Driven an EV

[V]

As far as I know, the French have not published a cradle-to-grave assessment of the energy requirements to manufacture and totally recycle a wind turbine. If they did, their recycling levy would be much higher than it currently is. A wind turbine is not green until it has offset all of the CO2 in its manufacturing and recycling.

 

A 3MW turbine costs in excess of £3M, but I will round it down for convenience.

The French recycling levy on that capacity is £60,000 , that's just 2% of the purchase price.

 

I suspect that the true cost of recycling equals or exceeds the purchase price. Recycling usually only deals with what recovered resources are commercially viable. A commercial business not receiving government funding would not spend more money recycling something than the value of the recovered resources. This became apparent to me when I visited a ghost town in California called Calico some years ago. It had a massive heap of mine tailings, waste broken rock containing approximately $13M worth of silver. The rock fragments contain traces of silver that would cost many more times its value to extract so it has sat there as a hillside for more than 120 years. Recycling is much the same, if the value of what is recycled is less than what is spent to recover it, it wont get recycled, it will get dumped somewhere.

 

So how does this affect official turbine recycling propaganda? Easy, the wind energy company pays it's 2% recycling levy which is an absolute discount on the real cost that they have no intention of paying. This keeps the public happy and the green illusion going. The wind energy subcontract a start-up recycling firm that is developing new recycling processes, this gives them a plausible period of years to get set up. The recycling company is paid to take each turbine for recycling. When ready, the old turbines are transported to a storage facility until the processing starts in a few years time. Some profitable recycling is actually done to keep the auditors happy. The original turbine company is wound up when it stops making a profit (end of government subsidies). The recycling company is now responsible for the recycling they have been paid to do as the wind energy company no longer exists. Ownership of the recycling company changes hands in a myriad of acquisitions that is impossible to find the ultimate owner. The recycling company conveniently goes bust when the process they were developing is found to be flawed at an industrialised scale and all the investors pull out. The storage facility becomes the de-facto dump for the waste turbines. The end result is that the tax payer picks up the cost of the clean-up and the government keeps it quiet on how much was actually recycled and what it cost the tax payer.

 

Edited March 1, 2022 by V

[MacManus]

Maybe the future may be V8 powered after all

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/technology/toyota-and-yamaha-developing-hydrogen-fuelled-449bhp-v8

[Fourpot]

On 28/02/2022 at 17:24, BLUE STAR said:

Its still just a debatable point I guess, but in the event of the country being forced to going totally EV where would all those batteries actually end up then (exported to Asia in containers again) and where will the power come from to charge them, as wind is notoriously unreliable and heavily subsidised, plus  having to keep gas, coal & diesel powered stations on standby at massive costs when tenders go out to them, to quickly jump in to balance the grid to stop it crashing when the wind drops  ?

Trying to run a modern society with steel plants, manufacturing etc on off grid technology isn't going to work no matter how much you want it to.

When they actually come up with a 'flux capacitor' for my Wrangler, then I will be a believer   

You're right the big problem is the wind doesn't blow when we want it, and currently about 80% of what is generated gets earthed because there'e nowhere to store it. But there is a lot of work and effort and investment going in to solve the problem and there are lots of ways being put in place already, not just by building HUGE batteries, but by using the off-demand energy to make hydrogen. which can be stored easily and then used to make electricity when there's demand. Of course there are energy losses, but if the wind is surplus and clean, it doesn't matter. There are losses between crude oil and electricity and between gas and electricity. Even F1 drive trains are only 50% efficient.

There's a company near Manchester who use surplus wind energy to liquify air, yes just air. Then by letting it go back to a gas, the energy created makes electricity again. No pollution, no fancy gases or minerals. 

[MacManus]

Perhaps you were preempting this announcement Fourpot.
 

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/jeep/108646/jeep-goes-electric-first-ev-model-revealed-2023-launch

[Gerald F]

19 hours ago, Fourpot said:

You're right the big problem is the wind doesn't blow when we want it, and currently about 80% of what is generated gets earthed because there'e nowhere to store it.

 

I think I mentioned tidal energy; it isn't constant on a 24 hour basis, but it is predictable and guaranteed in its availability, and we do have lots of it! Energy storage doesn't have to be in batteries, either. More than 100 years ago, hydro-electric power systems pumped water uphill when grid demand was low, then ran it back down the pipes to meet high demand. It wasn't highly efficient, nor was it cheap, but quite a lot of it is still working a century later.

There is more at stake than just profit; the  increased atmospheric energy from greenhouse effects is flooding people's homes right now. Even if you believe that the effects of global warming are related solely to natural causes and not human activities, we can more easily control CO2 emissions from ICEs than from volcanoes, so we must play our part. Then, all we need to do is stop cows from farting.

[Fourpot]

2 hours ago, Gerald F said:

 

I think I mentioned tidal energy; it isn't constant on a 24 hour basis, but it is predictable and guaranteed in its availability, and we do have lots of it! Energy storage doesn't have to be in batteries, either. More than 100 years ago, hydro-electric power systems pumped water uphill when grid demand was low, then ran it back down the pipes to meet high demand. It wasn't highly efficient, nor was it cheap, but quite a lot of it is still working a century later.

There is more at stake than just profit; the  increased atmospheric energy from greenhouse effects is flooding people's homes right now. Even if you believe that the effects of global warming are related solely to natural causes and not human activities, we can more easily control CO2 emissions from ICEs than from volcanoes, so we must play our part. Then, all we need to do is stop cows from farting.

We're on the same page...  We could do with more valleys to flood, but that'd open the floodgates for another heated conversation (pun intended).  Cow burp is the issue, six times more harmful as a greenhouse gas than CO2. Apparently if they're fed on seaweed....

[V]

NF3 is used to make photovoltaic solar panels. It is 17,000 times more harmful than CO2 but politicians prefer to ban internal combustion engines instead because the majority of humans need something to be scared of in order to accept government control over their freedom.

 

SF6, NF3 and CF4 are used in the manufacture of displays for smartphones, computers and TVs. SF6 is 23,500 times more harmful than CO2, CF4 is 7,000 times more harmful than CO2 and they stick around in the atmosphere for hundreds of years. I don't hear any environmentalists wanting to ban smartphones in a hurry, but they should be. Perhaps it is just too inconvenient for them not to be able to use Facebook and Twitter any more. Industrial pollution is a real problem, but the green agenda doesn't want people to be concerned with it because the designated enemy is CO2. If you can blame CO2 for global warming and the public believe it, the industrialists can pollute as much as they want because the public already has a scapegoat.

 

It is estimated that CO2 emissions from smartphone use represent 6% of global emissions now and are estimated to be 14% by 2040. All road traffic represents 20% now and falling. In my lifetime, smartphone CO2 emissions will eclipse those from internal combustion engines.

 

[Fourpot]

SF6 - the nightmare of many a wind farm and any electrical installation, whether it be a wind farm or coal-fired power station.  Due to the massive voltages used in the array sub-station (the installation where all the turbines send their electricity, and from where it heads to shore), there has to be a spark or arc suppressant in the HV cabinets etc. SF6 has been used at lot up to now, but it is being replaced rapidly. It's only a problem though if it leaks, there is no chimney or exhaust pipe throwing it out.

 

The CO2 figures for use of electronics using Lion are surely down to the production of the energy used in manufacture, not the devices or the actual manufacturing process. So if we use CO2 free power then the problem ceases?

[V]

I believe that in 2019, the CO2 figure for smartphone usage in the Viessmann report did not include manufacturing, only usage based on 1 hour per day and it's effect on regional electricity power generation for the charging of battery powered devices.

 

If the world was already at a point of all electricity being cleanly generated, then all electrical devices would be CO2 neutral in use. The world isn't generating all electricity cleanly. So until that day comes, for governments to pretend that smartphone use is not a significant contributor of CO2 created by human activity is politically corrupt. CO2 emissions by cars is heavily taxed to discourage use. It is strange that there are no CO2 taxes that impact smartphone user's as an individual like with cars. Why is one method of human created CO2 emission taxed and another not?

 

I have been a long term advocate of hydroelectric power generation. It is my opinion that offshore wind turbines should be mechanical salt water pumps, pumping sea water to salt water cisterns (sealed reservoirs) on land at sufficient height above sea level to create head for hydroelectric turbines. The turbine salt water goes back to the sea when spent. The salt water reservoirs become batteries to deal with the peaks and troughs of wind availability. Water pumps and pipework are a simple technology. We have had wind powered pumps for thousands of years and hydro electricity generation since 1878 yet governments back projects that are both inferior with no power storage or surge capacity and more expensive.

[BLUE STAR]

Just think all this spending for a non problem, (not a pollutant) and  helps green the planet.

Now just waiting for 'Greta'  to join in

If we built ten times as many windfarms, at a cost of perhaps £800 billion, we might be able to meet a quarter of peak demand tomorrow!

 

[BLUE STAR]

On 01/03/2022 at 09:32, Surfer said:

I am surprised that both the BBC and Bloomberg have got it wrong?

Ah that bastion of truth & integrity the  BBC 

 

Anyways just come across this one if true ?

"To manufacture each EV auto battery, you must process 25,000 pounds of brine for the lithium, 30,000 pounds of ore for the cobalt, 5,000 pounds of ore for the nickel, and 25,000 pounds of ore for copper. All told, you dig up 500,000 pounds of the earth's crust for one battery."   (That's totals to 85,000 pounds) wonder what the remaining 415,000 lbs of earths crust goes towards ?

Wonder how that compares to an ICE powered vehicle, which is mostly steel and can at end of life, be crushed & reused even though there is a lot of plastic  C**P in them these days ?

Edited March 15, 2022 by BLUE STAR

[V]

The other 415,000 lbs is the dirt in the way of the mineral deposit that needs to be removed to get to it. Mining, open cast or not, always produces lots of spoil.

[neal]

3 minutes ago, V said:

The other 415,000 lbs is the dirt in the way of the mineral deposit that needs to be removed to get to it. Mining, open cast or not, always produces lots of spoil.

Can we drive our Jeeps over the spoil heap…….

[V]

I have had a dream project for a number of years to build a replica Willys MB as an EV using wheel motors and body parts sourced from MD Juan . Every now and then I go back to it but the best car wheel motor technology got bought up a few years back and then disappeared. Perhaps one day it could be built from a scrapped mass produced EV.

[jerryg]

On 01/03/2022 at 17:36, Fourpot said:

You're right the big problem is the wind doesn't blow when we want it, and currently about 80% of what is generated gets earthed because there'e nowhere to store it. But there is a lot of work and effort and investment going in to solve the problem and there are lots of ways being put in place already, not just by building HUGE batteries, but by using the off-demand energy to make hydrogen. which can be stored easily and then used to make electricity when there's demand. Of course there are energy losses, but if the wind is surplus and clean, it doesn't matter. There are losses between crude oil and electricity and between gas and electricity. Even F1 drive trains are only 50% efficient.

There's a company near Manchester who use surplus wind energy to liquify air, yes just air. Then by letting it go back to a gas, the energy created makes electricity again. No pollution, no fancy gases or minerals. 

Not true. It doesn't get 'earthed'. It doesn't go anywhere. If a turbine is spinning it produces a voltage, but no current flows until you connect something to it, a 'load'. It is just spinning round and round doing ... nothing! 

For more info on how useless solar and wind is check out  https://gridwatch.co.uk/?oldgw=

This shows the dismal contribution solar provides when the sky is overcast, like today, and even when sun is shining it only produces for a few hours a day - oh, in daylight!!!! When there is high pressure over UK, in winter, there is not much wind, so that contribution is less. When do we need most power? Oh, when it is cold and dark, when solar = sod all, and wind, well just puffed out!

Oh, and one for the green brigade/co2 moaners - we are running coal fired power stations to make up our shortfall and exporting power to France!

Just look at Gridwatch over a few days to get a better picture of the farcical situation we are in. The majority of our power is generated in CCGT stations - that's right - GAS Turbines. Where is the gas coming from? Not much from the UK, it's imported. When will this government and country get a grip?!

 

 

[V]

Thanks for posting the link to GridWatch, very interesting.

[BLUE STAR]

On 16/03/2022 at 22:24, V said:

Thanks for posting the link to GridWatch, very interesting.

This is the one I view 

https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

 

[jerryg]

Cripes, need a magnifying glass to read that one!