• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

BYD 5 minute EV charger

I'm sorry you believe such nonsense.
CALLER: Well, what’s happening is the LED traditionally was like you just said; it was an indicator on your stereo system.
RUSH: Right.
CALLER: Or a TV or whatever. Now in the last five, six years there’s been a transition in the semiconductor industry where they can make LEDs with high wattage output. Now, we’re talking about one-watt, three-watt, and five-watt LEDs.
RUSH: Cool. Very cool.
CALLER: So they put them in series, and they have 12 of them and they make a 12-watt recessed picture. That puts out quite a bit of light.
RUSH: That’s it. That’s true.
CALLER: So that’s all I wanted to just make sure at least take a look at this. If you want to really look into it more, you can look at the company we work with, LLF, and basically that market’s taking off. It will be in restaurants, hotels, and high-end residential.
RUSH: Let me ask a quick question here, because I’m very sensitive to these kinds of technological advances being thrown into the open market. Will the poor and minorities be able to afford these new lights?
CALLER: No. No.
RUSH: Or is it one of these things where people like me are going to have buy them at exorbitant prices at the outset, in order to bring the price down for the poor?
CALLER: Well, what I see happening is… Your point is correct. What I see happening is that the utilities, as they do with the CFL lights today —

I will bet you were listening to some Rush hater making invalid claims.

OMG! Rush had ONE caller who thinks LED is a good idea? Please note, Rush was not sold on the idea, even in THIS call transcription. I listened to him often enough to know that ANYTHING the left thought was a good idea had to be bad.

You know who else hates the idea of EVs? Sean Hannity. I've heard him myself rip EVs like there was no tomorrow. How many millions of viewers/listeners hang on his every word?
 
The technology is loosely called Power to Liquid and I think the oil companies already have the process worked out
and know what the cost will be. (I think the breakeven is $96 a barrel oil sustained) Only Exxon is talking,
and they started making low carbon jet fuel last year on a unit scale.
From what I have read, most modern cracking refineries could make the fuel, they just need feeds of hydrogen and carbon.
M'kay, interesting- if you say so. We will see how it evolves. It may have limited uses.

Still doesn't discredit climate change science.
 
Sorry, I never heard these Fairy Tails you believe. When LEDS because available, I bought over $400 worth and replaced almost every bulb. I skipped the dryer, refrigerator, and range bulbs, but I replaced even my floodlights outside. I bought enough to share masny with my family so they could decide if they wanted to pay the extra money for them.

Does it somehow make you feel superior to project such nonsense on others?
Still waiting to see why the abstracts of 100% of currently published papers on climate change are fake.
 
M'kay, interesting- if you say so. We will see how it evolves. It may have limited uses.

Still doesn't discredit climate change science.
No it is simple a sustainable energy path forward!
 
I am not sure that will help, as the batteries will have to themselves be charged.
Would it matter if the station can charge a car up in 5 minuets, if it then had to wait
and hour to charge the next car?

Batteries can be charged during off hours at lower rates and when provide enough power during peak demand.

Also those chargers will only be used for a small share of total chargers. That many drivers will for example charge at home, work or shops for the daily commute. While some will also use slower charges during long trips because they combine charging with meal breaks.
 
Batteries can be charged during off hours at lower rates and when provide enough power during peak demand.

Also those chargers will only be used for a small share of total chargers. That many drivers will for example charge at home, work or shops for the daily commute. While some will also use slower charges during long trips because they combine charging with meal breaks.
This is about public chargers, no one is going to have a 1MW charger at home, that would be an even bigger problem!
 
That's great if you are an EV fan. Personally, I am still quite against EVs and it's not just about charging time. It's also about massive and very heavy battery banks and other parts that are very costly to maintain, not to mention they are dependent on rare earth minerals that are mined in a very environmentally dirty fashion. The cars have a massive carbon footprint before they even reach the showroom floor. And there are the battery fires that cannot be put out with conventional fire fighting techniques. I will keep buying gasoline powered cars until hydrogen powered cars hot the market. I think they are the wave of the future.

Fossil fuels leads to enormous environmental and social costs. While also dependency on ruthless dictatorships, that also use their massive profits to gain influence over Western politicians.



While it's also a lot of progress in making batteries more sustainable.

 
Fossil fuels leads to enormous environmental and social costs. While also dependency on ruthless dictatorships, that also use their massive profits to gain influence over Western politicians.



While it's also a lot of progress in making batteries more sustainable.

I mentioned hydrogen as the future for automobiles. In the meantime, I will continue with gasoline powered cars. I am all for wiping out the oil pig, however EVs are not the solution. The mining process is not environmentally friendly either. Like I pointed out, EVs have a massive carbon footprint well before reaching the showroom floor. And the prime source for those rare earth minerals at this time is China, a ruthless dictatorship.
 
I mentioned hydrogen as the future for automobiles. In the meantime, I will continue with gasoline powered cars. I am all for wiping out the oil pig, however EVs are not the solution. The mining process is not environmentally friendly either. Like I pointed out, EVs have a massive carbon footprint well before reaching the showroom floor. And the prime source for those rare earth minerals at this time is China, a ruthless dictatorship.
I don't see hydrogen as being very promising. The cheapest hydrogen we have comes from natural gas and leaves CO2 when processed. Hydrogen is also difficult to store. If we are relying on green power, green hydrogen is expensive to make.
 
I don't see hydrogen as being very promising. The cheapest hydrogen we have comes from natural gas and leaves CO2 when processed. Hydrogen is also difficult to store. If we are relying on green power, green hydrogen is expensive to make.
Anything without existing infrastructure starts our expensive. I see hydrogen as ultimately promising. Toyota has already made an internal combustion engine that runs on hydrogen, and Tesla is experimenting as well.
 
Anything without existing infrastructure starts our expensive. I see hydrogen as ultimately promising. Toyota has already made an internal combustion engine that runs on hydrogen, and Tesla is experimenting as well.
The benefits of hydrogen are an illusion in attempting to go green. Green hydrogen requires electricity to separate the hydrogen and oxygen. It uses 44 kWh to produce the same power capacity of a gallon of gasoline. The cost of electricity is rising as we use more green power generation, and that is only the amount of power used without all the other associated costs of making green hydrogen.

According to the International Energy Agency, 96% of hydrogen produced worldwide is made using fossil fuels – coal, oil and natural gas – in a process known as reforming. This involves combining fossil fuels with steam, and heating them to around 800°C. Eventually, you get carbon dioxide (CO₂) and hydrogen.

What is green hydrogen?
Green hydrogen is produced by a process called electrolysis, where water is split into hydrogen and oxygen using electricity from renewable energy sources like wind, solar, or hydropower. This method can produce zero carbon emissions, making it the least carbon-intense form of hydrogen available. As the world looks to decarbonize, green hydrogen is being hailed as a key solution.
What is blue hydrogen?
Blue hydrogen is produced from natural gas through a process called steam methane reforming (SMR). SMR mixes natural gas with very hot steam in the presence of a catalyst, where a chemical reaction creates hydrogen and carbon monoxide. Additional water is added to the mixture converting the carbon monoxide to carbon dioxide and creating more hydrogen. Carbon emissions generated during this process are captured and stored, rather than being released into the atmosphere. This makes blue hydrogen a lower-carbon alternative to traditional grey hydrogen where the emissions are not captured, though it still produces some carbon emissions when compared to green hydrogen. Blue hydrogen can serve as a transitional fuel, helping bridge the gap between our current reliance on fossil fuels and a future powered by renewable energy, with hydrogen-fueled turbines playing a supporting role.


There are many ‘colours’ of hydrogen – each referring to how it is produced.
Green hydrogen is the only variety produced in a climate-neutral manner.
It could play a vital role in global efforts to reach net-zero emissions by 2050.

 
Pray tell...where do all those components for electric cars come from? All the materials? How are they mined? How are they transported? How are the developed into usable commodities? How are they manufactured? How are the shipped to plants? How are they transported post assembly?

How viable is that "electric car" without all those Exxon products?
Yes, my electric car is comprised of nearly all the same energy-expensive materials as the gas guzzlers. But those materials are not Exxon products. Only the fuels are.
 
Yes, my electric car is comprised of nearly all the same energy-expensive materials as the gas guzzlers. But those materials are not Exxon products. Only the fuels are.
Where do you suppose plastics and polymers come from?
 
Technically it is likely Dow rather than Exxon, but still very hydrocarbon based! :D
Oils oils oil.

I'm all for effective clean energy programs. i just think people 'should' be realistic about the need for oil and oil production. Yes...even from Exxon.
 
Wow, interesting- that really is breakthrough technology if real. I have an EV- a Chevy Bolt EUV. I love that little car- it’s great for driving kids to school, going to work every day, and going on the town or the suburbs on the weekends- about 95% of our needs. But I avoid it for road trips because of this “”range anxiety”. If you can have these 5 minute fill ups, that ahould eliminate the last big hurdle for even more widespread adoption of EVs.

A plug in hybrid is probably the best of both worlds.
A trip the the gas pump would be a rare event, and
you can take it on a longer trip, after all, they will
run on gas.
 
"Where you see obstacles, I see opportunities." Doctor Alfred Blaylock of John Hopkins School of Medicine, first surgeon to perform cardiac bypass surgery.

Yes, there challenges and difficulties, and it can't be done, until someone does it.

JFK Had good reason to think a man on the moon in less then ten years was possible.
 
Yesterday an EV fire broke out on the car carrier Morning Midas at sea near Adak Alaska.

YouTube or you can do your own search.
This happens with such regularity that frankly...the better play would be to equip these cargo ships that are transporting Chinese EVs with a giant rubber bathtub type stopper in the bottom of the vessel and if a fire breaks out...just pull the plug and let the boat sink. Environmentally, it would be more sound.
 
This happens with such regularity that frankly...the better play would be to equip these cargo ships that are transporting Chinese EVs with a giant rubber bathtub type stopper in the bottom of the vessel and if a fire breaks out...just pull the plug and let the boat sink. Environmentally, it would be more sound.
As with most EV related issues, it’s an over hyped problem. Here’s what a maritime insurance company says about it:

CONCLUSION AND TAKEAWAY​

The objective investigation and related testing of EV battery fire incidents during transport by sea indicates that the hazards presented are evidently not greater than those presented by ICE vehicles. Furthermore, statistics show that the likelihood of EV battery fires is not greater than for fires in ICE vehicles.

However, EV battery fires present special characteristics in terms of potential intense heating in their battery areas which – due to their encapsulation and under vehicle position – are difficult to access for cooling, fire extinguishment and re-ignition prevention purposes. These special fire risk characteristics require special fire control processes. At present, these special processes exceed the current minimum requirements of SOLAS Chapter II -1 or equivalent NCVS regulation.

MM’s recommendations are therefore as follows:

  • Members operating RoPax vessels should ensure the priority adoption and implementation of the IMO MSC.1/1615 Interim Guidelines, the EMSA Guidance (Chapters 1, 2 and Annexes) and MCA MGN 653 (M).
  • Members operating RoRo (Cargo) and PCTC vessels should ensure the priority adoption and implementation of the EMSA Guidance (Chapters 1, 3 and Annexes), the ICS Common Guidance on the Presentation and Loading of Vehicles and MCA MGN 653 (M).

    NOTE: MCA MGN 653 (M) is directed at EV fire safety on board RoPax vessels. However, much of the advice it contains is applicable to RoRo (Cargo) and PCTC vessels as well.
MM’s assessment is that the above referenced IMO, EMSA, MCS and ICS guidelines – when applied together with the applicable SOLAS/NCVS regulation – provide the current ‘industry best practice’ benchmark for fire training, detection, containment and extinguishment on board RoPax as well as RoRo (Cargo) and PCTC vessels. Members should review their ISM Code or equivalent NCVS SMS manuals and procedures and then ensure the guidelines and recommendations referred to in this Risk Bulletin No. 84 and Risk Bulletin No. 51 are incorporated as appropriate to vessel type and trade. Effective adherence should then be monitored and reinforced by way of ISM Code or equivalent NCVS audit procedures.

 
As with most EV related issues, it’s an over hyped problem. Here’s what a maritime insurance company says about it:

CONCLUSION AND TAKEAWAY​

The objective investigation and related testing of EV battery fire incidents during transport by sea indicates that the hazards presented are evidently not greater than those presented by ICE vehicles. Furthermore, statistics show that the likelihood of EV battery fires is not greater than for fires in ICE vehicles.

However, EV battery fires present special characteristics in terms of potential intense heating in their battery areas which – due to their encapsulation and under vehicle position – are difficult to access for cooling, fire extinguishment and re-ignition prevention purposes. These special fire risk characteristics require special fire control processes. At present, these special processes exceed the current minimum requirements of SOLAS Chapter II -1 or equivalent NCVS regulation.

MM’s recommendations are therefore as follows:

  • Members operating RoPax vessels should ensure the priority adoption and implementation of the IMO MSC.1/1615 Interim Guidelines, the EMSA Guidance (Chapters 1, 2 and Annexes) and MCA MGN 653 (M).
  • Members operating RoRo (Cargo) and PCTC vessels should ensure the priority adoption and implementation of the EMSA Guidance (Chapters 1, 3 and Annexes), the ICS Common Guidance on the Presentation and Loading of Vehicles and MCA MGN 653 (M).

    NOTE: MCA MGN 653 (M) is directed at EV fire safety on board RoPax vessels. However, much of the advice it contains is applicable to RoRo (Cargo) and PCTC vessels as well.
MM’s assessment is that the above referenced IMO, EMSA, MCS and ICS guidelines – when applied together with the applicable SOLAS/NCVS regulation – provide the current ‘industry best practice’ benchmark for fire training, detection, containment and extinguishment on board RoPax as well as RoRo (Cargo) and PCTC vessels. Members should review their ISM Code or equivalent NCVS SMS manuals and procedures and then ensure the guidelines and recommendations referred to in this Risk Bulletin No. 84 and Risk Bulletin No. 51 are incorporated as appropriate to vessel type and trade. Effective adherence should then be monitored and reinforced by way of ISM Code or equivalent NCVS audit procedures.


Electric cars are also a new technologies that are already sees great opportunities. While fossil fuel still after hundred years have devastating accidents.


 
Electric cars are also a new technologies that are already sees great opportunities. While fossil fuel still after hundred years have devastating accidents.


Remarkable that those leaking oil and gas wells in the Gulf of Mexico got their inspectors pulled back. Where is the political will to enforce the Clean Water Act in the U.S. and also to stop fouling international waters ?
 
Back
Top Bottom