Comments by "H. " (@LocPH.) on "Real Engineering" channel.

@mrpicky1868 yeah see a pun intended
48
I don't like batteries. Batteries, especially lithium-ion are not at all good when it comes to the manufacturing process. Like lithium mining and processing is one if the dirtiest industries in the world. And, lithium is not an huge source and it would harm nature by all that mining. So no, batteries are probably not the only answer even if we could. Best would be like hydrogen and alcohol storage, compressed air storage systems for smaller energy producers, molten salt like you said in the video and much more. The technology grows by every day, and to have it in a nearer future we should invest more in that kind of technology. I'm still very optimistic about our future.
40
@Proud Apostate swept back are coolest
11
Sheepy007 Here's one: http://www.kitco.com/ind/Albrecht/2014-12-16-How-Green-is-Lithium.html?sitetype=fullsite The others aren't in English, but there has been research about these industries and to manufacture a battery (for electric cars) of around 100 kwh, it would generate 15 metric tons of carbon dioxide. That is equal to a diesel or petrol car driving 150 000 km! And guess what, the lifetime of these batteries are definitely not more than 150 000 km. This means that even before you have driven 1 meter in a electric car, it has already emitted equally much carbon dioxide like a diesel car that has been driven 150 000 km! Another thing is that the industri it self is bad, like stated in the site above they use many toxins. Half of the lithium deposits in the world are comming from a lake in Bolivia, you can imagine the environment destruction. If you're still not convinced, try searching it up yourself and you'll see.
2
Dutch just sounds like a very weird mixture of German and Danish honestly, from someone who (roughly) understands both of them.
1
DagarCoH ok, but I hope you read the rest I wrote. That is more important.
1
Roman R What? Why don't let the nature take care of the CO2 emissions? You know, that is what bio fuels are all about. If we don't burn to much (especially fosil fuel) the trees and every plant on earth will pick up that carbon dioxide most at the summer when the photosynthesis is on peak performance, which it had done in hundreds of millions years. If we take enough, like making methanol out of methane from dead plants with green energy, it will eventually come back to nature. That is how the carbon cycle works. By that we can have totally clean planes and some cars. But we should not just use biofuels, maybe it's best for transport and some kind of small bio-fuel cells. And no, noone has every approached the CO2 emissions straight on, maybe because there are better solutions. If we stop using fossil fuels, we will not have a problem with excess CO2 in the atmosphere and at the same time we save our natural sources. The rest is done by how I described it above. This is how it should be.
1
Roman R I really would like to drive a methanol driven car or motorcycle. It has good energy content, it's a biofuel and is pretty safe, and I could use quite and effective fuel cells with it. Boom, a electric-methanol-biofuel driven car/motorcycle!
1
Abe Dillon well I can't deny what you're saying, that's probably true. But I'm still talking about how it is today, like the generation of carbon dioxide. But if Tesla successfully does what it promised, then I don't see any wrong with Lithium batteries. I took an example of cars, and that is from one of the biggest car companies, Toyota how are building electric cars to. Those batteries it has are not clean. So once again, if we can do "clean" mining without causing way to much environmental damage, and if Tesla can produce these batteries totally clean then it's good. But I don't know how long it takes that would take. I still think that batteries are not the only thing we should consider when storing energy, huge amounts of energy from renewable energy sources. Thank you.
1
Abe Dillon totally agreed. I didn't mean totally clean, rather clean enough. Nothing can be "totally clean". But I really hope it will work, systems with renewable energy and energy storage wether it is batteries or something else and at big and small scale.
1
Sherrif instead of making fun of people's English, why can't you as any other normal human try to answer the arguments? Or maybe you can't? If you have nothing to say (any thing but acting as a grammar police) then you have nothing to do here either.
1
Sherrif this was a peaceful discussion, until you came in. I was and everyone else here (I think) trying our best to get our facts right, even if some was wrong. And then answering in a polite way. It is just stupid and rude to write comments like yours, you are not helping or even trying to disprove anyone, just talking shit about people. But ok, just keep commenting about how idiotic I am and that my facts are stupid and my English is bad bla bla blah. If you feel like you want take out your anger on me your welcome.
1
Sherrif one thing more, I never said I was for fossil fuels, I don't care if the emissions are greater there. It doesn't make lithium mining any purer than it is. Yeah I know I said "one of the dirtiest industries" but even of it isn't one of them, it is still very dirty, currently. Now this is how a diskussion should be like. And yes, I am accepting that I was wrong in many ways, and did it before you even posted a comment here.
1
dlwatib it depends on the fuel. With today's technology and biofuels like methane, the emissions of "bad" gases are minimized. They are not a problem. If burnt correctly or if you're using near zero impurities fuels like methane (not natural, artificial) then there is nothing wrong with using it like a power source. But fossil fuels contain a large amount of these pollutions.
1
dlwatib I don't mean that biofuels should be used in every vehicle or power facility, that would be way to much of course. But using it in some facilities and vehicles and maybe even in airplanes, I think, would be great.
1
Listen, Youtube is not a open forum for real experts and scientists, not necessarily, and to be angry or or fed up because some facts are wrong in peoples arguments is totally unnecessary. I was trying to find some facts, pretty quick, I'm not an expert at this subject. I doubt any of us are. Of course, when I started my arguments with some facts that do not necessarily mean they're true, I was open for criticism because I had my criticism about lithium batteries. My point of view with my facts was what I wrote, later when some of the facts turned out to be wrong I changed my mind. But my hole argument is not wrong, I've been disproven in battery life length where I know I did not do a complete research, in environment destruction of lithium mining which was connected to lithium sources. These things where not the only thing I talked about. I did my research, I was open minded, and I knew that I was wrong in some ways because of the great facts and arguments I got from other people in a peaceful diskussion. So why destroying it?
1
I have questions about the power and force equations. According to the power equation shown in the video, power seems to be a function of v^3. If you increase speed by 2 then power requirement increases by 8. But that's weird. Best illustrated in a plane. If you fly 2 times the speed them aerodynamic pressure is 4 times higher, and the required thrust is 4 times higher too. Which means power is increased by 4, not 8. Hence, power seems to be a function of v^2 here. Could you explain what's happening?
1
I think you are overestimating the importance of room temperature superconductors. This seems to be pretty common for many science and technology outlets. The main reason you you don't see massive grids from Africa to Europe, or to America, is the massive cost associated with such a project. Not the losses. HCDC lines are very efficienct at transporting electricity at any distance, much better than AC (the longer the bigger advantage), but due to the high cost of HVDC converter stations you don't see DC everywhere. Sort of the reason why Telsa won over Eddison, even though DC has major advantages. There is no evidence pointing towards "cheap" room temp superconductors. Opposite, in fact. Even if LK-99 turned out to be real, there is nothing pointing towards it soon being used in grids, as cost is the most important factor.
1