The tipping point is right around the corner.

Discussion in 'Electric Motorcycles' started by MJSfoto1956, Dec 26, 2018.

  1. ctromley

    ctromley Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2012
    Oddometer:
    986
    Location:
    PA
    I agree with MJSfoto1956 on this, that the speaker makes a lot of overly-broad statements and glosses over possible mitigations. But I have also heard credible evidence that he's right, that wind and solar can't get us what we need as quick as we need it to head off climate change. The talk really reduces down to a promotion for nuclear, and his numbers are compelling.

    However.

    He says nuclear is safe, and the way he says it, it's true. But what he doesn't talk about is what you do with the waste, which remains lethal for 250,000 years, 5 times longer than human beings have existed. And keep in mind, we've only been 'civilized' for around 15000 years, 30% of our existence. How many civilizations have emerged, thrived, declined and disappeared in that time?

    Stop a moment and let those numbers sink in. How do you even communicate to a future archeologist 1000 centuries from now that what he's about to open up will kill him? Or do we not give a rat's ass?

    The waste is also a security threat since it can be used in dirty bombs. And how do you prevent future Fukashimas? With climate change breathing down our necks, I would be OK with building some new nuclear plants, PROVIDED that we simultaneously and dramatically step up development and testing of new forms of nuclear power that vastly reduce the problems it still has. (Those other forms have been played with, and continue to show promise. Some even use today's nuclear waste as fuel! But they never got anywhere because of the regulatory nightmare nuclear power lives within.) AND ALSO PROVIDED that any new nuclear comes with a full life-cycle plan to handle waste and de-commission all existing and future old-school plants, and all new-tech plants, SAFELY, with all costs accounted for and covered.

    Costs of waste management and future de-commissioning need to be included in every kWh sold during its life, kept in an untouchable fund. They need to be treated as the operating costs that they are. I'm sick of people who claim to defend capitalism, when purposely hiding costs like that perverts the whole capitalistic system. Buyers can only make informed choices - a cornerstone of capitalism - when they know the real costs. If you're going to defend capitalism, make sure it's honest capitalism.

    Nuclear power is the hellish mess that it is today because we didn't think it through before we started using it. Fix that problem by requiring approval of the entire life-cycle use and all the challenges it brings, and I'm a supporter. Not until.

    So in reality, our biggest problems aren't really technical. They are the corporations that will tell us what we want to hear so they can start making profits now, and screw any future unintended consequences - that's someone else's problem. And the politicians whose biggest concerns are getting elected next cycle and getting as many 'campaign contributions' as possible in the shortest time possible.

    In short, this problem is like so many others - profits before people, and money in politics. I really DO NOT want to turn this into a CSM discussion, but I think you can see that's really where this topic ultimately points to.
  2. _CJ

    _CJ Retrogrouch

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2010
    Oddometer:
    3,169
    Location:
    The 719, Yo.
    I'd love to see the USA move to an energy production model like Sweden....using trash for power. They actually buy trash from other countries because they don't have enough of their own. Public transit....meh. I know there's a big movement to get everyone to live on top of each other in big cities, but that doesn't work for a lot of us, and if I can figure out how to live freely, more in tune with nature, I don't think I should be penalized (taxed) to pay for other people's "free" train rides.


    .
  3. MJSfoto1956

    MJSfoto1956 Been here awhile

    Joined:
    May 12, 2017
    Oddometer:
    447
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    There definitely is a future for nuclear and we dismiss it at our peril. Thorium reactors to which you refer seem to be the most promising in that they cannot go critical, cannot be used to make bombs, and they can "eat" old radioactive material. See: https://www.forbes.com/sites/energy...clear-fuel-may-not-get-a-chance/#7abaadf1d803
  4. MJSfoto1956

    MJSfoto1956 Been here awhile

    Joined:
    May 12, 2017
    Oddometer:
    447
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    But you are ok for taxing people in cities to pay for your rural highways? Seems to be a egregious case of hypocrisy, wouldn't you agree?

    M
    SocalRob likes this.
  5. keenerkeen07

    keenerkeen07 Adventurer

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    Oddometer:
    74
    Location:
    Calgary Alberta Canada
    :lurk
  6. _CJ

    _CJ Retrogrouch

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2010
    Oddometer:
    3,169
    Location:
    The 719, Yo.
    We all pay taxes for roads, and we all benefit from public roads (even if we don't drive on them), but just as city folk's taxes don't pay for rural folk's cars, rural folks taxes shouldn't pay for city trains. If they want the luxury of riding a train or bus vs. riding a bicycle or walking, they should pay for it. or maybe the large corps that want them efficiently herded to their cubicals every day can pay for it. and if you want any evidence of how wrong public transportation projects can go, and how much of everyone's money can be wasted, look no further than California's recent "high speed train" debacle.



    .
  7. MJSfoto1956

    MJSfoto1956 Been here awhile

    Joined:
    May 12, 2017
    Oddometer:
    447
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    That is the most twisting "logic" I've ever heard.
    You are comparing cars to trains to obscure your "don't tax us rural folks (but let me benefit from taxing those urban folks)" bias.
    Instead, the only fair comparison would be trains to highways -- both shared resources.
    The sad part is that you really believe this RW brainwashing. SMH.
    This is what is wrong with this country -- the "I've got mine and f@ck everyone else" -- an attitude which appears to dominate these days in the Red states.
    more koolaid likes this.
  8. keenerkeen07

    keenerkeen07 Adventurer

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    Oddometer:
    74
    Location:
    Calgary Alberta Canada
    :jack:imaposer
    Eatmore Mudd and _CJ like this.
  9. ex250mike

    ex250mike Long timer

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2007
    Oddometer:
    1,066
    "Rural" highways are paid for by gas taxes, county sales taxes, property taxes etc... Probably some borrowing and debt on the county level, after all it is gov't, they love to run up debts. Those highways move goods (and people) in an out of cities.

    There are also many of us (here on ADV) that don't want more/bigger highways. We like our dirt roads, lack of traffic etc... We don't want easy access to big cities VIA freeways in our smaller communities. Many of us moved out of big cities to get away from that and don't like that it has followed us.

    As for electric bikes, currently (pun intended) they are great for the city dwellers, OK for suburbanites but lack the range to be more than a toy in rural areas. As I get older I plan to move farther from town not closer. So, I'll need a really BIG leap in range before I consider buying electric.
    _CJ and keenerkeen07 like this.
  10. MJSfoto1956

    MJSfoto1956 Been here awhile

    Joined:
    May 12, 2017
    Oddometer:
    447
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    You just proved my point: Urban areas dwarf rural areas wrt tax collection. Or stated more bluntly: urban areas subsidize rural areas by an 20% effective tax on urban dwellers. If a revolution is ever needed in this country is to make sure that this migration of tax money stays where it originates. Either that, or give us our high-speed trains and you can have your high-speed highways. Fair trade as far as I'm concerned. But the current "deal" has been unfair to urban dwellers for far too long.
  11. _CJ

    _CJ Retrogrouch

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2010
    Oddometer:
    3,169
    Location:
    The 719, Yo.
    There you go with the politics again. No brainwashing here my friend. I don't prescribe to any particular political party, I don't watch "the news", and I don't concern myself with the opinions of political bloggers. I suspect the same can't be said for you. You're just another pawn in the us vs. them scheme being drummed into the minds of the masses, and you let it blind you from the fact that many of the people you're so quick to label are in favor of clean energy too, but don't want the authoritarian hand of government forcing upon us. You seem to enjoy arguing, to the point that you've contradicted yourself a couple of times in this thread just to keep the argument going. Have fun, I'm out.


    .
    keenerkeen07 and Eatmore Mudd like this.
  12. MJSfoto1956

    MJSfoto1956 Been here awhile

    Joined:
    May 12, 2017
    Oddometer:
    447
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    Um, the cleverly un-stated but patently obvious realpolitik of your position makes it clear where you stand on the LW/RW divide.
    You are being disingenuous when you try to blame others for your "don't tax me but definitely feel free to tax those urban folks" attitude.
    It is clear that you want everyone to know whose team you are rooting for -- as long as they can read between the lines.
    And frankly, the majority of Americans are getting tired of your-favorite-team's self-absorbed actions over the past 35 years.
    There is a tsunami coming my friend.
    I too am done.

    M

    EV's are here to stay. Get on board.
    ScottieDucati and more koolaid like this.
  13. keenerkeen07

    keenerkeen07 Adventurer

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    Oddometer:
    74
    Location:
    Calgary Alberta Canada
    :clap nailed it
  14. PeterW

    PeterW Long timer

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2005
    Oddometer:
    4,297
    Location:
    Gold Coast
    Where do you think the food cities rely on comes from ?. That's right, rural areas.

    Undersubsidised by far is the truth, and that's because the majority of people who live in cities create systems that screw over the minority of rural dwellers who keep them fed.
    Eatmore Mudd and keenerkeen07 like this.
  15. stephsarkle

    stephsarkle Adventurer

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2019
    Oddometer:
    65
    Location:
    Old Europe
    That vast majority of charging is done at home, and the vast majority of that is done at night, when demand is very low. Lower than utilities like actually because they often have to cut off wind turbines from the grid for example. Those things are expensive and if they can deliver useful energx only 50% of the day their cost effectiveness is halved, too. The wind blows usually strongest at night too, so it's a double shame we haven't been able to make proper use of them so far. Maybe that will change with more electric cars.
    ScottieDucati likes this.
  16. ctromley

    ctromley Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2012
    Oddometer:
    986
    Location:
    PA
    Yes, load leveling is a major potential benefit from EVs, and it's not really even being used to advantage yet. Most people plug in when they get home from work, which is when ALL residential loads increase. The grid doesn't like that. But it would be easy to go back to the days when a plug or two was put on a timer, and the car would only charge after maybe 10 PM when normal loads disappear. (I think it was called time-of-use [TOU] metering. Today rather than a timed outlet, people would just use their EV's 'delayed charging' feature.) Charging an EV off-hours keeps the load on the grid more stable - which is so beneficial to the utility that when they did this before they charged less for power delivered during low demand hours.

    Multiply these benefits times a squillion when you have enough EVs to build a Smart Grid. You enter a few settings in your EV, then when you plug it in the Smart Grid knows who needs how much charge by what time, and who is willing to serve as a grid reserve (your EV feeds the grid) for high-demand times, as long as their charging needs are served. Utilities can then juggle load in real time, using the many MWh of storage that's online at any particular time. EV owners acting as reserve get paid for their services. EV range is generally so much more than needed on any typical day that there is tremendous potential here. Put enough EVs on a Smart Grid and the variability of solar and wind production becomes a complete non-issue.

    There is also the fact that with more EVs out there, packs will start wearing out. We arbitrarily call <80% of original capacity "dead", but it's not - it's just marginal for some people in their vehicle. It's still perfectly usable as stationary storage, which is the perfect second life for a "dead" pack before it gets recycled. And using "dead" packs as storage also makes off-grid solar and wind-powered residences, and even commercial buildings, far more practical. (Solar and wind are really better suited for non-centralized energy supply.)

    In short, the best solution for the intermittent nature of solar and wind power is more EVs. And frankly, as much of a regulatory mess as nuclear power is, it might happen sooner.
  17. IndigoSwann

    IndigoSwann Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2019
    Oddometer:
    102
    Location:
    Easton, PA
    Fascinating stuff ladies and gentlemen.

    I'm personally very excited about the prospect of electric motorcycles but clearly we are still suffering from batteries that do not have an equatable range or refuel time of gas/petrol vehicles. However with new material science breakthroughs and developments (e.g. graphene batteries and a whole plethora of other new battery type replacement technologies) I firmly believe we are going to see a big shift in the next ten-twenty years.

    I am however paranoid with the advent of a nation/global wide spread AV vehicles there will be a push to ban all motorcycles operated by meatbags due to them being much more inherently dangerous. I'm 37 now and I don't want to be told at 60 "Mr Swann your motorcycle license has been revoked effective immediately as of now motorcycles are classified as an illegal form of transport. Have you thought about playing Squid4000 on VR instead?"

    *shudders...* I don't know, maybe I'm being overly dramatic but I feel I could see this happening.. would be a shame if we were the last generation of Motorcycle Adventure riders.
  18. _CJ

    _CJ Retrogrouch

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2010
    Oddometer:
    3,169
    Location:
    The 719, Yo.
    I just don't see that ever really happening, not in the good ol' USA anyhow. Too many freedom lovers. This assumes of course that a civil war doesn't break out and end with a liberty territory where everyone rides/drive whatever they want, and a socialist territory where all the slaves get transported to and from the fields/factories/cubicals in trains and buses.




    .
  19. IndigoSwann

    IndigoSwann Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2019
    Oddometer:
    102
    Location:
    Easton, PA
    I wouldn't rule anything out! Is there a Bug Out Bike thread on here - got to be some ADV Rider prepper types around here
  20. ctromley

    ctromley Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2012
    Oddometer:
    986
    Location:
    PA
    Uh, yeah.... Because extremes are the only possibilities.

    I'd like to assume you're joking, but that's a bad assumption in today's atmosphere of what we nostalgically call political discourse. Don't want to go there, so I'll leave it by just saying that the extremes you describe are our only options - IF, and only if, we force them to be.

    Why would we do that? One would hope we're smarter than that, but our current path raises serious doubts.