Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby baha » Mon 13 Nov 2017, 08:02:05

In case you're not quite there yet...the fuel in this case is the mined ore, and the motive force is gravity. The process will stop when the ore is all gone...
A Solar fuel spill is otherwise known as a sunny day!
The energy density of a tank of FF's doesn't matter if it's empty.

https://monitoringpublic.solaredge.com/solaredge-web/p/kiosk?guid=19844186-d749-40d6-b848-191e899b37db
User avatar
baha
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 776
Joined: Thu 12 Jul 2007, 02:00:00
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby Subjectivist » Mon 13 Nov 2017, 08:07:21

baha wrote:Of course it's not perpetual motion. Dude :)

It's a human designed mechanical system that produces more power than it uses. More commonly known as a powerplant. I didn't write the stupid article and you latched onto one word and quit reading without grokking the concept.

There is nothing an ICE motor can do that an electric motor cannot do better...The source of easily stored power is the only advantage it has. And that source is waning.


Mining involves removing stuff from below ground and putting it into commerce at normal altitude. The most successful mines are open pit operations that involve making a wide hole in the landscape and hauling ore and spoil up hill out of the hole to average altitude. A mining truck based around a regenerative electric motor with battery pack will use more power hauling a full load of ore out of the pit than it will regenerate coasting back down hill empty to pick up the next load of ore. Sure ther is an efficiency gain from regen motors on the coast down hill, but in a lot of hilly places like say Greece, commercial drivers often conserve fuel by shutting off the motor and coasting down hill under gravitational attraction.
II Chronicles 7:14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
User avatar
Subjectivist
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 4110
Joined: Sat 28 Aug 2010, 06:38:26
Location: Northwest Ohio

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby baha » Mon 13 Nov 2017, 08:22:13

You're right Sub,
That mine in Norway is a special case. But that doesn't change the fact that a mining truck could be electric. You just have to fuel it.

Take a pit mining operation with a big pole in the middle and extension cords going to each truck while they go round and round. Power it with one central diesel generator that runs at a constant RPM. I bet that would be twice as efficient as a diesel engine in each truck (even with wire loss).

This is another argument I get tired of. 'You can't operate this or that with electric motors'. This is totally off track...the issue is energy, not the motor. If batteries are ever more energy dense than gas the ICE will be instantly obsolete. And I'm thinking the threshold is more like 1/4 as dense. Electric motors are sweet...
A Solar fuel spill is otherwise known as a sunny day!
The energy density of a tank of FF's doesn't matter if it's empty.

https://monitoringpublic.solaredge.com/solaredge-web/p/kiosk?guid=19844186-d749-40d6-b848-191e899b37db
User avatar
baha
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 776
Joined: Thu 12 Jul 2007, 02:00:00
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Mon 13 Nov 2017, 09:12:56

Part of the issue too is outright lies, such as in Baha's link. LENR, water engines, over unity blah blah flipping blah, the internet is overflowing with fools & foolers. Let's not join them, shall we please?
SeaGypsy
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 9036
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 03:00:00

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby eugene » Mon 13 Nov 2017, 10:00:46

We live in an age of thought solutions. If I can think it, it can be done. Thought solutions disappear when the reality of application arrives. Thought solutions only exist from people who are comfortable, safe, secure and over a cup of coffee or debates on web sites.
All can rest assured our transition to a world of ever increasing energy sources will be simple, cost free and a very happy one.
eugene
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 76
Joined: Sat 23 Aug 2014, 09:08:45

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby asg70 » Mon 13 Nov 2017, 10:15:36

The moderate viewpoint is that of the hype cycle. While ideas are often overly touted, the good ones eventually enter into the plateau of productivity.

https://www.gartner.com/binaries/conten ... 2af41954e0

To doomers, all ideas just go down the trough and never enter the plateau.

There rally is a profound lack of reflection and revision within the doomer mindset. It's just all pessimism all the time. I wouldn't expect any different, and yet it's the flipside of the cornyism they so decry. So you'd think if they're gonna get all arrogant that they know the score and cornies don't that they'd fully explore every option rather than just knee-jerk strike a pessimistic tone each and every time, but no.
Hubbert's curve, meet S-curve: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
asg70
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1192
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby GHung » Mon 13 Nov 2017, 10:43:01

asg70 wrote:The moderate viewpoint is that of the hype cycle. While ideas are often overly touted, the good ones eventually enter into the plateau of productivity.

https://www.gartner.com/binaries/conten ... 2af41954e0

To doomers, all ideas just go down the trough and never enter the plateau.

There rally is a profound lack of reflection and revision within the doomer mindset. It's just all pessimism all the time. I wouldn't expect any different, and yet it's the flipside of the cornyism they so decry. So you'd think if they're gonna get all arrogant that they know the score and cornies don't that they'd fully explore every option rather than just knee-jerk strike a pessimistic tone each and every time, but no.


Gosh, asg, if you are so secure in your assessments of things and your version of the future,, why do you spend do much time, day after day, trying to fix doomers?
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1775
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby asg70 » Mon 13 Nov 2017, 11:44:52

GHung wrote:Gosh, asg, if you are so secure in your assessments of things and your version of the future,, why do you spend do much time, day after day, trying to fix doomers?


This is mostly a fascination I have with the limit of people's epistemic closure and the degree to which doomers fail to realize that clinging to outdated doomer narratives is the flipside of the blue-pill cornies clinging to their faith in BAU.

Regardless of the topic at hand there has been a severe hollowing out of moderate viewpoints, thanks to the internet. Everyone has proceeded to move to the poles and this is a supreme tragedy.
Hubbert's curve, meet S-curve: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
asg70
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1192
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby GHung » Mon 13 Nov 2017, 11:52:35

asg70 wrote:
GHung wrote:Gosh, asg, if you are so secure in your assessments of things and your version of the future,, why do you spend do much time, day after day, trying to fix doomers?


This is mostly a fascination I have with the limit of people's epistemic closure and the degree to which doomers fail to realize that clinging to outdated doomer narratives is the flipside of the blue-pill cornies clinging to their faith in BAU.

Regardless of the topic at hand there has been a severe hollowing out of moderate viewpoints, thanks to the internet. Everyone has proceeded to move to the poles and this is a supreme tragedy.


Seems more like a compulsion to control others and prove to yourself you are right. Rest easy though. You have plenty of company.

The tell is the name-calling. AdamB has you beat on that one.
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1775
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby asg70 » Mon 13 Nov 2017, 11:58:03

GHung, I think this discussion group is largely an empty time-waster regardless of whether there's sniping or bobbleheading going on.
Hubbert's curve, meet S-curve: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
asg70
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1192
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby Newfie » Mon 13 Nov 2017, 18:53:47

baha wrote:Of course it's not perpetual motion. Dude :)

It's a human designed mechanical system that produces more power than it uses.


Your second sentence is describing a perpetual motion machine.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 9400
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: US East Coast

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby ralfy » Mon 13 Nov 2017, 20:11:31

vtsnowedin wrote:That 70 percent figure is only true today because diesel fuel is cheap and plentiful today. When supply and prices change the economics of mining will change right along with it. Electric powered conveyor belts set up in series can transport material the same distance heavy mine trucks can without using a drop of diesel.


Conveyor belts have been used in mining for years, especially with mines that are too deep. But if there are problems with electrical supply, diesel generators and other means have to be used to provide enough power. The same applies for other equipment.

As diminishing returns kick in, even more power will be needed for fewer minerals extracted, and of lower quality.

Ultimately, the economics of mining will change, but not in the way most imagine. The same will apply to the global economy.
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 4654
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby ralfy » Mon 13 Nov 2017, 20:17:54

baha wrote:Did you'all forget about this?

https://im-mining.com/2017/06/28/e-dump ... itzerland/

A mining truck that is not only electric but produces power. The only limit is your imagination.


According to the same article, there is a "substantial premium" for the vehicle that should be offset because it runs on electricity and there are no CO2 emissions. But why is there such a premium?

Perhaps these points involve limits to both imagination and credit, but I'm sure we have a lot of both. Apparently, what we lack are energy and material resources, i.e., the amount of both needed to maintain global economic growth, in turn needed to replace ICEVs with EVs.
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 4654
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby ralfy » Mon 13 Nov 2017, 20:21:55

baha wrote:Of course it's not perpetual motion. Dude :)

It's a human designed mechanical system that produces more power than it uses. More commonly known as a powerplant. I didn't write the stupid article and you latched onto one word and quit reading without grokking the concept.

There is nothing an ICE motor can do that an electric motor cannot do better...The source of easily stored power is the only advantage it has. And that source is waning.


If that source is waning, then perhaps the same issue can be seen for EVs in general.
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 4654
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby pstarr » Mon 13 Nov 2017, 20:22:50

This thread is a great place to be. It's a doomer enclave :)
Haven't you heard? I'm a doomer!
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 26304
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby ralfy » Mon 13 Nov 2017, 20:27:11

baha wrote:You're right Sub,
That mine in Norway is a special case. But that doesn't change the fact that a mining truck could be electric. You just have to fuel it.

Take a pit mining operation with a big pole in the middle and extension cords going to each truck while they go round and round. Power it with one central diesel generator that runs at a constant RPM. I bet that would be twice as efficient as a diesel engine in each truck (even with wire loss).

This is another argument I get tired of. 'You can't operate this or that with electric motors'. This is totally off track...the issue is energy, not the motor. If batteries are ever more energy dense than gas the ICE will be instantly obsolete. And I'm thinking the threshold is more like 1/4 as dense. Electric motors are sweet...


My understanding is that motors in EVs may burn up if the road incline is too steep and/or the load is too heavy. Besides the energy density problem, lack of infrastructure (e.g., electric grid) also doesn't help.
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 4654
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Mon 13 Nov 2017, 20:42:53

Na, it's about gearing & clutching, horses for courses.
SeaGypsy
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 9036
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 03:00:00

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby baha » Tue 14 Nov 2017, 06:03:26

Newfie wrote:Your second sentence is describing a perpetual motion machine.
No, the mined ore is a fuel...perpetual motion does not use fuel. (At least every one I've seen :))

ralfy wrote:According to the same article, there is a "substantial premium" for the vehicle that should be offset because it runs on electricity and there are no CO2 emissions. But why is there such a premium?

The premium is the batteries. In this case they store excess power going downhill and give it to the grid when the battery is full. An electric drivetrain is cheaper and simpler than an ICE.

ralfy wrote:My understanding is that motors in EVs may burn up if the road incline is too steep and/or the load is too heavy. Besides the energy density problem, lack of infrastructure (e.g., electric grid) also doesn't help.

This problem is caused when the cooling fan is attached to the output shaft. When the motor is turning very slow it can still produce full power, and take full current, but it doesn't keep itself cool. If you use a separate cooling system that keeps the motor cool no matter how fast it's turning...problem solved. Most of the EVs I've seen have water cooled motors. Also most EVs have one reduction gear that never shifts and no clutch.
A Solar fuel spill is otherwise known as a sunny day!
The energy density of a tank of FF's doesn't matter if it's empty.

https://monitoringpublic.solaredge.com/solaredge-web/p/kiosk?guid=19844186-d749-40d6-b848-191e899b37db
User avatar
baha
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 776
Joined: Thu 12 Jul 2007, 02:00:00
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Tue 14 Nov 2017, 09:05:55

In order to run an electric driven high load lift, a flywheel & clutch is the simplest solution to avoid stopped motor burnout.

That truck article is bullshit as i already said. The load is not the fuel & is irrelevant. The claim is to generate more power than it consumes, from gravity. Just lies.
SeaGypsy
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 9036
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 03:00:00

Re: Bans on Internal Combustion Engines May Backfire

Unread postby GHung » Tue 14 Nov 2017, 09:17:14

SeaGypsy wrote:In order to run an electric driven high load lift, a flywheel & clutch is the simplest solution to avoid stopped motor burnout.

That truck article is bullshit as i already said. The load is not the fuel & is irrelevant. The claim is to generate more power than it consumes, from gravity. Just lies.


Yep. Not even sure why this is being debated. The laws of thermodynamics rule.
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1775
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: pstarr and 27 guests