Diesels to be banned

[WotEver]

1 hour ago, Murflynn said:

oddly, searching for 'te abbreviation' in google didn't throw up any reference to tonne as used in the chemical industry.

A search for 'petrochemical industry tonne' doesn't turn it up. 

A search for 'petrochemical industry te' doesn't turn it up. 

A search for 'petrochemical industry tes' doesn't turn it up. 

[mross]

https://www.petropedia.com/definition/7615/metric-ton

quite interesting...................

[WotEver]

2 hours ago, mross said:

https://www.petropedia.com/definition/7615/metric-ton

quite interesting...................

So te (amongst others) is an unapproved, informal abbreviation. Interesting. 

[mross]

But we all knew that, didn't we?  

[WotEver]

16 minutes ago, mross said:

But we all knew that, didn't we?  

My wife has pointed out to me that I have a penchant for stating the obvious. 

And for reinforcing a point by repetition thereof

[tree monkey]

5 hours ago, Murflynn said:

as a pipeline construction engineer I am familiar with the concept that a soil with zero moisture deficit is important when considering the environmental impact of doing such work in a country with a temperate climate; however I wouldn't introduce science/industry-specialist terms into a public forum like this.  I would say 'mud'.  

oddly, searching for 'te abbreviation' in google didn't throw up any reference to tonne as used in the chemical industry.

Zero moisture deficit made me giggle, field capacity is more commonly used in my world

[tree monkey]

5 hours ago, Dr Bob said:

We now have two issues.

One is pollution which arises from burning things and gives particulates or other nasties viz NOx....and

Two is CO2 which heats up the planet and kills everyone on it when it gets too high.

So Two problems.

The 'pollution' from wood (and I am not going to say it is it worse than diesel - or better) is all about what  you are burning and HOW you burn it. Diesel is a straight chain hydrocarbon - similar to candle wax but it also contains a % of aromatics and napthenics. Aromatics have less hydrogen than straight chain hydrocarbons but can burn clean if enough heat is present. Napthenics contain Nitrogen as well as the carbon/hydrogen and it is this nitrogen that causes NOx and other nasties.

Wood is cellulose and therefore contains carbon/hydrogen and oxygen. The snag here is that the oxygen atoms are already combined with the carbon so when burnt can form nasties as well - ie Dioxin which is incredably toxic. There is therefore a potential for nasties when burning wood. The biggest issue though is how well it is burnt. If there is enough heat then combustion can proceed through to the ultimate breakdown ie CO2 but if it is only partial combustion then a lot of intermediate products can remain ie Dioxin. When therefore comparing Diesel to wood, you have to look at the efficiency of the burning, ie a diesel engine should be reasonably efficient - but will polute if there are high levels of naphthenics (and aromatics) but a piece of wood smouldering on a camp fire will be making a lot of nasties but a good blaze and it will be a lot better (ie in a power station).

I'm not that convinced there is much difference in the two.

For me there is a huge issue in to what the refineries put into our diesel (and gasoline). Their profitability comes from throwing as much of the 'bottom of the barrel' (of crude oil) into transportation fuels and not having to dispose of the bottom half of the barrel as ashphalt, blacking for canal boats or to be upgraded in cokers etc. I the cr*p wasnt put in the fuel from the bottom of the barrel we would be a lot better off pollution-wise, but at a big financial cost.

Not being a chemist I am not sure if there is any real difference but wood combines cellulose and lignin, they serve different roles in timber are they massively different from a chemist point of view?

[Dr Bob]

3 hours ago, tree monkey said:

Not being a chemist I am not sure if there is any real difference but wood combines cellulose and lignin, they serve different roles in timber are they massively different from a chemist point of view?

I was trying to keep it simple. Lignins are just complex polymeric type materials containing just Carbon, Hydrogen and oxygen - not that dissimilar to cellulose but more crosslinked - and a bit more aromatic ie phenolic rings. If I remember right, lignins will have less hydrogen (ie more aromatic) than cellulose so it will not burn quite as well. The ability to burn is usually related to the carbon hydrogen ratio (the more hydrogen the better). This is now getting far too technical. Time for another Bombay Saphire.

[tree monkey]

14 minutes ago, Dr Bob said:

I was trying to keep it simple. Lignins are just complex polymeric type materials containing just Carbon, Hydrogen and oxygen - not that dissimilar to cellulose but more crosslinked - and a bit more aromatic ie phenolic rings. If I remember right, lignins will have less hydrogen (ie more aromatic) than cellulose so it will not burn quite as well. The ability to burn is usually related to the carbon hydrogen ratio (the more hydrogen the better). This is now getting far too technical. Time for another Bombay Saphire.

Thank you,  thats interesting

[MtB]

On 29/07/2017 at 21:54, tree monkey said:

Thank you,  thats interesting

 

Especially the very last bit...

[mark99]

Is Bombay Saphire full of polyphenol falling over aromatics?

 

 

[Alan de Enfield]

Extract from the 'Sunday Papers'

So you've swapped your old gas guzzler for an environmentally friendly electric car: you can give yourself a gold star for your ethical choices, right? Not so fast. Last year Amnesty International raised concerns that leading electric car makers General Motors (GM), Renault-Nissan and Tesla had failed to disclose the steps they are taking to ensure that cobalt mined by child labourers as young as seven in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) is not used in their batteries. "Electric cars may not be as ‘clean’ as you would think," says Mark Dummett, researcher at Amnesty International. "Customers need to be aware that their green cars could be linked to the misery of child labourers in the Democratic Republic of Congo." Analysts are also expecting a 100-fold increase in the production of lithium, the key component of electric car batteries, much of which comes from South America, particularly Chile and Bolivia – places not known for their sparkling record on workers' rights.

[Robbo]

3 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Extract from the 'Sunday Papers'

So you've swapped your old gas guzzler for an environmentally friendly electric car: you can give yourself a gold star for your ethical choices, right? Not so fast. Last year Amnesty International raised concerns that leading electric car makers General Motors (GM), Renault-Nissan and Tesla had failed to disclose the steps they are taking to ensure that cobalt mined by child labourers as young as seven in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) is not used in their batteries. "Electric cars may not be as ‘clean’ as you would think," says Mark Dummett, researcher at Amnesty International. "Customers need to be aware that their green cars could be linked to the misery of child labourers in the Democratic Republic of Congo." Analysts are also expecting a 100-fold increase in the production of lithium, the key component of electric car batteries, much of which comes from South America, particularly Chile and Bolivia – places not known for their sparkling record on workers' rights.

What has child labour got to do with a car been cleaner or not?   It says ethical choices, then it goes not be a ‘clean’ as you think they should have kept the word ethical!   Also no one buys a car to be green or ethical, buy a bicycle if you are.

Edited July 30, 2017 by Robbo

[Murflynn]

I'm always a bit sceptical about criticisms of child labour.

It was normal in the UK - chimney sweeps, tatty pickers, etc.

And these children help to earn a dollar or ten to help to feed the family which otherwise would go hungry.

We so-called 'civilised countries' in the West are too quick to criticise other countries that are at an earlier stage of development.  There seems to be an implication that our kids are better looked-after ...... really?  So many grow up obese, unruly, excluded from school and become teenage vandals, druggies and long term benefit dependants.  Time we looked more closely at our own sick over-developed PC society where we are not allowed to criticise our own standards and habits, before criticising others.

[MtB]

On 30/07/2017 at 12:33, Robbo said:

What has child labour got to do with a car been cleaner or not?   It says ethical choices, then it goes not be a ‘clean’ as you think they should have kept the word ethical!   Also no one buys a car to be green or ethical, buy a bicycle if you are.

 

Oh yes they do. I had a customer who genuinely believed that by driving her stoopid Toyota Prius around she was saving the planet. 

Honestly, she explained to me the further she drove it, the more the CO2 in the atmosphere was being reduced. This cropped up when she mentioned driving or walking 300 yards to the corner shop, then said she'd drive as driving her car was good for the environment.

I was all like 'eh??', so she explained. Speechless? Moi?? 

 

Edited July 31, 2017 by Mike the Boilerman

[rusty69]

1 minute ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

Oh yes they do. I had a customer who genuinely believed that by driving her stoopis Toyota Prius around she was saving the planet. 

Honestly, she explained to me the further she drove it, the more CO2 in the atmosphere was being reduced. This cropped up when she mentioned driving or walking 300 yards to the corner shop, then said she'd drive as driving her car was good for the environment.

I was all like 'eh??', so she explained. Speechless? Moi?? 

 

Theres some real stupid people about! 

[Dharl]

Quote

 

Now I must admit I am not an expert on such things, but what is the learned opinion on Fuel Cell powered cars?   We have a few of these (well duel powered) busses running around London already, are they feasible to be run up for more main stream transport?    

[Robbo]

7 minutes ago, Dharl said:

Now I must admit I am not an expert on such things, but what is the learned opinion on Fuel Cell powered cars?   We have a few of these (well duel powered) busses running around London already, are they feasible to be run up for more main stream transport?    

Don't quote me on this but I think Fuel Cells for the physical size for cars require rare metals which are not as needed on the bigger units.

[cuthound]

As I have posted before, fuel cells were on the verge of being economically viable when  I was at college in 1970, and apparently still are in this position.

Most major motor manufacturers have run prototypes that have been well received by the motoring journalists who drove them.  However, there seems to be an ongoing problem making them economical to produce in large numbers.

It is the same with the aluminium air battery,  which have a range of 200-300 miles and batteries that are virtuslly 100% recyclable. Well received pre-production prototypes, but no one interested in setting up the requisite battery exchange stations.

[Dharl]

Thanks Cuthound, thought I had caught up with all the posts that I missed over the weekend on this subject.    I guess with this potential legislation coming in then making such things more economical will be encouraged.      Of course it will then come down to being able to produce enough fuel source in sufficient quantity to make it all viable.   

[Alan de Enfield]

I do sometimes find following the twists & turns of 'change' to be difficult, but having read the 10 pages of this thread, and numerous press articles and listened to various TV discussions I am still at a loss :

Batteries are simply 'storage vessels'

My question :

"We are struggling to keep up with electrical demand at peak times - Where is the electricity going to be produced to meet this additional demand, and, how will it be able to reach this 5 - 10 - 15 million electric cars in sufficient places - ie 'infrastructure'  requirements ?"

[cuthound]

14 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

I do sometimes find following the twists & turns of 'change' to be difficult, but having read the 10 pages of this thread, and numerous press articles and listened to various TV discussions I am still at a loss :

Batteries are simply 'storage vessels'

My question :

"We are struggling to keep up with electrical demand at peak times - Where is the electricity going to be produced to meet this additional demand, and, how will it be able to reach this 5 - 10 - 15 million electric cars in sufficient places - ie 'infrastructure'  requirements ?"

Quite simply we will need to build another 10 or more nuclear power stations like Hinckley C. Local infrastructure will be relatively cheap compared to that. 

Edited July 31, 2017 by cuthound
To add a missing worm

[Alan de Enfield]

3 minutes ago, cuthound said:

Quite simply we will need to build another 10 or more nuclear power stations like Hinckley C. Local infrastructure will be relatively cheap compared to that. 

And - starting today we can find locations, get 'planning permission, build, pay for and commission a new nuclear power station every 2 years for the next 20 years.

I'd suggest that no Government of any 'colour' could achieve that.

[Momac]

I think issues with child labour are equally as important as exhaust pipe emissions , if not greater.

Not the mention the energy and emissions required to mine and refine any products used in production, such as aluminium  lithium and cobalt.

So there is no such thing as a 100% clean energy and no engine / motor can be zero emission  when the emissions used to produce the motor or vehicle are considered.

In the meantime it is surely better to keep an old car running as long as it is repairable and passes an mot test . The little pollution that comes from it's exhaust is nothing compared to the pollution required to dispose of its remains and replace it with a new car.

We are already short of electricity so must try to reduced demand on the electricity we can so conveniently obtain by plugging into the mains. Better and easier ways of generating electricity locally must be developed.

Hydrogen fuel cells are the future ................. probably.

 

 

[mross]

To replace all the petrol and diesel used by today's cars, buses and truck will take about 16GW.  That's four or five nuclear power stations, not twenty.  And in 2040 there will still be plenty of internal combustions engines just not new ones.  This is quite do-able.