GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

28 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

ICE cars are still more flammable. The battery situation is being minimized through software and different chemistries. Sales continue growing faster than ICE sales.

The issue is more than auto batteries, this article looks at mega-battery storage problems.

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

40 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

ICE cars are still more flammable. The battery situation is being minimized through software and different chemistries. Sales continue growing faster than ICE sales.

But Jay, those sales do not include yourself, who continues to rely on an ICE vehicle. Common sense has prevailed in your own choice of vehicle. You have voted with your wallet. That is still Exhibit A in this discussion.

Perhaps those Economics courses you went through were not entirely wasted.

The article concentrates on mega-battery storage, so that is a serious problem.

"The risk of a fire is certainly a problem, but perhaps a bigger one is that extinguishing that fire is not as easy as putting out a “normal” fire. This is because of all the chemicals that go into making a battery cell. Those chemicals create the gases that build up in batteries right before they explode.

“We don’t have a definitive answer of what is the best way to deal with an EV [electric vehicle] fire or energy storage fire,” Newcastle University professor Paul Christensen told the Financial Times, commenting on the Victorian Big Battery incident.

“They [lithium-ion batteries] are essential to the decarbonisation of this planet but their penetration into society has far outstripped our actual knowledge of the risks and hazards associated with them,” he added.

One might suggest that the risk is minimal; otherwise, we would be hearing about battery storage fires every day. But, in fact, there have been quite a few battery storage fires recently, according to Christensen: a total of 38, in fact, since 2018, including one at an Orsted battery storage site in the UK, and one in Arizona, at a battery storage facility operated by Arizona Public Services.

There are “many similar battery enclosures operating today that could experience the exact same kind of failure,” warned Matthew Paiss, a technical advisor on battery materials and systems at the pacific Northwestern National Laboratory, at the Energy Storage Summit USA earlier this year.

The way to reduce the risk is to ensure the rapid release of gasses built up in a battery cell, according to experts. Yet achieving this rapid release may be easier said than done. In the meantime, the risk will only grow, as the FT notes, because of the wider adoption of lithium-ion batteries, including in households."

Edited August 4, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

Here is the crux of the issue for dealing with battery fires.

https://www.energy-storage.news/news/very-rapid-removal-of-gases-vital-to-explosion-prevention-during-battery-fi

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

11 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Here is the crux of the issue for dealing with battery fires.

https://www.energy-storage.news/news/very-rapid-removal-of-gases-vital-to-explosion-prevention-during-battery-fi

You continue to be a sucker for a sales pitch.

"Speaking at the event, hosted by our publisher Solar Media, Matthew Paiss, technical advisor, battery materials & systems at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), 

He therefore went on to detail new technology developed by PNNL titled the IntelliVent, which helps to vent flammable gases prior to an explosion, therefore preventing the explosion from taking place."

Regardless, the problem you declare to be the crux of the issue has been solved by this company. 

Edited August 4, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

37 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

It has served me well, Jay. I have not seen any economic analysis in your posts, so perhaps you are the one who deserves some refunding. I don't think that anyone would deny that one of the prime motivations for purchasing an EV is to contribute to a greater "cause", and "cause" related purchases do not follow the normal rules of economic rationality.

I presume that is why you pay no attention to the abysmal ratings of Tesla vehicles in the surveys above. Again, your "cause" trumps (excuse the term) any rational evaluation.

 

Rationality is in the mind of the consumer. The idea that an economist can judge the consumer's utility function as rational or irrational is a positively archaic economic concept.  

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

50 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

The issue is more than auto batteries, this article looks at mega-battery storage problems.

Coal is also more flammable.

 

[turbguy + 1,544]

2 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

There is a looming problem for battery power,

https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Renewable-Energy/Do-Lithium-Batteries-Pose-A-Major-Fire-Hazard.html

"Batteries are sensitive to overheating and overcharging, Alexey Glushenkov explained to EcoGeneration. Overheating initially happens in a single battery cell but can quickly spread to all the other cells in a battery pack. Battery manufacturers seek to minimize the chance of that happening. Unfortunately, recent battery incidents have proven that it is not always possible to completely eliminate the danger.

When a battery cell overheats, gases begin to build up inside it, swelling it and eventually opening it, allowing oxygen to come in and spark a fire. 

But how does overheating happen? By overcharging, which can also cause unwanted chemical reactions in the battery cells—again threatening fire.

The most common cause for all of this is a short circuit. According to Glushenkov, it could be the result of a bad battery design or a manufacturing defect. Short circuits can also start at a molecular level when overcharging the battery cell results in the buildup of metallic lithium in the anode. These buildups grow into what are commonly known as dendrites."

Not exactly "looming".

It's been known about for many years.

Using alternative chemistries is a solution.

Most cells in pocket-able items are supplied with undervolage/overvoltage protection circuitry.

That said, it can still occur.

[turbguy + 1,544]

21 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

This is all about perception, not reality. In fact, CO2 is not a problem, it is just perceived to be a problem.

The way to deal with a perceived problem is to create a perceived solution. 

Yeah, I hear you.

It is just that Exxon acts just like the tobacco companies, the Eythl Corporation, and Jones-Manville.

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/24102019/exxon-scientists-climate-research-testify-congess-denial/

Seems to me, the Fossil Industry might find itself in a real financial bind should courts agree to awarding damages.  They got DEEP POCKETS, too!

Edited August 5, 2021 by turbguy

[Boat + 1,324]

Texas GOP Official Mocked COVID Five Days Before He Died of Virus

 

‘MY HEART IS BEYOND BROKEN’

H. Scott Apley’s Facebook page was filled with anti-mask, anti-vaccine content until he was suddenly hospitalized on Sunday.

Justin Rohrlich

Reporter

Updated Aug. 04, 2021 9:34PM ET Published Aug. 04, 2021 5:38PM ET 

 

 

 

 

 

Texas GOP

 

A GOP official from Texas who regularly espoused anti-vaccine and anti-mask views online has died from COVID-19, five days after posting a meme on Facebook questioning the wisdom of getting inoculated against COVID.

Dickinson City Council member and State Republican Executive Committee member H. Scott Apley, 45, died in a local hospital around 3 a.m. Wednesday morning, according to a GoFundMe page set up to help Apley’s family with expenses. He was admitted to the facility in Galveston on Sunday with “pneumonia-like symptoms,” and was hooked up to a ventilator as his condition worsened. His wife was also infected, the family said.

[Boat + 1,324]

5 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Here is the crux of the issue for dealing with battery fires.

https://www.energy-storage.news/news/very-rapid-removal-of-gases-vital-to-explosion-prevention-during-battery-fi

Shouldn’t we fix FF fires first? Seems like they have been around a bit longer. 

Natural Gas and Propane Fires, Explosions and Leaks Estimates and Incident Descriptions
An estimated average of 4,200 home structure fires per year started with the ignition of natural gas. These fires caused an average of 40 deaths per year. The statistics, incident descriptions from NFPA publications and reports from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) show that most major gas incidents involved some type of leak.
In the U.S., local fire departments respond to an average of 340 natural gas or LP-Gas leaks per day with no ignition. Although gas leaks are much more common than gas ignitions, they can be precursors to devastating events.

 

[turbguy + 1,544]

38 minutes ago, Boat said:

Shouldn’t we fix FF fires first? Seems like they have been around a bit longer. 

Natural Gas and Propane Fires, Explosions and Leaks Estimates and Incident Descriptions
An estimated average of 4,200 home structure fires per year started with the ignition of natural gas. These fires caused an average of 40 deaths per year. The statistics, incident descriptions from NFPA publications and reports from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) show that most major gas incidents involved some type of leak.
In the U.S., local fire departments respond to an average of 340 natural gas or LP-Gas leaks per day with no ignition. Although gas leaks are much more common than gas ignitions, they can be precursors to devastating events.

 

While those are alarming and reliable statistics, there's no way I would locate a large battery (even lead-acid) within my home. 

In a separate, vented enclosure outside, yes.

Inside?  No way!

FF fires are a thing that cannot be avoided.

Then, refinery incidents come to mind.  THOSE must be EXPENSIVE!!

Edited August 5, 2021 by turbguy

[nsdp + 449]

On 7/15/2021 at 3:59 AM, Rob Plant said:

So are you saying humans wouldnt have evolved in higher C02 levels?

What evidence have you for this? or is it a blind guess/assumption?

5000ppm "could be harmful" for an extended length of time and 40000 definitely are.

"This could occur when exposed to levels above 5,000 ppm for many hours. At even higher levels of CO₂ can cause asphyxiation as it replaces oxygen in the blood-exposure to concentrations around 40,000 ppm is immediately dangerous to life and health."

What says humans (and other fauna) cant live just fine at 3000ppm or a lot higher, clearly some did when it was much higher than this or we wouldn't be here!

We're at 420ppm for Gods sake!

Still think we're all doomed?

Remember Apollo13?

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

2 hours ago, Boat said:

Texas GOP Official Mocked COVID Five Days Before He Died of Virus

 

‘MY HEART IS BEYOND BROKEN’

H. Scott Apley’s Facebook page was filled with anti-mask, anti-vaccine content until he was suddenly hospitalized on Sunday.

Justin Rohrlich

Reporter

Updated Aug. 04, 2021 9:34PM ET Published Aug. 04, 2021 5:38PM ET 

 

 

 

 

 

Texas GOP

 

A GOP official from Texas who regularly espoused anti-vaccine and anti-mask views online has died from COVID-19, five days after posting a meme on Facebook questioning the wisdom of getting inoculated against COVID.

Dickinson City Council member and State Republican Executive Committee member H. Scott Apley, 45, died in a local hospital around 3 a.m. Wednesday morning, according to a GoFundMe page set up to help Apley’s family with expenses. He was admitted to the facility in Galveston on Sunday with “pneumonia-like symptoms,” and was hooked up to a ventilator as his condition worsened. His wife was also infected, the family said.

Off topic.

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

2 hours ago, Boat said:

Shouldn’t we fix FF fires first? Seems like they have been around a bit longer. 

Natural Gas and Propane Fires, Explosions and Leaks Estimates and Incident Descriptions
An estimated average of 4,200 home structure fires per year started with the ignition of natural gas. These fires caused an average of 40 deaths per year. The statistics, incident descriptions from NFPA publications and reports from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) show that most major gas incidents involved some type of leak.
In the U.S., local fire departments respond to an average of 340 natural gas or LP-Gas leaks per day with no ignition. Although gas leaks are much more common than gas ignitions, they can be precursors to devastating events.

 

If you plan to electrify everything, the statistical balance will change. You will get electric baseboard heating fires, battery explosions, etc.

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

1 hour ago, nsdp said:

Remember Apollo13?

Not able to respond to the challenge?

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

7 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Coal is also more flammable.

 

Coal is not the issue here, Jay, you sure do like to change the topic when it looks bad for your guys.

I've seen you do that more than a few dozen times around here.

Edited August 5, 2021 by Ecocharger

[QuarterCenturyVet + 312]

1 hour ago, nsdp said:

Remember Apollo13?

Yeah, about 60,000ppm. 

420ppm is nothing in comparison. 

You must be suffering from a case of the vapors with that reference. 

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

8 hours ago, turbguy said:

Yeah, I hear you.

It is just that Exxon acts just like the tobacco companies, the Eythl Corporation, and Jones-Manville.

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/24102019/exxon-scientists-climate-research-testify-congess-denial/

Seems to me, the Fossil Industry might find itself in a real financial bind should courts agree to awarding damages.  They got DEEP POCKETS, too!

This link is some two years old. What is wrong with producing science research which questions the CO2 hypothesis of climate change? I would really like to know that, and that question is not addressed in this rather slanted report.

As I recall, this case was won by the oil company, and for good reason.

Edited August 5, 2021 by Ecocharger

[turbguy + 1,544]

8 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

This link is some two years old. What is wrong with producing science research which questions the CO2 hypothesis of climate change? I would really like to know that, and that question is not addressed in this rather slanted report.

As I recall, this case was won by the oil company, and for good reason.

I find nothing wrong with a questioning attitude concerning "climate change", or even the root causes of climate change.  That is how science evolves.

That said, there is little support for competing theories that tend to "brush off", or ignore, the significant rise of human activities that occurred since the "industrial revolution".  The astronomical community certainly has made very strong objections to proposed theories of variance of orbital mechanics and/or solar activity as unsupported by observation or even the JPL ephemeris.

The energy balance of our planet is certainly difficult to simplify, and is influenced by factors difficult to quantify with good accuracy.   We just do the best we can with the science we have.

The "best we can" has shown that we are warming.

The 'best we can" indicates that there will be chaotic, unpredictable results from warming.

The "best we can" indicates that human activities are a contributor to warming.

The "best we can" indicates that humans (and life) will adapt. 

That adaptation will be somewhat "unpleasant". 

More here from a most trustworthy source.  Short reads...

https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/climatescience/greenhousegases/whichgases.html

https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/climatescience/greenhousegases/industrialrevolution.html

https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/climatescience/greenhousegases/sourcesandsinks.html

Edited August 5, 2021 by turbguy

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

11 hours ago, nsdp said:

Remember Apollo13?

Great film, not really relevant

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

1 hour ago, turbguy said:

I find nothing wrong with a questioning attitude concerning "climate change", or even the root causes of climate change.  That is how science evolves.

That said, there is little support for competing theories that tend to "brush off", or ignore, the significant rise of human activities that occurred since the "industrial revolution".  The astronomical community certainly has made very strong objections to proposed theories of variance of orbital mechanics and/or solar activity as unsupported by observation or even the JPL ephemeris.

The energy balance of our planet is certainly difficult to simplify, and is influenced by factors difficult to quantify with good accuracy.   We just do the best we can with the science we have.

The "best we can" has shown that we are warming.

The 'best we can" indicates that there will be chaotic, unpredictable results from warming.

The "best we can" indicates that human activities are a contributor to warming.

The "best we can" indicates that humans (and life) will adapt. 

That adaptation will be somewhat "unpleasant". 

More here from a most trustworthy source.  Short reads...

https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/climatescience/greenhousegases/whichgases.html

https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/climatescience/greenhousegases/industrialrevolution.html

https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/climatescience/greenhousegases/sourcesandsinks.html

I agree there are many factors to look at and oversimplifying doesnt help, however the relatively new solar theory is 97% accurate (so far) which is hard to dismiss dont you think? Especially when every single climate change theory is at best 50-60% correct so you might as well flip a coin!

I still fail to see any concrete evidence that Co2 is the root cause for "climate change" when it is a smidge above (140 ppm) on pre industrial levels. Again these have been estimated as high as 9000ppm in the earths history and life still carried on evolving and thriving, and look here we are having a conversation, isnt Darwin great!

Population growth and pollution now there's the problem!

 

[nsdp + 449]

8 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Great film, not really relevant

The point is that the point where CO2 impairs human performance is 600ppm.  About like ,075% blood alcohol.  1000 ppm causes mental functions to begin to shut down. .  Apollo 13 Capsule reading was 700 ppm.  I should not have expected people to be familiar with toxicity curves.

[nsdp + 449]

18 hours ago, QuarterCenturyVet said:

Yeah, about 60,000ppm. 

420ppm is nothing in comparison. 

You must be suffering from a case of theapors with that reference. 

60,000 you are unconscious in 2 minutes and dead in 5 minutes.https://inspectapedia.com/hazmat/Carbon_Dioxide_Hazards.php

20,000

> 5%

minutes

Toxic, unconsciousness, death [5]

 

[QuarterCenturyVet + 312]

10 minutes ago, nsdp said:

60,000 you are unconscious in 2 minutes and dead in 5 minutes.https://inspectapedia.com/hazmat/Carbon_Dioxide_Hazards.php

20,000

> 5%

minutes

Toxic, unconsciousness, death [5]

 

Thanks, tips.

Now research H2S. 

It's not like I've worked in these situations around noxious/poisonous gasses for the last 25 years or anything. 

Now, how about that increase of 140ppm of CO2? Pretty insignificant. 

[QuarterCenturyVet + 312]

2 hours ago, nsdp said:

The point is that the point where CO2 impairs human performance is 600ppm.  About like ,075% blood alcohol.  1000 ppm causes mental functions to begin to shut down. .  Apollo 13 Capsule reading was 700 ppm.  I should not have expected people to be familiar with toxicity curves.

You're off by about a factor of 10. 600ppm of CO2 doesn't negatively affect you, numpty. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/idlh/124389.html

Basis for original (SCP) IDLH: The chosen IDLH is based on the statements by ACGIH [1971] that a 30-minute exposure at 50,000 ppm produces signs of intoxication, and a few minutes of exposure at 70,000 ppm and 100,000 ppm produces unconsciousness [Flury and Zernik 1931]. AIHA [1971] reported that 100,000 ppm is the atmospheric concentration immediately dangerous to life. In addition, Hunter [1975] noted that exposure to 100,000 ppm for only a few minutes can cause loss of consciousness.

https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/41990/was-the-apollo-13-co2-problem-a-matter-of-capacity-or-of-rate/41991#41991

4.5 mm Hg partial pressure of CO2 is equivalent to 5900 ppm (part per million) of CO2 in air at sealevel. 14.9 is 19,600 ppm. The mean CO2 content of fresh outdoor air is about 400 ppm, low quality room air may have more than 1400 ppm.

 

Edited August 6, 2021 by QuarterCenturyVet