Comments by "David H" (@DavidHalko) on "EPIC Breakthrough Can SAVE the Internal Combustion Engine!" video.
-
@klepow - the problem is that rail is generally half duplex, one train 🚊 travels on the rail at a time going into a city. Maybe 2 trains 🚂 on a line, in the same direction, but not traveling the same line in opposing directions. Large segments of rail are shared. Sharing is more limited.
With airports, multiple planes can be in the air at a time, hovering in queue, at different altitudes, and they are landing 🛬 one plane a minute. All day long. They look like strings of beads in the sky. It is more like a full duplex network line.
Sure, we may have multiple rails entering a city, like multiple runways to an airport, but those runways are constantly in use by multiple planes, coming and going fairly rapidly within x mins, and the planes ✈️ can all be coming in and out, without the need to build the rail infrastructure between each point… only at the end points.
To increase simultaneous usage with rail, more rail must be built & maintained, more rails between each & every point.
To increase simultaneous usage with air, more planes ✈️ take off and land on existing runways, and adding a runway is easier than adding a rail, since the sky does not have to be built or maintained.
Trains 🚂 are so 1800’s. The amount of energy & co2 required to make the steel, crush the rocks for the rail bed, create the ties of wood or concrete, swap the ties on a regular basis, inspect the rails, dispose of the old rails & ties, railroad ties are dumped in stacks on old railroad 🛤️ land (I used to live by such an area). Concrete is buried in landfills. It is outrageous! The energy used & waste is unbelievable!
For the planes, we use radar to make sure the air is clear, we don’t inspect the air for flaws to replace the air when a defect is seen (just avoid occasional storms, which clear up), don’t need to dispose of bad air with defects (storms drop their rain 🌧️ and all is good). Plants 🌱 grow from the CO2. Nitrogen becomes fertilizers for the plants 🪴. The rain 🌧️ waters plants. Cows 🐮 eat plants 🌱. We eat burgers 🍔. All is good 👍🏼 in the world 🗺️
Honestly, air travel is much more economical & environmentally friendly.
Once we have flying cars, this discussion will be so irrelevant.
2
-
2
-
1
-
@sparkybob1023 -“rail is the… solution that nobody is talking about… in America”
Because rail 🚂 is from the 1800’s. It is good for heavy goods, traveling from clear endpoints, like a port to a city.
Human transport is not like this. How many people in your neighborhood work at the same location requiring transport by train 🚂 ? In my neighborhood, 0. Literally no one.
In some countries, where there are occasional, highly dense cities, it is much more useful, but not in places like the US, where people are spread out.
A rail may go in and out of a city. Once this is done, people drive their cars 20 mins to a rail station, park their cars, just to get on a train to ride somewhere 30 minutes later, to walk 20 mins to a destination? They can drive to the destination in 40 minutes. A waste of time.
People get robbed & raped at the public parking areas, cities are inherently unsafe in the places like the US now a days, because incompetent politicians were elected by people who are dumb. The policies are such where you have to walk through homeless encampments, avoiding the needles 💉, and the human fecal matter 💩.
Everyone is talking about high speed rail, indirectly, when they are taking about crime 👮♀️, drug addicts 💉, poop 💩 maps 🗺️ of streets in major cities, 2nd Amendment rights for the individual, and working virtual.
1
-
Hi @bzuidgeest -
“recycling a combustion engine”
We have not even talked about the recycling of electric motors! ROTFL!
The batteries are the equivalent of recycling a gasoline/diesel tank, much easier to recycle a gas tank, and a gas tank lasts the life of a car, while an EV battery does not last the life of a car.
“life of a car these days? 10 years?”
I wrecked my last car at 19 years,
virtually no maintenance except tires & oil… it’s replacement is now on 6 years. I was getting 30+ MPG (city & highway for our usage.) Over 200k.
My wife’s car is a 2001, now going on 22 years… tires, oil, and a radiator. Once again, 4 door sedan, 30+ MPG (city & highway for our usage.) Over 200k.
“Battery will last the life of the car”
Nope. The battery costs about the price of my last car… I bought a used car, 1 year old, $15k, to replace my 19 year old wrecked vehicle, 4 door sedan, leather interior, automatic everything, from an expensive dealer… ROTFL!
An average Tesla battery costs $13k-$14k
Basically, throw out the vehicle when the battery gets old. Maybe you are right, the battery lasts the life of the car, because we’ll throw out the car when the battery dies with it’s 100k warranty.
The EV batteries suffer calendar aging, as well as usage aging, aging from being charged in cold weather, and [self-combusting] shorts can develop from charging in freezing temperatures.
Batteries must be respected.
All energy is dirty & dangerous.
(Stick a bunch of keys in your front pocket & place a 9v battery in your pocket with the connectors facing down… or swallow a button cell… even the smallest batteries with the least power can be lethally dangerous.)
1
-
Hi @bzuidgeest -
“old cars… atmosphere”
Emissions are a problem for EV’s, as well.
The emissions required to produce an EV battery is immense. Mining rare earths in Africa or South America or Australia, transport across an ocean for battery manufacturing, manufacturing of the battery itself is incredibly energy intensive, shipping to EV manufacturing location… one may drive an EV for 40k until an EV just breaks even, compared to a regular car, as far as emissions difference. Then, the electricity is largely produced by burning various carbon fuels, since people are often charging their cars at home, after they get home at night, when solar panels are not producing electricity. If someone lives in a U.S. state like West Virginia… an EV will actually produce more emissions than a hybrid car will, since the electricity is so dirty! LOL!
“most cars are wrecked earlier”
If an EV is wrecked earlier, then the emissions produced in manufacturing an EV may never be recovered, in comparison to an ICE vehicle.
“dangers… battery… gasoline”
Yep… As I said, all energy is dangerous & dirty. This stuff has been bubbling out of the ground, for as long as written history existed, from the days of Noah sealing the ark.
“defend driving ICE cars”
The amount of energy stored in an tank is far superior to the amount of energy stored in a battery. The energy transmission / transportation requirements are independent of electric lines, offering redundancy in case of a down power line, storms, or war… offering people a way to survive if there is a failure. I have lived long enough & in enough places to appreciate diversity in energy infrastructure. A passive gas fireplace still heats a home when power is out. An ICE engine in my car, with an inverter, can power half my house with a power outage. A power outage does not bother me, for a week or so, when I can drive my car[s], with the energy stored up. Evacuating a peninsula or coastal area during a hurricane with an ICE vehicle is far more realistic than with an EV.
H2 from renewables, like wind & hydro, is a better solution. Provides energy diversity, that carbon based fuels have. H2 fixes the problem with non-portable electrical energy, to become portable. H2 derived from water, which is readily available in all inhabitable areas. H2 emissions are less than tradition carbon based fuels. H2 is done today. H2 can be used in both ICE & Fuel Cell, to reduce barriers to entry & constraints in supply chain (to force competition to drive down costs & offer consumers alternatives when a constraint appears.)
“to be”come relics, just like the people driving them”
Honestly, EV is a nice idea for many use cases, just poor thinking as a “one size fits all” use case. Maybe a nice spare car, for a rich family for commuting, who has an ICE vehicle for longer trips… but EV’s are a poor choice for a poor family in an apartment where they will be left to die in a catastrophic weather event, or where they will need to use fast charging stations, where fast charge electricity costs as much as cheap gas, and the cost of vehicle replacement is exorbitant for a low budget.
Honestly, compelled EV is just another way for the bourgeoisie to create a serf class, binding the poor to the local land, so they have their slave class to do the local work, and the workers have no method of emancipation. An expensive [ev] car is basically no car, for the poor.
We need to emancipate people, with clean & widely available & robust energy sources for transportation… not constrain people.
1
-
Hi @bzuidgeest -
“ice car overtakes ev in pollution once in use”
Unless you are using hybrids or plug in hybrids and your electricity is produced using coal or oil… which is most of the world and even large areas of the first world. Electricity made with natural gas is a lot better (but much of the third world has already transitioned mobile transportation to natural gas, as well as first world cities like mine.)
Studies evaluating pollution [you didn’t cite] normally don’t even take into consideration the energy / pollution required to recycle EV batteries.
“Mandating EV… not allowing murder”
This is a false analogy, a logical fallacy. Pricing people out of the personal mobility is not like telling people to not murder.
Since the advent of ICE engines, life expectancies rose & slavery was able to be abolished, since ICE engines made slavery uneconomical.
“Being backwards again”
Yeah… I’ll go back to my solar panels & lithium ion batteries, while hoping for a sustainable mobile solution, and enjoy emancipation of slaves. Pretty backwards, for the progressives I suppose.
Legally mandating the poor to become relatively immobile, by forcing an expensive & unsustainable mobility solution like EV, is immoral, both economically, societally, and environmentally.
You can go back to the slaving world, without ICE engines, or an appropriately widely available sustainable replacement.
1