Electric everything.

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
Jdsk
Posts: 24640
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Electric everything.

Post by Jdsk »

PDQ Mobile wrote: 4 Aug 2021, 10:22amSo every electric vehicle has been producing more percentage of carbon.
Therein lies the biggest conundrum IMV.
"More percentage of carbon" than what... than it would have been if there had been more wind, or than if it had been an ICE vehicle?

Thanks

Jonathan
Jdsk
Posts: 24640
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Electric everything.

Post by Jdsk »

biketips666 wrote: 4 Aug 2021, 10:24amSo maybe the fall in demand because of greater efficiency in things like domestic appliances, lighting, etc, gives some room for a greater demand from things like BEV (battery electric vehicles) and the other "Electric Everything" things.
Yes. And that's why the 2040 projection upthread looks like it does.

And why shortage of electricity is not a major concern in the shift from ICE to BEVs.

Jonathan
biketips666
Posts: 217
Joined: 19 Jun 2021, 7:17pm

Re: Electric everything.

Post by biketips666 »

Jdsk wrote: 4 Aug 2021, 10:27am
biketips666 wrote: 4 Aug 2021, 10:24amSo maybe the fall in demand because of greater efficiency in things like domestic appliances, lighting, etc, gives some room for a greater demand from things like BEV (battery electric vehicles) and the other "Electric Everything" things.
Yes. And that's why the 2040 projection upthread looks like it does.

And why shortage of electricity is not a major concern in the shift from ICE to BEVs.

Jonathan
Wait, what ?! So, so, so, you mean it's not all a load of totally hopeless old tree hugging nonsense, and all those scientists and engineers aren't wasting their time devising new ways to have a decent sustainable standard of living? Well, I'll go to the foot of our stairs, I thought we were just going to have to carry on lugging in coal to heat the water on the range to fill the tin bath with and the kids would just have to put up with rickets from the smoke blocking out the sun.

What's that you say? It's called progress?
Jdsk
Posts: 24640
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Electric everything.

Post by Jdsk »

Rickets? You were lucky to have rickets...

Jonathan
User avatar
al_yrpal
Posts: 11537
Joined: 25 Jul 2007, 9:47pm
Location: Think Cheddar and Cider
Contact:

Re: Electric everything.

Post by al_yrpal »

Could be that the Rolls Royce small local reactors solution gets some traction? I would expect lots of resistance from locals.

Al
Reuse, recycle, thus do your bit to save the planet.... Get stuff at auctions, Dump, Charity Shops, Facebook Marketplace, Ebay, Car Boots. Choose an Old House, and a Banger ..... And cycle as often as you can......
biketips666
Posts: 217
Joined: 19 Jun 2021, 7:17pm

Re: Electric everything.

Post by biketips666 »

al_yrpal wrote: 4 Aug 2021, 11:04am Could be that the Rolls Royce small local reactors solution gets some traction? I would expect lots of resistance from locals.

Al
Yes. And yes.

https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles ... -of-UK-SMR
Jdsk
Posts: 24640
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Electric everything.

Post by Jdsk »

List of SMRs:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_s ... or_designs

If we want the future generation of electricity by nuclear fission to be better than the past we need:

1 To stop pretending you can implement as if it's a typical commercial project.

2 To be absolutely clear what is about generation, what is about governmental subsidy to national and local industry, and what is about military interactions.

Jonathan
biketips666
Posts: 217
Joined: 19 Jun 2021, 7:17pm

Re: Electric everything.

Post by biketips666 »

As the Rolls Royce SMR was mentioned above.
Jdsk wrote: 4 Aug 2021, 11:17am If we want the future generation of electricity by nuclear fission to be better than the past we need:

1 To stop pretending you can implement as if it's a typical commercial project.

2 To be absolutely clear what is about generation, what is about governmental subsidy to national and local industry, and what is about military interactions.

Jonathan
As it happens I'm old enough to remember lots of my school friends' panic at the thought of their parents losing their jobs at Rolls Royce, the biggest employer in my town, before the formation of Rolls Royce 1971 Ltd.

So although it's maybe just a coincidence, the UK government does have a record of putting money into Rolls for strategic reasons.
Jdsk
Posts: 24640
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Electric everything.

Post by Jdsk »

al_yrpal wrote: 4 Aug 2021, 11:04amI would expect lots of resistance from locals.
biketips666 wrote: 4 Aug 2021, 11:27amAs it happens I'm old enough to remember lots of my school friends' panic at the thought of their parents losing their jobs at Rolls Royce, the biggest employer in my town, before the formation of Rolls Royce 1971 Ltd.
There was a neat piece of work from ? the University of Central Lancashire showing that local support was dramatically increased by perception of local benefit. That was probably onshore wind but I'd guess that it's generally true.

Jonathan
Mike Sales
Posts: 7883
Joined: 7 Mar 2009, 3:31pm

Re: Electric everything.

Post by Mike Sales »

Jdsk wrote: 4 Aug 2021, 11:17am and what is about military interactions.

Jonathan
Iran's uranium enrichment activity unnerved Israel enough to provoke sabotage, and in 1981 they bombed an Iraqi reactor.
Will "rogue states" have to forgo nuclear electricity?
One, North Kprea already has the bomb.
Israel has nuclear weapons, of course,.
India and Pakistan, have already fought wars and both have the bomb.

If nuclear power spreads will nuclear bombs proliferate?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power#Nuc ... liferation
Last edited by Mike Sales on 4 Aug 2021, 2:18pm, edited 1 time in total.
It's the same the whole world over
It's the poor what gets the blame
It's the rich what gets the pleasure
Isn't it a blooming shame?
biketips666
Posts: 217
Joined: 19 Jun 2021, 7:17pm

Re: Electric everything.

Post by biketips666 »

Mike Sales wrote: 4 Aug 2021, 11:39am
Jdsk wrote: 4 Aug 2021, 11:17am and what is about military interactions.

Jonathan
Iran's uranium enrichment activity unnerved Israel enough to provoke sabotage, and in 1981 they bombed an Iranian reactor.
Will "rogue states" have to forgo nuclear electricity?
One, North Kprea already has the bomb.
Israel has nuclear weapons, of course,.
India and Pakistan, have already fought wars and both have the bomb.

If nuclear power spreads will nuclear bombs proliferate?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power#Nuc ... liferation
Your link doesn't seem to work.

But this, hopefully working version https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_p ... liferation makes the point that:
The vast majority of these nuclear weapons states have produced weapons before commercial nuclear power stations.
So it appears the opposite movement is true, nuclear weapons -> nuclear power, rather than the nuclear power -> nuclear weapons, as you seem to be suggesting.

In fact, later in the same section
However, without an increase in nuclear reactors and greater demand for fissile fuel, the cost of dismantling and down blending has dissuaded Russia from continuing their disarmament.
It looks like we need nuclear reactors to help get rid of nuclear weapons.

Turning reactor grade material into weapons grade material seems to be a fantastically difficult and time-consuming process, as Iran has learnt. And even when or if they manage it, the number of weapons they manage to produce will be small. Nowhere near the amount that are needed for the full scale MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) that cold war nuclear arms were based upon.

The strong linking of nuclear power with nuclear arms in the popular imagination has done a great deal of harm to the progress towards low carbon electricity generation.

It's worth pointing out that over the past 30 years or so, the world stockpile of nuclear weapons has reduced by about 80%. That may not have reduced the risk of any of them being used. But it has certainly reduced the risk of the "total annihilation of humanity" that is such a popular theme whenever the subject is raised.
Stevek76
Posts: 2086
Joined: 28 Jul 2015, 11:23am

Re: Electric everything.

Post by Stevek76 »

Jdsk wrote: 4 Aug 2021, 11:31am There was a neat piece of work from ? the University of Central Lancashire showing that local support was dramatically increased by perception of local benefit. That was probably onshore wind but I'd guess that it's generally true.
That effect is apparent in Cumbria where Copeland district council has often been at odds with the higher tier county council over sellafield and the proposed geological disposal location.
The contents of this post, unless otherwise stated, are opinions of the author and may actually be complete codswallop
Mike Sales
Posts: 7883
Joined: 7 Mar 2009, 3:31pm

Re: Electric everything.

Post by Mike Sales »

Sorry aboiut my duff link.

There is, of course, a link between nuclear power technology and bomb technology.
Israel, who should know, think so. They bombed an unfinished Iraqi reactor in 1981, and saabotaged the programme of Iran's enriching centrifuges.
Uranium enrichment for power generation involves the same process as enrichment for a bomb, which is the cover Iran uses, for its centrifuges.
Reactors also produce plutonium.
Historically the two technologies went together, and it is difficult to see how one could be allowed but the other stopped. It would be contentious to oversee the suspicious activity of a state which wanted to make a bomb. Iran for example would not welcome the sort of monitoring needed.
The world has done well with dismantling nuclear weapons, but it seems to me a precarious process. One constant in history is war being used as an extension of diplomacy. I am often disturbed by the genocides in the planet's history, long before the 20thC. and since WWII.
The more states with access to nuclear technology, the higher the risks of one of them falling into the hands of the likes of Isis.
Conventional bombing of a reactor could produce widespread contamination.

I am not allergic to nuclear power, and it could certainly help with decarbonising, but the problems of widespread nuclear technology need a lot of thinking about.
Last edited by Mike Sales on 4 Aug 2021, 2:22pm, edited 1 time in total.
It's the same the whole world over
It's the poor what gets the blame
It's the rich what gets the pleasure
Isn't it a blooming shame?
Mike Sales
Posts: 7883
Joined: 7 Mar 2009, 3:31pm

Re: Electric everything.

Post by Mike Sales »

Stevek76 wrote: 4 Aug 2021, 12:37pm
Jdsk wrote: 4 Aug 2021, 11:31am There was a neat piece of work from ? the University of Central Lancashire showing that local support was dramatically increased by perception of local benefit. That was probably onshore wind but I'd guess that it's generally true.
That effect is apparent in Cumbria where Copeland district council has often been at odds with the higher tier county council over sellafield and the proposed geological disposal location.
The safety record of Calder Hall/Windscale/Sellafield is not encouraging.
Does any one remember Cockcroft's Follies?
Without the filters - installed at the last minute by Nobel Prize-winning scientist Sir John Cockcroft - the effects of the radioactive dust blasted into the Cumbrian air would have been much more devastating.

"Radioactive dust did escape, but the filters caught about 95 per cent of it," says Christopher Cockcroft, Sir John Cockcroft's son.

"Had the filters not been there I would think a considerable part of the the Lake District and Cumbria would have been put out of bounds, at least for agricultural use and perhaps for people."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Cockcroft
It's the same the whole world over
It's the poor what gets the blame
It's the rich what gets the pleasure
Isn't it a blooming shame?
Jules59
Posts: 420
Joined: 16 Jan 2019, 2:34pm

Re: Electric everything.

Post by Jules59 »

How user-serviceable are BEVs ?

Cars are pretty reliable in my opinion and once my cars are out of warranty I've tended to do my own servicing, which saves loads on labour charges (and makes sure its actually done).

I'm told BEVs are cheaper to service because the BEV parts don't need servicing like an ICE (eg oil change , cambelt, spark plugs etc).
So servicing will largely be about things common to both ICE and BEVs, - brakes, suspension, 12v electrical stuff etc

But I wonder would the need to be part of some rental or hire scheme (due to the high cost buying a BEV, and maybe later, of replacing a battery) prohibit owner-servicing and lock people into franchise-only servicing - which of course the main dealerships would love and would cost a lot more.

For example JLR main dealers charge about £1000 (or more) to change a cambelt and water pump - the actual parts required are less than £100
Post Reply