the GHG also absorb and re-emit the IR light sending some back to earth. Edited May 1 by TailingsPond Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ecocharger + 1,474 DL May 1 4 hours ago, notsonice said: science is a challenge for you, we get it that you are incapable of doing a simple experiment that an eight grader can do that shows the green house effect.... an experiment that you yourself can complete ?????? to demonstrate to yourself the green house effect . As you repetitively post BS denying science as done by others. What is it like for someone such as yourself,to be a Luddite and in denial at the same time If an elementary student can do it and you can do it, that should tell you something about how sophisticated and upscale the experiment is. The Norwegian scientists' work on this just three years ago has drastically changed the scene on CO2, the IPCC studies now avoid the forcing equations criticized in the Norway study. In case you did not know it, and it appears that you do not know it, that is how science works. New testing disqualifies existing theories. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
notsonice + 1,255 DM May 1 10 minutes ago, Ecocharger said: If an elementary student can do it and you can do it, that should tell you something about how sophisticated and upscale the experiment is. The Norwegian scientists' work on this just three years ago has drastically changed the scene on CO2, the IPCC studies now avoid the forcing equations criticized in the Norway study. In case you did not know it, and it appears that you do not know it, that is how science works. New testing disqualifies existing theories. The Norwegian scientists' work on this just three years ago has drastically changed the scene on CO2, the IPCC studies now avoid the forcing equations criticized in the Norway study.?????? Tailings Pond has posted info that discredits your blah blah blah...... and if kids can prove CO2 is a nasty green house gas responsible for the earths dramatic temperature rise ....you should pay attention....as you seem to think on their level That paper was from 2020. The paper has been cited in newer (2022) work. This group still downplays the global warming risk, but they admit they found CO2 forcing in their lab experiment. +1.05°C each time you double CO2 (without feedback). Feedback could make things much worse. Science marches on... and this time you can't claim they were ignorant of the previous paper since it was cited / challenged. https://climatetverite.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Harde-Schnell-GHE-m-2021.pdf "The derived forcing for CO2 is in quite good agreement with some theoretical studies in the litera- ture, which to some degree is the result of calibrating the set-up to the spectral calculations, but in- dependently it determines and also reproduces the whole progression as a function of the gas con- centration. From this we deduce a basic equilibrium climate sensitivity (without feedbacks) of ECSB = 1.05°C." 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ecocharger + 1,474 DL May 1 (edited) 3 hours ago, TailingsPond said: That paper was from 2020. The paper has been cited in newer (2022) work. This group still downplays the global warming risk, but they admit they found CO2 forcing in their lab experiment. +1.05°C each time you double CO2 (without feedback). Feedback could make things much worse. Science marches on... and this time you can't claim they were ignorant of the previous paper since it was cited / challenged. https://climatetverite.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Harde-Schnell-GHE-m-2021.pdf "The derived forcing for CO2 is in quite good agreement with some theoretical studies in the litera- ture, which to some degree is the result of calibrating the set-up to the spectral calculations, but in- dependently it determines and also reproduces the whole progression as a function of the gas con- centration. From this we deduce a basic equilibrium climate sensitivity (without feedbacks) of ECSB = 1.05°C." Feedback is not major, as we saw in the comprehensive calculations of greenhouse gases. But where is the link to the 2023 Norwegian paper? Not that I don't trust your interpretation of the contents, but I like to see it myself. Here are the Norwegian authors, Thorstein O. Seim1, Borgar T. Olsen2,31Former Senior Research Scientist at Nycomed Pharma, Oslo, Norway.2Former Research Fellow at Max-Planck-Institute for Physiological and Clinical Research, Munich, Germany.3Former Research Scientist at Telenor (Televerkets) Research Department, Fornebu, Norway. Edited May 1 by Ecocharger Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ecocharger + 1,474 DL May 1 (edited) 2 hours ago, TailingsPond said: The Norwegian author has moved on and no longer supports that older paper! The author (Seim) of that 2020 paper wrote a new paper in 2023 saying the 2022 paper by (Harde) was correct. "Of special interest is how IR energy, re-emitted from CO2 gas, behaves in an earth/atmosphere simulated setup. Such an experiment was performed by Hermann Harde and Michael Schnell where they show that IR radiation emitted from CO2 can warm a small black-body metal plate. In a control experiment, we verified this result." Too funny Eco, your own authors have moved on but you remain in the past. Where is your link to the 2023 Seim paper? Edited May 1 by Ecocharger Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TailingsPond + 1,008 GE May 1 Just now, Ecocharger said: Where is your link to the 2023 Seim paper? https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=124562 Sorry I forgot to include it. It has an oddly casual writing style. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ecocharger + 1,474 DL May 2 (edited) 3 hours ago, TailingsPond said: https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=124562 Sorry I forgot to include it. It has an oddly casual writing style. Well it appears that the "rest of the story" is something quite different. Here is the abstract in full. The entire context is important to understand the points raised. Thank you for finding this article, most interesting. The writing style is perhaps a translation from a German original into English, thus the odd phrasing in parts. The Influence of Heat Source IR Radiation on Black-Body Heating/Cooling with Increased CO2 Concentration Thorstein O. Seim1, Borgar T. Olsen2,31Nycomed Pharma, Oslo, Norway.2Max-Planck-Institute for Physiological and Clinical Research, Munich, Germany.3Telenor (Televerkets) Research Department, Fornebu, Norway.DOI: 10.4236/acs.2023.132014 PDF HTML XML 125 Downloads 1,104 Views "This study deal with interactions between thermal and radiative energy flow in experimental situations of varying complexity. Of special interest is how IR energy, re-emitted from CO2 gas, behaves in an earth/atmosphere simulated setup. Such an experiment was performed by Hermann Harde and Michael Schnell where they show that IR radiation emitted from CO2 can warm a small black-body metal plate. In a control experiment, we verified this result. However, in their experiment, the amount of IR radiation from the heating element was strongly attenuated. In a modified experiment, where IR emission from the heating source is present, no heating but a slight cooling of a black object is found when air is replaced by CO2. The modified experimental situation is also more like the earth/atmosphere situation. The presence of IR radiation from a heated surface (like when the sun heats the earth’s surface) strongly attenuates the heating ability of increasing backscatter from increased amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. This result has consequences for the climate change models used by IPCC." So this is rather a different story taken in its full context. I suspect that this is a translation into English of a German original. Edited May 2 by Ecocharger 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TailingsPond + 1,008 GE May 2 (edited) 3 hours ago, Ecocharger said: Thank you for finding this article, most interesting. The writing style is perhaps a translation from a German original into English, thus the odd phrasing in parts. All I did was follow the citations. I agree the odd writing was probably due to translation. Only quoting select portions is annoying eh? You have to admit you do that on the regular. Edited May 2 by TailingsPond 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
notsonice + 1,255 DM May 3 (edited) solar keep decreasing, the 5 cents per Watt barrier has now been breached on a ongoing basis on all cell types. Is 4 cents per Watt achievable???? The answer in the future is yes with Tandem /bi facial cells. The only question is when the 4 cent per Watt barrier is going to be breached.........2024???? maybe 2025 most likely battery prices cut in half in 2024 Coal is doomed..... Will $2 nat gas be competitive for power generation????. Does $2 nat gas make economic sense for Nat Gas only wells....It appears that only for Oil producers that have Nat Gas as a byproduct will prices of less than $2 will be a money maker........ pv magazine International Accelerated declines in solar cell prices since late March In a new weekly update for pv magazine, OPIS, a Dow Jones company, offers bite-sized analysis on solar PV module supply and price trends. . 4 hours ago FOB China prices for both mono PERC M10 and TOPCon M10 cells extended declines this week, assessed at $0.0417/W and $0.0494/W, respectively, marking a decrease of 5.01% and 4.45% from the previous week. FOB China prices for mono PERC G12 have steadied this week, holding at $0.0448/W. This stability can be attributed to the recent initiation of several ground-mounted solar projects in China, which has spurred demand for this cell type. The constrained production capacity for these cells has led to intermittent supply tightness. In the Chinese domestic market, mono PERC M10 cells were priced at around CNY0.335($0.046)/W, while TOPCon M10 cells stood at approximately CNY0.397/W, as per the OPIS market survey. According to a major TOPCon cell producer, the current price trend of cells is closely mirroring the price trend of wafers. Edited May 3 by notsonice 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ecocharger + 1,474 DL May 3 The EV industry is now stumbling into massive failure, with sales plummeting and even the resale values of EVs falling off a cliff. We are entering an apocalyptic reckoning for these ill-conceived and unnecessary schemes. https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Automotive-Industry-Grapples-with-Plummeting-Resale-Values-of-EVs.html "...the automotive industry, previously buoyed by supply chain disruptions driving up prices, is now grappling with challenges stemming from plummeting resale values of electric vehicles." "Diminished resale values pose a particular challenge for car manufacturers like VW, heavily involved in customer financing. When used car prices fall below expectations, companies are compelled to take write-downs on these loans." 1 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eyes Wide Open + 3,555 May 3 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Ecocharger said: The EV industry is now stumbling into massive failure, with sales plummeting and even the resale values of EVs falling off a cliff. We are entering an apocalyptic reckoning for these ill-conceived and unnecessary schemes. https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Automotive-Industry-Grapples-with-Plummeting-Resale-Values-of-EVs.html "...the automotive industry, previously buoyed by supply chain disruptions driving up prices, is now grappling with challenges stemming from plummeting resale values of electric vehicles." "Diminished resale values pose a particular challenge for car manufacturers like VW, heavily involved in customer financing. When used car prices fall below expectations, companies are compelled to take write-downs on these loans." When all those European leasing contracts expire a financial blood bath will have dire effects on there economy. Quite sad is it not. Speaking of leasing and the future of EV'S Tesla Pulling Out of Supercharger Leases After Firing Entire Supercharger Team Earlier this week, news emerged that Musk was conducting yet another round of layoffs, including senior director of EV charging Rebecca Tinucci — alongside her 500-person-strong team https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesla-pulling-supercharger-leases-firing-141228830.html Elon Musk Slams Tesla With Fresh Round of Layoffs And now many of their teams are also being let go, with rumors suggesting the total number of workers affected by the layoffs could amount to around 20 percent of Tesla's total headcount. The company's already in for a "nightmare" year, with year-over-year sales dropping precipitously. Its rapidly shrinking workforce likely won't help that situation in the short run, apart from slowing down the company's spending. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/elon-musk-slams-tesla-fresh-141146990.html Edited May 3 by Eyes Wide Open 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
specinho + 470 May 5 On 4/30/2024 at 11:05 AM, turbguy said: While faster charging battery is desirable, the charging points will have to be carefully considered. Using a reasonable voltage (say, 700 VDC), at 310KW, the connections must be able to carry about 450 amperes. That's a LOT of current. The cabling between the vehicle and charge source will require significant forced liquid cooling, as many high current EV charge points are today, at FAR less levels of current. Except this new "cable" is gotta be really special, perhaps built with multiple liquid cooling circuits using pre-chilled fluids WE will need the strength of a well-built teenager to lift, support, orient, and plug the vehicle in and out (unless you use a plethora of cable connections to break up the current and reduce the weight of the connectors). That teenager may be required to wear an arc-flash suite of PPE! Not that some other connection method is possible. Solid bus-bar (air-cooled)? The existing charging paradigm (plug it in by hand, similar to refueling an ICE) will have to be significantly modified. Because, physics. Anyhow, this also requires charge points WITH that capability. How many are out there? At this time, probably only one. Reducing resistance may also help. For example, charging an iphone takes 4 hours on a normal hot day. It takes only 1 hour + to charge the same phone on a cooling day with phone unused for a while. It means: 1. Hot weather, heated phone or battery due to usages or running apps, increase resistance. 2. Cold surrounding, unused phone and apps, reduces resistance 3. Resistance at Inverter, turning incoming AC to DC, may affect the speed too. E.g. purity of material used, amount of voltage or current queueing up to be converted etc... 4. With that, wondering if storing apps on cloud would reduce the space and energy needed on a phone?? If yes, battery may last longer per charge without those apps draining battery off the energy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TailingsPond + 1,008 GE May 5 (edited) On 5/4/2024 at 9:25 PM, specinho said: With that, wondering if storing apps on cloud would reduce the space and energy needed on a phone?? If yes, battery may last longer per charge without those apps draining battery off the energy. Storing data in the cloud increases the amount of energy needed and is slower than local, on device, storage. The phone has to use the internet to transfer files. Upsides to cloud storage are: essentially unlimited capacity; no need to personally make back up copies; ease of sharing data between devices and others. On the other hand, sending computational tasks to a cloud server saves the phone power and allows for phones with low computational power to do fancier things. Basically the phone sends difficult to solve questions to the server instead of calculating the answer itself. Downside to anything cloud is it requires a working internet connection. Edited May 6 by TailingsPond 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turbguy + 1,544 May 6 (edited) On 5/4/2024 at 9:25 PM, specinho said: Reducing resistance may also help. Reducing resistance of what part of a charging circuit? To charge, you still must pass current through relatively room temperature conductors (unless superconductors are implemented), and avoid overheating the cells. Edited May 6 by turbguy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ecocharger + 1,474 DL May 6 (edited) The electric auto industry is in a world-wide meltdown of unparalleled proportions, we are witnessing the chaotic and embarrassing endgame of a monumental disaster, whose blame lies purely on gullible and panic-stricken politicians who chose to buy into mass hysteria without proper investigation. This is an economic Dunkirk, the end result of mistaken government policies. https://qz.com/cars-european-ports-slow-sales-bottlenecks-1851397116#:~:text=Imported vehicles are seriously piling,buildup of new%2C unsold vehicles. "Imported vehicles are seriously piling up at European ports, turning them into “car parks.” Automakers are distributors are struggling with a slowdown in car sales as well as logistical bottlenecks that make it hard to alleviate the buildup of new, unsold vehicles. From the Financial Times: Port and car industry executives have pointed to a pile-up of Chinese electric cars as one of the leading causes of the problem, with some companies booking shipping delivery slots without ordering onward transportation. In other instances, carmakers in general are struggling to order trucks because of the lack of drivers and equipment to move the vehicles on. “Car distributors are increasingly using the port’s car parks as a depot. Instead of stocking the cars at the dealers, they are collected at the car terminal,” said the Port of Antwerp-Bruges, whose port at Zeebrugge is Europe’s busiest port for car imports. “All major car ports” were struggling with congestion, the port added, without specifying the origin of the vehicles. Edited May 6 by Ecocharger 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ecocharger + 1,474 DL May 7 (edited) Some of the most extreme nonsense in this matter of climate change is coming from the left-wing legal community, who invent wild allegations against oil companies with each passing day. Some of these legal wizards should stop and consider that energy companies are regulated closely and follow the letter of the law in their production plans, and have responded with record oil production in keeping with desperate Biden pleas for more affordable gasoline for the American consumer. Any interference in lawful production with nuisance law suits for no logical reason should be met with countersuits for abuse of a legal process and legal harrassment. When these weirdo law moguls have to pay some hard cash to confess their sins, perhaps some sanity will return to the public discussion about fossil fuels. https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Fossil-Fuel-Companies-Face-Mounting-Legal-Challenges.html Edited May 7 by Ecocharger Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TailingsPond + 1,008 GE May 7 (edited) 1 hour ago, Ecocharger said: Some of the most extreme nonsense in this matter of climate change is coming from the left-wing legal community, who invent wild allegations against oil companies with each passing day. Some of these legal wizards should stop and consider that energy companies are regulated closely and follow the letter of the law in their production plans, and have responded with record oil production in keeping with desperate Biden pleas for more affordable gasoline for the American consumer. Any interference in lawful production with nuisance law suits for no logical reason should be met with countersuits for abuse of a legal process and legal harrassment. When these weirdo law moguls have to pay some hard cash to confess their sins, perhaps some sanity will return to the public discussion about fossil fuels. https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Fossil-Fuel-Companies-Face-Mounting-Legal-Challenges.html You think the energy companies follow the letter of the law? How naive. Truly laughable. Every spill is a violation of law and there have been plenty. It is super easy to find examples if you care to look. Here is a recent conviction from Canada. https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-enforcement/notifications/husky-oil-operations-limited-fined-three-offences-federal-legislation-crude-oil-release-newfoundland-labrador-offshore.html Then of course the deepwater disaster. Felony crimes. https://www.noaa.gov/explainers/deepwater-horizon-oil-spill-settlements-where-money-went "On November 14, 2012, BP and the US Department of Justice reached a settlement under which BP agreed to pay $4.5 billion in fines and other payments, the largest of its kind in US history. BP also agreed to plead guilty to 11 felony counts related to the deaths of the 11 workers." Edited May 7 by TailingsPond Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ecocharger + 1,474 DL May 7 (edited) 19 hours ago, TailingsPond said: You think the energy companies follow the letter of the law? How naive. Truly laughable. Every spill is a violation of law and there have been plenty. It is super easy to find examples if you care to look. Here is a recent conviction from Canada. https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-enforcement/notifications/husky-oil-operations-limited-fined-three-offences-federal-legislation-crude-oil-release-newfoundland-labrador-offshore.html Then of course the deepwater disaster. Felony crimes. https://www.noaa.gov/explainers/deepwater-horizon-oil-spill-settlements-where-money-went "On November 14, 2012, BP and the US Department of Justice reached a settlement under which BP agreed to pay $4.5 billion in fines and other payments, the largest of its kind in US history. BP also agreed to plead guilty to 11 felony counts related to the deaths of the 11 workers." Those are examples of how carefully regulated and monitored the oil industry is in terms of spills and labor rule violations. But that is not what these screwball legal agitators are talking about, they are promoting the nonsense that just ordinary oil production is injurious to the climate and therefore actionable under tort law. This is clearly rubbish, the oil industry functions within strict laws and simply producing an energy and manufacturing input which emits CO2 is not a violation of any statutary restriction. The oil industry is not responsible for decisions of the federal and state governments who promote the increase of oil products, that is an insane claim. Edited May 7 by Ecocharger Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TailingsPond + 1,008 GE May 7 43 minutes ago, Ecocharger said: Those are examples of how carefully regulated and monitored the oil industry is in terms of spills and labor rule violations. But that is not what these screwball legal agitators are talking about, they are promoting the nonsense that just ordinary oil production is injurious to the climate and therefore actionable under tort law. This is clearly rubbish, the oil industry functions within strict laws and simply producing an energy and manufacturing input which emits CO2 is not a violation of any statutary restriction. The oil industry is not responsible for decisions of the federal and state governments who promote the increase of oil products, that is an insane claim. The high rate of monitoring is because they are essentially always on probation for the last time they got caught breaking the laws. Known criminals get more heat from the cops. The laws are straight forward: do not leak oil into fish bearing water, do not leak methane or H2S into the air. Simple. The oil industry is clearly injurious to the environment / climate. The emission laws to the environment are well established. If the energy companies continue to fail to follow the laws there is no other recourse than to continue to punish them for violating the laws through any legal measure available. The government can promote safe and lawful increase of oil products without giving the industry a permission to break laws. I believe that the industry can harvest oil much better than they do. They cut corners, lie on audits, knowingly leave failing equipment in operation, etc. Simple greed. $$$$$ I would give the companies leniency in the case of an act of God type disaster. Those disasters are less common than the routine operation failures due to mismanagement or purposeful criminal activity. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
notsonice + 1,255 DM May 7 On 5/6/2024 at 11:02 AM, Ecocharger said: The electric auto industry is in a world-wide meltdown of unparalleled proportions, we are witnessing the chaotic and embarrassing endgame of a monumental disaster, whose blame lies purely on gullible and panic-stricken politicians who chose to buy into mass hysteria without proper investigation. This is an economic Dunkirk, the end result of mistaken government policies. https://qz.com/cars-european-ports-slow-sales-bottlenecks-1851397116#:~:text=Imported vehicles are seriously piling,buildup of new%2C unsold vehicles. "Imported vehicles are seriously piling up at European ports, turning them into “car parks.” Automakers are distributors are struggling with a slowdown in car sales as well as logistical bottlenecks that make it hard to alleviate the buildup of new, unsold vehicles. From the Financial Times: Port and car industry executives have pointed to a pile-up of Chinese electric cars as one of the leading causes of the problem, with some companies booking shipping delivery slots without ordering onward transportation. In other instances, carmakers in general are struggling to order trucks because of the lack of drivers and equipment to move the vehicles on. “Car distributors are increasingly using the port’s car parks as a depot. Instead of stocking the cars at the dealers, they are collected at the car terminal,” said the Port of Antwerp-Bruges, whose port at Zeebrugge is Europe’s busiest port for car imports. “All major car ports” were struggling with congestion, the port added, without specifying the origin of the vehicles. world-wide meltdown of unparalleled proportions?????? the article you posted has zero info to support your BS, as usual can you have someone read to you the article you are referencing firs???????t...........instead of making up stuff https://qz.com/cars-european-ports-slow-sales-bottlenecks-1851397116#:~:text=Imported vehicles are seriously piling,buildup of new%2C unsold vehicles. looks like the ports are free parking zones until the car is sold .........why move it to a place where it is not needed....just move it once to the new owners house..... lol you forgot to post the reason why vehicles are piling up....and from your article.............. your article has no info on EV sales in the EU whatsover a pile-up of Chinese electric cars as one of the leading causes of the problem, with some companies booking shipping delivery slots without ordering onward transportation. In other instances, carmakers in general are struggling to order trucks because of the lack of drivers and equipment to move the vehicles on. “Car distributors are increasingly using the port’s car parks as a depot. Instead of stocking the cars at the dealers, they are collected at the car terminal,” said the Port of Antwerp-Bruges, whose port at Zeebrugge is Europe’s busiest port for car imports. “All major car ports” were struggling with congestion, the port added, without specifying the origin of the vehicles. One car logistics expert said many of the unloaded vehicles were simply staying in the ports until they were sold to distributors or end users. Cui Dongshu, the secretary-general of the China Passenger Car Association, told FT that inland shipping into European markets is proving difficult for Chinese EV makers. The clogging up of car terminals comes as many of China’s carmakers, such as BYD, Great Wall, Chery and SAIC, are planning an export push to Europe, both to keep their factories in China running and to capitalise on the region’s appetite for electric cars. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Most Active Members
Recently Online
Popular Members
Most Active Members
Recently Online
Popular Members
