S550 may be eliminated sooner rather then later...

[Elp_jc]

Do you see a pattern?

That doesn't mean oil will last forever. Same reason you won't see 10K HP volume cars. As ACE said, it has been due to new technologies, but we can basically see to the center of the planet now, so new oil won't 'magically' appear anymore. It'll get to a point where it'll have to be reserved for planes, trains, ships, etc. But ICE cars will have to be phased out sooner or later, as much as some of us hate that fact.

I'm not a tree hugger, or wouldn't have a freaking V8, but it's stupid not to see the bad effects of greenhouse gases everywhere. And yes, that's only ONE of the many HUGE problems the world is facing now. I don't have much time left with my stupid cancer, but want my 2 daughters to hopefully live a full healthy life, and the only way to achieve that (and for her future kids) is to start doing something in a very significant scale NOW. I understand many don't want drastic measures, but doing nothing is just not going to cut it anymore. So I think CA is on a better path than the rest of the nation.

Sponsored

 

[K4fxd]

I worked in the oil industry for about 8 years. Back in 2008 the best estimates for running out of oil was 400 years at the then current usage levels.

Will oil run out. Probably Is it a crisis at this point in time? No.

So we need to continue to find better ways of powering our cars, trucks, homes ect...

Mandating a change just for changes sake never works. If EV's and solar power were viable they would not need subsidies or mandates for their use.

Something better will come along, it will not be battery powered anything.

 

[Gregs24]

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/147465/large-deep-antarctic-ozone-hole-in-2020

On September 20, 2020, the annual ozone hole reached its peak area at 24.8 million square kilometers (9.6 million square miles), roughly three times the size of the continental United States. ...Nov 1, 2020

CFC's have or had nothing to do with the ozone hole over Antarctica. The hole is still there, only difference is the media is not playing chicken little about it anymore.

DDT another bad ban, by not using it millions of people are dying of mosquito spread diseases.

What will the next crisis be? Oh wait, CO2.......

Looks like NASA don't agree with you

First Direct Proof of Ozone Hole Recovery Due to Chemicals Ban | NASA

Even better the link you posted said:

“From the year 2000 peak, Antarctic stratosphere chlorine and bromine levels have fallen about 16 percent towards the natural level,” said Paul Newman, an ozone layer expert and the chief Earth scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center. “We have a long way to go, but that improvement made a big difference this year. The hole would have been about a million square miles larger if there was still as much chlorine in the stratosphere as there was in 2000.

Hey - I'm not going to waste my life arguing with a member of the flat Earth society. Move on.

 

[Gregs24]

Did you even read your link?

It has 0 information on any proposed or in-process increases to Norway's electrical power production/distribution.

Are you just being deliberately obtuse at this point?

And in case you missed it, another poster calculated that Norway can handle 30% EVs on the road. So their trouble lies in their future. 100% EVs (out-lawing ICEs) is a fantasy in Norway.

Is it working? Sure. For now.

Well at least you do now understand that it is working for now which is progress. Which other poster determined they can support 30% EV's - I'd love to see those detailed calculations. I sure hope you are not referring to the number of EV's x charging them all at once calculation !

 

[Gregs24]

except the claimed causation was complete fraud.

First Direct Proof of Ozone Hole Recovery Due to Chemicals Ban | NASA

I prefer to believe NASA rather than you

Especially after your earlier comments on oil creation.

 

[shogun32]

Hey - I'm not going to waste my life arguing with a member of the flat Earth society. Move on.

except you are.

Anyway you should read past the first paragraph or better yet the actual paper instead of a press release with HIGHLY misleading language. You'll note the "plain language summary" is similar bunk if you read the citations and the actual paper.

I'll panic when NASA digs up the data showing the ozone 'hole' hasn't existed for 100,000 years till humans showed up, or worse had this thing called the Industrial Revolution. If there ever was a reason to "save humanity/life from ozone depletion that's gonna kill us all" why aren't we flying planes up there or shooting rockets and spreading catalysts to eradicate inorganic Chlorine once and for all? Or putting satellites into orbit with giant sun reflectors to heat the air and burn the deadly HCl off?

And how is it we don't have O3 depletion measurements before 2004? So the protocols were agreed to back in 1988 and for 15 years we couldn't actually measure anything? Or is the data before 2004 inconvenient to the conclusions NASA wants to assert?

First prove or show ANY substantive evidence that the Ozone hole is even a problem and that the "natural" state is one that the hole doesn't exist. Should we not use CFC in general? Sure I could get behind that but how do you explain that "oopsie" in the data since 2013 which suggests HCl is going back up? Where is the new source of these compounds? Are the dirty Chinese cheating again and in such quantity that they are killing the planet?

 

[K4fxd]

The link I gave was NASA data.

If you read deep into Gregs link it is a hit piece on nitrous oxide.

Most of the chlorine comes from the ocean.

You don't think it is possible for the oil making process to still be going on? But I'm from the flat earthers?

 

[thunderstrike]

I once drove 2,100 miles non stop, around the clock rotating the drive with my son to get to my father's funeral because I could not afford a $4,500 next day's flight for three of us.

I will consider buying a battery car it can drive 2,100 miles with only few minutes of stops for bio calls and quick fill up.

 

[shogun32]

I will consider buying a battery car it can drive 2,100 miles with only few minutes of stops for bio calls and quick fill up.

how many more fathers do you have that expect to have unfortunately timed demise? If nothing else there should be plenty of ICE cars in rental fleets for such an eventuality.

 

[OX1]

how many more fathers do you have that expect to have unfortunately timed demise? If nothing else there should be plenty of ICE cars in rental fleets for such an eventuality.

Like that is the only reason you might want make a long trip on short notice. Super bowl Sunday this year, went to look at early bronco (decided to go the night before). Left @ 5 AM, took about 4.5 hours to get there, maybe 6.5 to get home ( was up off western 80 in Pa, and an accident took me way out of the way up in mnts, where I had no idea how to get back to highway). Made it home well in time for Superbowl parties.
This was the trip.

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Jac...c095d4c8a5!2m2!1d-78.7286388!2d41.4203391!3e0
With detours from accident due to 4 inch of unforcast snow when I got there, close to 700 miles.
I was HAULING in my Fusion Sport, (once past NE extension) and it was cold. What's the range that day of even a model S @ 90 in those temps? Of course I don't do that trip all the time, but when you gotta go, you gotta go.

 

[shogun32]

Of course I don't do that trip all the time, but when you gotta go, you gotta go.

of course. But what is the number of such trips out of the entirety of all trips taken in a year of american driving? 1e-12? It's a lousy justification for even having a personal vehicle, irrespective of ICE.

As EV penetrates into society more, I expect a significant majority will be for 'run-about' purposes and price and batt capacity commensurate. For everything else there's MasterCard, er. Budget/Enterprise rent-a-car be it a long-range/wagon EV or proper ICE/hybrid.

I'm not opposed to EV in the abstract. Where I vehemently object is being forced to own one, or just as insulting, having my pocket picked so someone gets one.

 

[OX1]

The bottom line is even the greenie cult admits without ridiculous draconian changes, it's too late. The market is going to go fully electric on it's own most likely, just due to less maint. Take all this money NASA is wasting and move those grants to tangible things that will extend range and/or reduce charging times.

This is NOT happening (So funny, the "LATEST" deadline is now 12 years)

"Involves cutting net human carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions 45% by 2030"

https://www.livescience.com/12-years-to-stop-climate-change.html

I can buy a 4600 sq-ft house (VERY common in my area, and no family besides the Hasidic's really "NEEDS" it) and leave the windows open all winter if I want (or buy 3 of them and heat/AC them all the time). The world is going to end, but ZERO restrictions on how you can waste resources on this issue. Start fixing that before you come for my cars/trucks (and no, I'm not advocating the gov't try to fix anything else, they have enough on their plate they can't fix).

https://blueprintforbetter.org/arti...MI9qGQhNbF7QIVCuOzCh39VA3SEAAYASAAEgIT1vD_BwE

 

[OX1]

of course. But what is the number of such trips out of the entirety of all trips taken in a year of american driving? 1e-12? It's a lousy justification for even having a personal vehicle, irrespective of ICE.

As EV penetrates into society more, I expect a significant majority will be for 'run-about' purposes and price and batt capacity commensurate. For everything else there's MasterCard, er. Budget/Enterprise rent-a-car be it a long-range/wagon EV or proper ICE/hybrid.

I'm not opposed to EV in the abstract. Where I vehemently object is being forced to own one, or just as insulting, having my pocket picked so someone gets one.

Not sure if you are being facetious for or against personal freedoms. Point I was making is there are plenty of things that cause emissions that people are totally free to do whatever they want. Stop eating mostly carbs and sugar, might fix global warming just by getting rid of 80 of the healthcare industry. How much "global whatever they are calling it these days" would that save"??

 

[Gregs24]

You don't think it is possible for the oil making process to still be going on? But I'm from the flat earthers?

Miniscule amounts of oil are still being created but the stuff we are extracting took millions of years to create (and was created millions of years ago) and we have extracted huge quantities in just over 100 years. Any oil deposits that appear to be 'refilling' are just oil moving from other lateral or deeper locations filling the void left by extraction. There is no possibility that oil is being created fast enough to refill oil wells. Plenty of information on this is freely available so no need for more pointless discussion.

Not sure how oil deposits ever crept into the thread as it was never about running out of oil but stopping the use of damaging fossil fuels and how EV's are one of several solutions to the problem.

 

[Gregs24]

DDT another bad ban, by not using it millions of people are dying of mosquito spread diseases.

Anybody who considers the ban of DDT to be a bad thing really has a screw loose.

Sponsored