I guess our arguments are kind of orthogonal to each other. I think your estimates of clathrate and permafrost responses are pretty optimistic. Been nice talking with you.
At the rate battery technology is improving it won't be that long. This article says:
"... the energy density of batteries goes up 15 percent every 18 months; the cost per kilowatt hour goes down 15 percent every 18 months; the life cycles of the batteries (how many times it can charge and recharge) goes up 15 percent every 18 months; and the cost per lifecycle-mile does down 50 percent every 18 months. “
As far as charging time and range anxiety goes I think once electric cars reach some critical mass they will start making them with standard battery packs that you can get changed in 5 or 10 minutes at a "filling" station, a similar experience to a gas station. You would exchange your depleted batteries for fully charged ones and be on your way without any more range anxiety than you have with current vehicles.
Someone's probably going to pipe up with "I don't want to exchange my nearly new batteries for some crap batteries from some station!" My answer to that is don't start the cars with brand new batteries but ones from the filling station inventory in the first place. That way they can handle bringing in new batteries and retiring old ones as needed.
When the electric car batteries deteriorate to the point they need to be replaced (estimated as when they've lost about 20% of their range) they still have a lot of life left in them. They can still be used as stationary batteries for grid storage or other uses. I would think they'd have to drop well below 50% of original capacity before they need to be recycled.
Gas stations seem to be much more numerous and closer together than charging stations, as far as I can tell.
And how long did it take to build up all of that infrastructure? It didn't happen overnight. Same is true with charging stations. As more electric vehicles are in use more charging stations will be built. Right now in Oregon there are charging stations all along the I-5 corridor and before long you will be able to travel i-5 from the Mexican border to the Canadian border without having to worry about finding a charging station. Check out the West Coast Green Highway site for more information.
You ignore the reciprocal part of the equation where the carbon in ethanol come from the carbon in the corn that was absorbed from atmospheric CO2. That makes it a net zero equation.
I doubt the clathrate argument is as much of a red herring as you believe. Yes, earlier estimates were overstated because we didn't understand that they would only form between certain depths and not clear to the bottom. But there is still a lot of it out there and as the oceans warm up they may destabilize the shallower deposits of clathrates leading to increased methane emissions. And you completely ignored my point about methane emissions from melting permafrost (which is not from clathrate deposits but from the anaerobic bacteria that break down the organic material as is thaws).
Yeah, maybe I am somewhat off topic talking about natural sources of methane in a story about fracking. My excuse is that I tend to look at things wholistically and you can't ignore any source when it comes to methane.
When I said "all sources" I meant both natural and man made. It's theoretical because it's impossible to achieve but the point was to agree with you that methane doesn't last in the atmosphere.
Since methane has a limited lifetime (8.4 years net) in the atmosphere the level of it is directly related to the rate of release from all sources. It's a simple and calculable relationship. That's what I mean by equilibrium.
Some sources do run out rather quickly but others have enough potential to last for centuries. The deposits of methane in clathrates and the potential for methane production from melting permafrost are immense and emissions from them could last for centuries if not millenia. As long as the biosphere lasts there will always be the background emissions from the bacteria that anaerobically decompose organic material. Methane levels were around 150% higher in 1998 than they were in 1750.
The fact that the human race is entirely dependent on the planet for our existence makes it pretty important in my book. The Earth systems supply the air we breath, the water we drink, the food we eat, the shelter we need and all the other frivolous things like Slashdot that we enjoy. We disrupt all that at our peril.
Are you just trolling? It's easy to know ND's nights are lit by gas flaring by examining the data from satellites. The characteristics of flaring gas are quite different than those of electric lights.
True, if you could stop all sources of methane to the atmosphere it would pretty much be all gone in 20 or 30 years. By the same token if the rate of release increases, say by the anaerobic decomposition of the organic matter in melting (ex)permafrost or from leaks in natural gas drilling and transport operations , the atmospheric level will increase to a new equilibrium level which does have an effect on warming.
The reason you got the Troll mod is because you don't know that Congress has required the USPS to fund it's pension liability (actually retiree health care benefits) in a way that no other business or government entity is required to. They are actually funding the benefits for the next 75 years which includes employees that haven't even been born yet. Tell me one other entity that is required to do that.
You don't think that Congress forcing the USPS to put money away (to the tune of around $5 billion a year) for the retirement benefits who haven't even been born yet might have something to do with it?
Plus they save on delivery by round filing junk mail for you at its origination point.
Wouldn't it be considered fraudulent for them to accept postage from the junk mail sender then not delivering the mail? It's a nice fantasy but it's not going to happen.
As OneAhead pointed out the funding information you seek is available, just not all in one place. Why would you expect anyone to compile it all and hand it to you on a silver platter? Maybe you should do everyone a favor and start compiling it yourself. The National Science Foundation is a good place to start. Every research institution probably has a web page trumpeting grants their scientists have received.
The rest of your post is just political claptrap that has nothing to do with climate science.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess our arguments are kind of orthogonal to each other. I think your estimates of clathrate and permafrost responses are pretty optimistic. Been nice talking with you.
Still if you can get even half of the energy needed to reaccelerate from it from the stop out of it that's quite an improvement in efficiency.
The pedant in me just has to say, too many people use the word "break" when they really should be using brake.
At the rate battery technology is improving it won't be that long. This article says:
" ... the energy density of batteries goes up 15 percent every 18 months; the cost per kilowatt hour goes down 15 percent every 18 months; the life cycles of the batteries (how many times it can charge and recharge) goes up 15 percent every 18 months; and the cost per lifecycle-mile does down 50 percent every 18 months. “
As far as charging time and range anxiety goes I think once electric cars reach some critical mass they will start making them with standard battery packs that you can get changed in 5 or 10 minutes at a "filling" station, a similar experience to a gas station. You would exchange your depleted batteries for fully charged ones and be on your way without any more range anxiety than you have with current vehicles.
Someone's probably going to pipe up with "I don't want to exchange my nearly new batteries for some crap batteries from some station!" My answer to that is don't start the cars with brand new batteries but ones from the filling station inventory in the first place. That way they can handle bringing in new batteries and retiring old ones as needed.
When the electric car batteries deteriorate to the point they need to be replaced (estimated as when they've lost about 20% of their range) they still have a lot of life left in them. They can still be used as stationary batteries for grid storage or other uses. I would think they'd have to drop well below 50% of original capacity before they need to be recycled.
Maybe with a 110 volt extension cord. But you can easily install a 220 volt charging station in most houses that will charge it overnight.
Gas stations seem to be much more numerous and closer together than charging stations, as far as I can tell.
And how long did it take to build up all of that infrastructure? It didn't happen overnight. Same is true with charging stations. As more electric vehicles are in use more charging stations will be built. Right now in Oregon there are charging stations all along the I-5 corridor and before long you will be able to travel i-5 from the Mexican border to the Canadian border without having to worry about finding a charging station. Check out the West Coast Green Highway site for more information.
You ignore the reciprocal part of the equation where the carbon in ethanol come from the carbon in the corn that was absorbed from atmospheric CO2. That makes it a net zero equation.
I doubt the clathrate argument is as much of a red herring as you believe. Yes, earlier estimates were overstated because we didn't understand that they would only form between certain depths and not clear to the bottom. But there is still a lot of it out there and as the oceans warm up they may destabilize the shallower deposits of clathrates leading to increased methane emissions. And you completely ignored my point about methane emissions from melting permafrost (which is not from clathrate deposits but from the anaerobic bacteria that break down the organic material as is thaws).
Yeah, maybe I am somewhat off topic talking about natural sources of methane in a story about fracking. My excuse is that I tend to look at things wholistically and you can't ignore any source when it comes to methane.
When I said "all sources" I meant both natural and man made. It's theoretical because it's impossible to achieve but the point was to agree with you that methane doesn't last in the atmosphere.
Since methane has a limited lifetime (8.4 years net) in the atmosphere the level of it is directly related to the rate of release from all sources. It's a simple and calculable relationship. That's what I mean by equilibrium.
Some sources do run out rather quickly but others have enough potential to last for centuries. The deposits of methane in clathrates and the potential for methane production from melting permafrost are immense and emissions from them could last for centuries if not millenia. As long as the biosphere lasts there will always be the background emissions from the bacteria that anaerobically decompose organic material. Methane levels were around 150% higher in 1998 than they were in 1750.
The fact that the human race is entirely dependent on the planet for our existence makes it pretty important in my book. The Earth systems supply the air we breath, the water we drink, the food we eat, the shelter we need and all the other frivolous things like Slashdot that we enjoy. We disrupt all that at our peril.
Yeah, I don't know who Motherboard is either.
We've already surpassed the point which prevents an ice age (glaciation) from happening. The next one won't happen until CO2 levels are reduced
Are you just trolling? It's easy to know ND's nights are lit by gas flaring by examining the data from satellites. The characteristics of flaring gas are quite different than those of electric lights.
True, if you could stop all sources of methane to the atmosphere it would pretty much be all gone in 20 or 30 years. By the same token if the rate of release increases, say by the anaerobic decomposition of the organic matter in melting (ex)permafrost or from leaks in natural gas drilling and transport operations , the atmospheric level will increase to a new equilibrium level which does have an effect on warming.
You should have posted that over on the story about conspiracy theorists.
No, you can't fight the church of scientific reality which is where the "warmistas" worship.
I know for a fact that they still do mail delivery by jet boat on the lower Rogue River in Oregon and on the Snake River in Hells Canyon.
Ooooh! Recursion!
The reason you got the Troll mod is because you don't know that Congress has required the USPS to fund it's pension liability (actually retiree health care benefits) in a way that no other business or government entity is required to. They are actually funding the benefits for the next 75 years which includes employees that haven't even been born yet. Tell me one other entity that is required to do that.
You don't think that Congress forcing the USPS to put money away (to the tune of around $5 billion a year) for the retirement benefits who haven't even been born yet might have something to do with it?
There is no way the UPS or FedEx would be able to deliver 1st class mail for $0.45 per piece. Probably more in the $1.50 or greater range.
Plus they save on delivery by round filing junk mail for you at its origination point.
Wouldn't it be considered fraudulent for them to accept postage from the junk mail sender then not delivering the mail? It's a nice fantasy but it's not going to happen.
As OneAhead pointed out the funding information you seek is available, just not all in one place. Why would you expect anyone to compile it all and hand it to you on a silver platter? Maybe you should do everyone a favor and start compiling it yourself. The National Science Foundation is a good place to start. Every research institution probably has a web page trumpeting grants their scientists have received.
The rest of your post is just political claptrap that has nothing to do with climate science.
It will be at least 3 billion years before that becomes an issue. I think we can safely put the solution off for a few million years.
It's going to need a lot of renovation before it ready for all of us to move in.