View previous topic | View next topic

Global Warming is a Hoax

Page 20 of 22
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 19, 20, 21, 22  Next


What do you think?
Global Warming is a hoax
7%
 7%  [ 5 ]
It's real, but is mostly natural
26%
 26%  [ 18 ]
It's real, and is mostly affected by man
58%
 58%  [ 39 ]
Ooh look, a brown dog outside my window...
7%
 7%  [ 5 ]
Total Votes : 67

crissdee
1350670.  Tue Jun 16, 2020 10:49 am Reply with quote

Don't forget, King of the Petrolheads, Jay Leno has a 1908 Stanley Steamer in which he is the only person to get a speeding ticket in a steam car, travelling at 60mph in...........somewhere which had a lower posted limit. I don't know, you'll have to ask Jay.......

 
suze
1350678.  Tue Jun 16, 2020 11:26 am Reply with quote

PDR wrote:
That's why "boilermaker" is a specific craft trade with a long apprenticeship.


Do you hear that sound of a penny dropping after many years?

One of the larger trade unions in the UK is the GMB; it's the union to which non-teaching staff at my school who choose to belong to a union mostly belong. Its fees are a bit higher than UNISON's, but GMB-ists will tell you that UNISON is mostly for Tories - and where I work, Tories tend to be non-union.

By now, GMB is its legal name - it dropped the whole words for which GMB stood in the 80s. It is an amalgamation over a century of more than fifty unions including such as the Chatham Government Labourers' Union (which pretty much ran the Dockyard for a time in the 20s), the Northern Ireland Professional Footballers' Association, and the International Union of Sex Workers.

But its largest components were the Gas Workers and General Labourers (G), the Municipal Employees (M) ... and the Boilermakers (B).

I should really have known this twenty years ago, but hey I'm foreign ...

 
barbados
1350680.  Tue Jun 16, 2020 11:36 am Reply with quote

suze wrote:
GMB-ists will tell you that UNISON is mostly for Tories

That is a very odd comment

 
suze
1350682.  Tue Jun 16, 2020 11:51 am Reply with quote

I'm not a member of either union, but they don't appear to like each other very much. I suppose this is only to be expected, since to a large extent they compete for members in the same sectors.

And I absolutely have heard GMB members say that UNISON is only for those who lick management arse, and I absolutely have heard UNISON members say that GMB is only for those who consider the RMT a bit right wing.


Last edited by suze on Tue Jun 16, 2020 11:52 am; edited 1 time in total

 
Alfred E Neuman
1350683.  Tue Jun 16, 2020 11:52 am Reply with quote

crissdee wrote:
Don't forget, King of the Petrolheads, Jay Leno has a 1908 Stanley Steamer in which he is the only person to get a speeding ticket in a steam car, travelling at 60mph in...........somewhere which had a lower posted limit. I don't know, you'll have to ask Jay.......

He also owns a Tesla and a couple of 100+ year old electric cars. I think he’s a petrolhead in the sense that he loves all cars, not exclusively petrol powered, internal combustion cars.

 
barbados
1350685.  Tue Jun 16, 2020 12:02 pm Reply with quote

suze wrote:
I'm not a member of either union, but they don't appear to like each other very much. I suppose this is only to be expected, since to a large extent they compete for members in the same sectors.

And I absolutely have heard GMB members say that UNISON is only for those who lick management arse, and I absolutely have heard UNISON members say that GMB is only for those who consider the RMT a bit right wing.

It was odd, because the largest union to support Corbyn on both leadership campaigns was UNISON, and the one that knocked heads with him most frequently was the GMB. Which doesn't reflect the views of the members' opinions of the opposing union.

 
suze
1350688.  Tue Jun 16, 2020 12:16 pm Reply with quote

That is very true, and you make a good point. But as I say I am not a member of either, and I can only speak from what I've heard people who are say.

 
barbados
1350689.  Tue Jun 16, 2020 12:18 pm Reply with quote

Just for the record, the odd comment was aimed at the membership rather than you.

 
crissdee
1350695.  Tue Jun 16, 2020 2:20 pm Reply with quote

@AEN. Oh yes, he is undoubtedly a man who loves motor vehicles in all their permutations, I was using "petrolhead" as something of an umbrella term. My point was that over a century ago, steam cars were eminently practical, and with some technological tweaking, might once again be a viable alternative.

 
Celebaelin
1350699.  Tue Jun 16, 2020 2:46 pm Reply with quote

crissdee wrote:
Celebaelin wrote:
In truth the point was, is and continues to be that I am - and have continuously been - disinclined to give the climate change skeptics time to prove themselves wrong; sadly many others have not agreed.


Maybe it's just me, but that sentence seems a little tangled mate. Any chance of a rephrase to clarify?

I think it's real and I think it's related to human activity; in any event I think we should take steps to address the problem. I have thought so for over 35 years and nothing has come to light to alter my opinion in the meantime. Being right is however only a mote of compensation in the light of so much suicidally inclined inertia.

Sorry it took 6 months to answer that polite inquiry but I struggle not to be rabidly outraged on this issue.

 
crissdee
1350709.  Tue Jun 16, 2020 5:18 pm Reply with quote

That's ok mate, we have all had one or two other things to think about of late.................

 
barbados
1350718.  Wed Jun 17, 2020 1:53 am Reply with quote

Just thinking back, I can’t recall if it was here or Pete’s experience with an EV, but there was small discussion about the inconvenience of owning am EV, mainly that it takes a (comparatively) long time to “fill her up” and then once full the range is a lot lower than the equivalent ICV.
It seems to me there would be greater take up if that “inconvenience” was avoided. The technology is there, but we don’t appear to be running with it in quite the same way as a Lithium battery solution.

 
Alfred E Neuman
1350720.  Wed Jun 17, 2020 4:14 am Reply with quote

barbados wrote:
Just thinking back, I can’t recall if it was here or Pete’s experience with an EV, but there was small discussion about the inconvenience of owning am EV, mainly that it takes a (comparatively) long time to “fill her up” and then once full the range is a lot lower than the equivalent ICV.
It seems to me there would be greater take up if that “inconvenience” was avoided. The technology is there, but we don’t appear to be running with it in quite the same way as a Lithium battery solution.

I’m not sure what you mean by ”the technology is there”. Are you talking about battery technology (and range) or charging technology (and charging times)?

 
barbados
1350721.  Wed Jun 17, 2020 4:21 am Reply with quote

Yes fuel cells take approx 5minutes to charge from empty to full, have a much higher range, and AIUI offset the carbon used to process the hydrogen when it is turned to water (steam) as it is used.
There are a couple of cars you can buy, but they are about £65k so not cheap, but if there is a higher interest, then as with HEVs which is where it appears to be at for the minute, the price will come down surely?

 
dr.bob
1350737.  Wed Jun 17, 2020 6:02 am Reply with quote

More interest will certainly result in reduced prices. However, as far as I'm aware, the problems with hydrogen fuel cells aren't solely limited to the price.

According to this article, storing hydrogen as a gas is expensive and energy intensive thereby hugely reducing the efficiency of the process. Hydrogen is also the smallest molecule there is, making it very easy for it to escape confinement. I've heard reports that if you leave a hydrogen-powered car on your driveway for an extended period of time, you're likely to return and find your "fuel tank" empty. This is not a problem that affects petrol/diesel powered cars, or battery powered EVs.

The article also points out that regulating temperatures is vital for a hydrogen fuel cell, making it more difficult to operate in extreme cold or heat. It concludes that, while fuel cells have several advantages, they won't be a viable power source for cars until many of the problems have been ironed out.

Another article refers to a report compiled by management consultancy Horváth & Partners, which looked at the energy efficiency of battery-powered EVs compared to Hydrogen fuel cell cars.

Since he mentioned it before, PDR might be interested to read their figures for energy loss when charging and using an EV (they claim 8% of the electricity is lost in transmission from the source to the car's battery pack, while 18% of what remains is lost between the battery pack and the drive wheels, though how variable those figures are I don't know). The same study found that producing, storing, and transporting hydrogen resulted in a loss of more than 65% of the energy used to make it.

This study has been viewed by Volkswagen as sufficiently convincing that they have chosen to focus their research efforts into pursuing battery technology rather than fuel-cells. However, other car manufacturers disagree. The article states that Honda, Hyundai, and Toyota are all developing fuel cells. However, all three seem to be focussing a lot of effort on developing commercial vehicles rather than cars. This makes sense since a vehicle that's in constant use would at least avoid the problem of having their fuel evaporating while left unused for a while. I guess ultimately time will tell.

So, in short, while the technology "is there", it still needs work. And while it may remove the “inconvenience” around filling up times, it does appear to introduce a bunch of other “inconveniences” which would be similarly unpalatable to the average private car owner.

 

Page 20 of 22
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 19, 20, 21, 22  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group