# EVs again - the sensible approach



## Jacob (27 Jul 2021)

Simple - no batteries required - tried and tested. 








UK government backs scheme for motorway cables to power lorries


E-highway study given £2m to draw up plans for overhead electric cables on motorway near Scunthorpe




www.theguardian.com




But not good for the boys-toys market, even though reminiscent of fairground dodgems.
Takes me back to one of my first of many jobs as a bus conductor on electric trolley buses!


----------



## Ollie78 (27 Jul 2021)

This might end up like the electrification of the rail network. 
Where they didn`t remember to make or order any electric trains, when they realised, tried to order trains with the wrong specification due to some monumental idiocy at the design stage and had to pay over the odds and wait ages for the delivery. 
Then they found out some parts of the track cannot accomodate the electrification so will have to use dual powered diesel trains anyway, managing to waste millions in the process.
Great job.


Ollie


----------



## Sandyn (28 Jul 2021)

Ollie78 said:


> Then they found out some parts of the track cannot accomodate the electrification so will have to use dual powered diesel trains anyway, managing to waste millions in the process.


AND they fitted the overhead power lines at the wrong height between Edinburgh and Glasgow!!

If lorries are running from overhead power cables, I hope that means they can't overtake!! I love these three mile lorry/lorry overtaking manoeuvres that sometimes happen.


----------



## Cabinetman (28 Jul 2021)

That’s just near me, so thanks, we’ve got months of utter f...... pandemonium. It did make me laugh when I first saw it though, talk about full circle, here we are back with trams! 
It’s going to be a very strange and probably totally useless test of the equipment, which transport company is going to go to the expense of buying new lorries just for that? It’s not the sort of thing that can be back engineered onto existing trucks. 
As was said, them in charge are chuffing clueless.


----------



## Jacob (28 Jul 2021)

Cabinetman said:


> That’s just near me, so thanks, we’ve got months of utter f...... pandemonium. It did make me laugh when I first saw it though, talk about full circle, here we are back with trams!
> It’s going to be a very strange and probably totally useless test of the equipment, which transport company is going to go to the expense of buying new lorries just for that? It’s not the sort of thing that can be back engineered onto existing trucks.
> As was said, them in charge are chuffing clueless.


Maybe it's simply going full circle - back to rail as the only means of shifting massive amounts of stuff with electricity, as it avoids the big battery issue. 
Instead it confronts the personal liberty issue - the end of our freedom to drive ourselves and our goods how we please. It was always a delusion anyway, being utterly dependent on oil/motor industry and road infrastructure


----------



## Phil Pascoe (28 Jul 2021)

Get rid of trains and tarmac the tracks over. Put all heavy goods and coaches on them and leave the roads for cars.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (28 Jul 2021)

Sandyn said:


> ! I love these three mile lorry/lorry overtaking manoeuvres that sometimes happen.



That's the idiocy of restricting their speed.


----------



## novocaine (28 Jul 2021)

2 million doesn't even cover FEED. it's another pass at "green" with what is considered pocket change and it's unlikely to get past the design table. again. for the 4th (ish) time.


----------



## Blackswanwood (28 Jul 2021)

On the face of it sounds bonkers to me.

A more definite step to move away from fossil fuels seems to have been taken by William Grant (Glenfiddich) who have developed a way of using their waste to make biofuel for their delivery fleet. As I understand it they have offered to share the technology they have developed to produce the fuel with other whiskey distillers if they want to go down a similar route.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (28 Jul 2021)

novocaine said:


> 2 million doesn't even cover FEED. it's another pass at "green" with what is considered pocket change and it's unlikely to get past the design table. again. for the 4th (ish) time.


It's just a bit of virtue signalling plus an envelope of cash for someone's friend/relative. The study will show (eventually) that it is a non - starter. 

We can either cover the entire nation in overhead cables (like some deeply ugly towns in Italy, for example) or have two kinds of trucks - one for motorways only, and another for non motorway delivery. And if you live outside the M25, it's not as if you deserve deliveries anyway. 

Any fuel or replacement power system that is less energy - dense than diesel is a step backwards and will result in reduced economic activity, which means fewer jobs, more poverty, more crime, etc, so on and so forth.

In medieval times they used wind and water power, and horses - very modern and green. I found out yesterday that the annual running cost for for a horse, back in the day, was about the same as the price to buy one. Imagine an economy where you spend the same amount on fuel each year as the price of a new car. Are we enthusiastically embracing increasing the divide between have and have not?


----------



## Geoff_S (28 Jul 2021)

Or they could install a long metal slot in the middle of the road …..


----------



## novocaine (28 Jul 2021)

Blackswanwood said:


> On the face of it sounds bonkers to me.
> 
> A more definite step to move away from fossil fuels seems to have been taken by William Grant (Glenfiddich) who have developed a way of using their waste to make biofuel for their delivery fleet. As I understand it they have offered to share the technology they have developed to produce the fuel with other whiskey distillers if they want to go down a similar route.



fusel oil, they've been selling it to biofuel producers for years, what grants have also done is related to the mash as well. it's good idea, but it can't power their entire fleet unfortunately. Barcardi (who own more than just the rum you drink) and Diagio (between the three names in this post that's almost all whiskey makers covered) are also researching it, but with support from a biofuel manufacturer (who shall remain nameless). 

the futures bright, it's also blue with a hint of green. hydrogen baby, it's the only way right now. 

right, I'm out of this thread before it starts down the normal route. have fun.


----------



## Rorschach (28 Jul 2021)

Why bother, it's too late with climate change we are all told, stick with nice easy diesel.


----------



## Stuart Moffat (28 Jul 2021)

How’s about taking a tip from the nursery ski slopes drag lifts, where a bit like the San Francisco street cars you have stout cables on the motorway pulling at 70mph. You get up to 70 on the slip road, find your gap and hook on. Can’t foresee any problems with that! Oh it’s amazing how good I am at solving problems when I’m asleep!!


----------



## Ollie78 (28 Jul 2021)

JCB have developed a new engine which is a modified diesel that runs on hydrogen. It is very clever, no idea how they prevent premature detonation but they have apparently.
An excavator that runs on batteries needs 8 tonnes of battery weight and can run for less than a shift, it then needs to be charged for a very long time. It is a non starter in that industry, no use in anywhere away from the grid.
Until supercapacitors become cheap, electric stuff is just not ready for industrial applications.

Ollie


----------



## Jacob (28 Jul 2021)

Cable or track electric pickup is a more practical idea than batteries for 90% (?) transport needs, and is well established technology
If you had mass battery fleets, power still has to be cabled out to the charging points - pure logic says it'd be more sensible to pick up the power from the cable direct and not have to carry massive batteries.
Bring back the dodgem!


----------



## RichardG (28 Jul 2021)

Sorry, trucks not running today, leaves on the road


----------



## eribaMotters (28 Jul 2021)

I suppose it all goes around in circles. So we are going back to trams, only a bigger. Next they'll invent something new for public transport called the trolley bus.

Colin


----------



## tinfoil (28 Jul 2021)

Giddyup!


----------



## D_W (28 Jul 2021)

Sandyn said:


> AND they fitted the overhead power lines at the wrong height between Edinburgh and Glasgow!!
> 
> If lorries are running from overhead power cables, I hope that means they can't overtake!! I love these three mile lorry/lorry overtaking manoeuvres that sometimes happen.



The vehicles will eventually be autonomous and grid controlled, anyway. That'll end the antisocial behavior from people who constantly leave 8 minutes ahead of arrival at a destination 10 minutes away.


----------



## Spectric (28 Jul 2021)

If you really think about the proposal then it is completely stupid and absurd, just like HS2 and many other big government projects like cross rail which will be no use once the sea levels rise, so has the government got a secret money tree or something because they seem to want to waste as much money as they can.

They want to electrify motorways so electric lorries can be used, do we not already have electrified routes called railways! so put the containers onto the railways for transport between major hubs and then smaller vehicles to deliver within a radius of each hub. Is the human race losing the inteligence to think or is it that dummmmies work for the government in a special stupidity department, perhaps as we have ministers for everthing these days there will be a minister for stupidity and can have an office near to the minister for farting.


----------



## Jacob (28 Jul 2021)

Spectric said:


> If you really think about the proposal then it is completely stupid and absurd, just like HS2 and many other big government projects like cross rail which will be no use once the sea levels rise, so has the government got a secret money tree or something because they seem to want to waste as much money as they can.
> 
> They want to electrify motorways so electric lorries can be used, do we not already have electrified routes called railways! so put the containers onto the railways for transport between major hubs and then smaller vehicles to deliver within a radius of each hub. Is the human race losing the inteligence to think or is it that dummmmies work for the government in a special stupidity department, perhaps as we have ministers for everthing these days there will be a minister for stupidity and can have an office near to the minister for farting.


Yep.
They perhaps think there's more mileage in "innovative" solutions. I think they are wrong! 
But right about developing direct connection EVs, which is already well established technology.
HS2 will be electrified - maybe it is more farsighted than everybody thinks!


----------



## xy mosian (28 Jul 2021)

Spectric said:


> .... Is the human race losing the inteligence to think or is it that dummmmies work for the government in a special stupidity department, perhaps as we have ministers for everthing these days there will be a minister for stupidity and can have an office near to the minister for farting.


Back in the 70's I had a lodger who worked for a large government department. After a display of particular idiocy, I asked if it were necessary to be cetified Brain Dead to get his job. He did not understand the question!!
geoff


----------



## Phil Pascoe (28 Jul 2021)

Spectric said:


> so put the containers onto the railways for transport between major hubs and then smaller vehicles to deliver within a radius of each hub.



Two Oxbridge professors did a huge study some years ago and found that if that system were put in place something like iirc 92% of the heavy goods vehicles on the road would still be on the road. I would imagine a drawback is that instead of having one truck do the whole trip, you have two - one at each end.


----------



## Spectric (28 Jul 2021)

But if the rail tracks went into the Amazon depots then you would lose an even larger number of lorries.


----------



## Jacob (28 Jul 2021)

Phil Pascoe said:


> Two Oxbridge professors did a huge study some years ago and found that if that system were put in place something like iirc 92% of the heavy goods vehicles on the road would still be on the road. I would imagine a drawback is that instead of having one truck do the whole trip, you have two - one at each end.


Oil will be priced out if things are going to be taken seriously. It's ludicrously cheap at the mo and should have been incrementally taxed from a long way back. Maybe the battery powered EVs would do all the local stuff.


----------



## clogs (28 Jul 2021)

all these "brilliamt idea's " from gov is only ment to fill thier pockets.....
not actually work.....
Like HS2, it'd be cheaper for the gov to pay for everyones airline ticket than build that DISASTER.....
except the wannabee's will be poorer for it.....


----------



## flying haggis (28 Jul 2021)

Spectric said:


> But if the rail tracks went into the Amazon depots then you would lose an even larger number of lorries.



how many amazon depots are anywhere near a rail line?


----------



## mikej460 (28 Jul 2021)

Cabinetman said:


> That’s just near me, so thanks, we’ve got months of utter f...... pandemonium. It did make me laugh when I first saw it though, talk about full circle, here we are back with trams!
> It’s going to be a very strange and probably totally useless test of the equipment, which transport company is going to go to the expense of buying new lorries just for that? It’s not the sort of thing that can be back engineered onto existing trucks.
> As was said, them in charge are chuffing clueless.


Think milk floats then where we are now with electric cars. My prediction is that transport will soon become a hybrid of hydrogen and electricity, and further out an updated Maglev rail system and who knows even Vactrains...


----------



## mikej460 (28 Jul 2021)

[/QUOTE]


Spectric said:


> so put the containers onto the railways for transport between major hubs and then smaller vehicles to deliver within a radius of each hub.


Hubs like DIRFT in the Midlands operate just like this
Prologis RFI DIRFT | Prologis UK


----------



## Jacob (28 Jul 2021)

mikej460 said:


> [
> 
> Hubs like DIRFT in the Midlands operate just like this
> Prologis RFI DIRFT | Prologis UK



Makes sense. Could expand same for personal transport - long trips by connected electric train no batteries, short trips to/from stations with battery driven cars - or connected public transport, trams, trolleys etc i.e. pretty much what we already have but more of it.
Long distance battery powered is and always will be fundamentally inefficient due to the need to carry the batteries themselves.
Power to weight ratios The Back Page


----------



## doctor Bob (28 Jul 2021)

The idea of trading in the convenience of a car or motorbike for packed trains electric or not which don't get you to your final destination and cost a fortune, when some people are burning a gazzilion gallons of fuel to travel into space for a 10 minute vanity trip is rather unappealing at present.


----------



## mikej460 (28 Jul 2021)

Jacob said:


> Makes sense. Could expand same for personal transport - long trips by connected electric train no batteries, short trips to/from stations with battery driven cars - or connected public transport, trams, trolleys etc i.e. pretty much what we already have but more of it.
> Long distance battery powered is and always will be fundamentally inefficient due to the need to carry the batteries themselves.
> Power to weight ratios The Back Page


I think the prototype trains currently under trials with a f'huge battery bank on board are designed to be self charging, on the basis that trains 'free wheel' for a lot of their journey - not true on some I assume, only those going south...


----------



## Terry - Somerset (29 Jul 2021)

Using trains for freight and transferring loads for local delivery is a non-starter. Stations will need a goods yard, materials handling systems, separate vehicles required at each end. 

As the rail network is already adequately supplied with power a better solution would be for "trains" to comprise a digitally connected stream of vehicles without drivers. Technically feasible and limited safety issues as no interaction with other traffic. Vehicles could be battery powered and recharged whilst in the "train".

Vehicles would leave the "train" when they reach their destination station and go driverless to a car park. The "train" would close up to eliminate gaps. Drivers would do local deliveries and return the vehicle to the car park. It would then be added to a "train" for its next assignment. 

It is questionable whether steel rails or tarmac would be a better "track" for the "train". 

Trains in decades past were used far more extensively to move goods around the country. This was not financially viable and transport transferred to an improving road network on which individual vehicles could be specified for the weight and size of load to be carried. 

Going back to the train model probably makes little financial sense - what's changed. Whether there is an environmental benefit is a fair question, although the answer is far from clear.


----------



## Cooper (29 Jul 2021)

Phil Pascoe said:


> Two Oxbridge professors did a huge study some years ago and found that if that system were put in place something like iirc 92% of the heavy goods vehicles on the road would still be on the road. I would imagine a drawback is that instead of having one truck do the whole trip, you have two - one at each end.


We have been here before. In suburban Bromley the waste infrastructure and fuel delivery (coal) were centred on the railways. The waste yard had a hopper that filled wagons that took the rubbish away. We now have a system where massive trucks removing waste have to compete with the queues of cars wanting to get to the tip. The plastic and card recycling firm based by the station was closed and a supermarket, which generates considerable packaging, was built on the site and all the deliveries come by massive trucks, their card and plastic taken away by another one, meanwhile just up the highstreet half the shops are either closed or short term lets etc. Bonkers. We seem to be trying to solve problems a slightly longer term view wouldn't have created in the first place. Short term gain long term pain. Lets hope the current plonkers, who have the reins at the moment, aren't as stupid and venal as they seem.


----------



## MikeJhn (29 Jul 2021)

Phil Pascoe said:


> That's the idiocy of restricting their speed.


Its the idiocy of the drivers who are only doing 0.5mph more than the lorry they are overtaking, foot flat to the floor don't lift it until you reach your destination.


----------



## Jacob (29 Jul 2021)

Terry - Somerset said:


> .....
> 
> Going back to the train model probably makes little financial sense - what's changed.


What's changed is the urgent need to stop using fossil fuels, which is also the answer to your next question


> Whether there is an environmental benefit is a fair question, although the answer is far from clear.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (29 Jul 2021)

MikeJhn said:


> Its the idiocy of the drivers who are only doing 0.5mph more than the lorry they are overtaking, foot flat to the floor don't lift it until you reach your destination.


Quite often the driver being overtaken doesn't floor it until he realises he's being overtaken.


----------



## jim1950 (29 Jul 2021)

All the talk of overhead power for hgvs is madness just go look at the JCB engine running on Hydrogen, harrys garage vid on youtube
Job done, Evs great town cars not for big stuff


----------



## D_W (29 Jul 2021)

jim1950 said:


> All the talk of overhead power for hgvs is madness just go look at the JCB engine running on Hydrogen, harrys garage vid on youtube
> Job done, Evs great town cars not for big stuff



Only 9 dollars a gallon and reformed from natural gas.


----------



## Spectric (29 Jul 2021)

flying haggis said:


> how many amazon depots are anywhere near a rail line?


Exactly, goes to show that they were not forward thinking when laying out their infrastructure. There is a cardboard producer up here that has dozens of lorry loads of logs delivered a day from Scotland, yet they can see the railway from the factory. These lorries travel through small towns and villages causing conjestion and pollution yet there is no willpower to change, sound familiar.



Terry - Somerset said:


> Using trains for freight and transferring loads for local delivery is a non-starter. Stations will need a goods yard, materials handling systems, separate vehicles required at each end.


A perfect example, to much effort required so lets not bother. This is why global climate change is a given, we waste money building HS2 but not to make a real change to get heavy diesel lorries of the road, the hardest to make into EV's.

If anyone watched the news this morning about climate change and that the UK has had more sun, more rain and higher temperatures again breaking records and it is now realised we have past the point at which major change will become the norm, plus we probably have about five years in which to stop using all fosil fuels to prevent total chaos then is it not time to stop worrying about it because no one is going to take any real action so lets just get on and enjoy butchering wood or perhaps we need to get together and build woodern homes that float, might be a bit strange in the future using a tablesaw with the thing swaying.


----------



## D_W (29 Jul 2021)

Rail either loses due to time or cost. Switching from trucks to trains isn't going to save the world.

Sound like the BBC is probably having good luck with ratings with their programs. I predict next year will be normal and no more records will be set than would be in any other year.


----------



## Noel (29 Jul 2021)

If you want to yap about political figures and politics please take it to OT2 or go elsewhere.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (29 Jul 2021)

Spectric said:


> These lorries travel through small towns and villages causing conjestion and pollution yet there is no willpower to change, sound familiar.


The real failure is in growing trees up mountains rather than next to the rail terminus. Trees are felled, logged and loaded onto trucks which must then get to civilization. Is it sensible to then offload the logs onto flatbed railway trucks, ship them, then reload onto trucks to get to the factory which is also not at the rail terminus? Perhaps we should lay rail tracks directly from the forest to the pulp mill.


----------



## clogs (29 Jul 2021)

all this train nonsence,
what about leaves on the line, wrong kinda snow.....
and look at the Suez canal mess.....
everything has been cocked up since Izambard K Brunel left.....bless him....


----------



## Spectric (29 Jul 2021)

Unfortunately we have lost the victorian engineering ability where anything could be done, some say that the massive loses of large numbers of people from single communities due to the great war did not help. On the flip side I suppose they started global warming but were not aware as the changes took some time to become noticable.


----------



## Terry - Somerset (29 Jul 2021)

The most intelligent solution by a considerable margin is to behave intelligently.

Whether trains taking the strain of HGVs is economically or environmentally sound is worth debating. Assuming that anyone who questions the use of trains displacing road freight is making a solely financial judgement is misplaced. 

Trains and the associated infrastructure also use energy.

The intelligent solution is to change behaviours to minimise total energy consumption rather than focus on one element (HGV transport). This may include:

buy local and seasonal
design and retrofit properties to minimise energy use
repair, recycle and reuse - extend the life of clothes and consumer goods
local not regional infrastructure - hospitals, schools, shopping centres - to minimise travel
stop building out of town retail parks to reinvigorate local towns and communities
make it easier and cheaper for people to move if changing jobs (eliminate stamp duty) to reduce commuting
Personally I favour the market to encourage change rather than additional regulation. This would involve reducing PAYE in favour of taxes on embedded energy, and taxing home energy consumption to encourage investment in more efficient homes.

In principle this could be tax neutral - those who are most responsive to change would benefit most, those reluctant to change current behaviours would face an significantly increased tax bill.

The only real questions are (a) how quickly does the transition from income tax to a carbon tax happen, and (b) which government (if any) would have the courage to implement such a radical scheme (probably none based on past performance).

The elephant in the room as always is population. David Attenborough noted in a recent talk that since he started broadcasting global populations have grown by 3 times. Unless this is actively addressed there is little prospect of avoiding climate change without a very unpleasant transition.


----------



## DrPhill (29 Jul 2021)

Some very good and thoughtful points there. We need mature discussion of all of them. I hope I do not stray too close to the forbidden political zone, but......
I do caution against the simplistic assumption that population growth is a root cause of the problem. I feel this is often used by high consuming societies to shift blame to lower consuming countries.
The countries where population is increasing are generally very low consumers of materials and energy. The rich countries are by far the largest consumers, and their consumption is growing, even though in many cases their locally bred population is declining. The problem is not population growth as such, but the number of people multiplied by their consumption.
Here for example is a good chart: Data Visualisations – materialflows.net





As you can see the overdeveloped world is consuming far more than the underdeveloped world, even though most population growth is happening in the underdeveloped world. The biggest reductions in consumption growth will be achieved by reducing per capita consumption in the overdeveloped world, not by controlling population growth in the underdeveloped world. That is not to say that we should ignore population growth - and it is easy (but not politically) to achieve in poorer countries by giving women the education they want (so they can create the opportunities to earn the money to feed their families), and control over their reproductive systems.

Edit: here is the same chart but per-capita rather than by country - just in case some thought us under-represented:


----------



## Anthraquinone (29 Jul 2021)

To quote Dad's Army - We are DOOMED - DOOMED

No matter what we do in Europe and perhaps America the mega population centres of Asia and the Far east will be so far behind in adopting the technology that by they try the earth be completely screwed. 

Too may people wanting too much of the limited resources we have = disaster.

Terry is right population is THE problem. It needs something with the infection rate of Covid and the lethality of MERS or SARS to sort that out. Would society survive that - probably not.

Keep smiling

AQ


----------



## Anthraquinone (29 Jul 2021)

DrPhill

Having worked in some of these underdeveloped countries I know from experience the people there aspire to the living standards we have in the west. With the population we have on this planet that is just not possible. 

I do not see how any Government will be able to or even want to reduce the consumption of their populations sufficiently to make a difference.

I wish there was a way to make that happen for the sake of my grandchildren but I do not think it will.

AQ


----------



## Jacob (29 Jul 2021)

Terry - Somerset said:


> The most intelligent solution by a considerable margin is to behave intelligently.
> 
> Whether trains taking the strain of HGVs is economically or environmentally sound is worth debating. Assuming that anyone who questions the use of trains displacing road freight is making a solely financial judgement is misplaced.
> 
> ...


Current opinion seems to be that it's too late and climate change is here with us and not going away. Channel 4 news seems to be doing a fair job of spelling things out - worth watching and catching up on recent episodes too.
Over population isn't the problem it's the solution; it's a basic survival technique throughout the living world - when the going gets tough in many species plant and animal, reproduction goes into over-drive. There may be mass casualties but it increases the chances of species survival.
Hence pop growth is greatest in some of the poorest and most stressed human communities. It's easy to forget that we too are an animal species with our own ecology, and everything we are or we do is entirely "natural".
Conversely when the living is easy in those parts of the globe where life is peaceful and civilised, there is a 'problem' of falling population and low birthrates. This includes China, which has abandoned its single child policy.
To reconcile these societal differences there is an obvious solution, but it would be highly political and upset the snowflakes!
I'll copy this post and put it in the padded room, in case anybody wants to reply


----------



## D_W (29 Jul 2021)

DrPhill said:


> Some very good and thoughtful points there. We need mature discussion of all of them. I hope I do not stray too close to the forbidden political zone, but......
> I do caution against the simplistic assumption that population growth is a root cause of the problem. I feel this is often used by high consuming societies to shift blame to lower consuming countries.
> The countries where population is increasing are generally very low consumers of materials and energy.



This falls apart unless you assume the population centers will always stay low means - see china. 

You could've made this argument for China about 30 or 40 years ago, that the population is large, but it's wrong to put the blame on population. 

The problem is both. It's a per capita use issue, but it's also a population issue. What does the average poor person consume in electricity now per individual. what was that figure in 1921, 100 years ago?

It's across the board. the reality of it is also that you're not likely to get a workable solutions out of anything but the high energy use societies (which are higher technology). 





__





Electric power consumption (kWh per capita) - China | Data


Electric power consumption (kWh per capita) - China from The World Bank: Data




data.worldbank.org





You cannot assume that high population areas won't become economically advanced. 

here's the world figure per capita (not just china). 




__





Electric power consumption (kWh per capita) | Data


Electric power consumption (kWh per capita) from The World Bank: Data




data.worldbank.org





I don't see older data than that, but you get the point. Per capita consumption is up by a factor of 3. In the US, I refer to this as the "energy efficiency factor". When I was a kid in the late 1970s and early 1980s, most of the stuff in the house was inefficient. The only two items that actually got regular use (other than the oven) were the fridge and a chest freezer (common back then as transport of vegetables from all corners of the earth wasn't as common, especially to rural areas). 

Our cars got poorer mileage by a little (not much, but they were smaller and less powerful. We drove them half as far, traveled by air none, used fans instead of A/C and heated only part of the house in the winter). There is no viable long term academic answer that doesn't involve population decline. Anything else is naive. Of course, there is one other viable answer - just not do that much about it and wait until solving the problem has more economic value. It will, and that's probably the most reasonable answer. 

The "jacob" answer (today we have to act, tomorrow will be too late.....then we get to tomorrow or next year, etc, none of it is actually true. At the outset of covid, there was suspicion that we couldn't make a viable coronavirus vaccine or we'd have had one already for the colds of that type. ...

..oops, we had to. it was important. To suggest that we can't manipulate carbon in the future or use another means when it becomes critically important - you won't get me to buy that.


----------



## Jacob (29 Jul 2021)

D_W said:


> ....
> 
> The "jacob" answer (today we have to act, tomorrow will be too late.....then we get to tomorrow or next year, etc, none of it is actually true. ....


It's not "my" answer it's current expert opinion and the evidence is all around us, globally. COP26 looks like being potentially the most important world conference ever


> ....To suggest that we can't manipulate carbon in the future or use another means when it becomes critically important.....


It's already passed being "critically important" for instance in Lytton or Paradise in american west, just two small local examples for you. Maybe you don't see much in the way of news?


----------



## doctor Bob (29 Jul 2021)

It will all be fine in the end, whether humans are around at that point, is another matter.


----------



## D_W (29 Jul 2021)

COP27 will be the most important once it occurs, and then COP28 will be more important than that. 

It's marketing. There is a lot of money at stake here. Of course the planet is also warming, but these things become like grants in the US university system. You need a hook to get the grant, because the grant money is coming from people who often are financially intelligent (they're managing large trusts), but who see one person who says "I suggest we wait and observe" and another who says "right now, we must act, we must study how we must act". Well, the first guy doesn't need money, but the second one says he does. He or she, or she who says they're a he or they that day - whatever it takes to have a pronoun and not get stuck with someone trying to drag down the discussion with that instead of talking about the purpose. 

I'm not interested in the discussion until it starts talking about incentivizing solutions in away that are economically viable. if someone can find something that's actually gainful for humans and also sequesters carbon at the same time, we're off to the races. 

But, no, I don't think it's that critical. I think the planet is warming - and the alarmists are using the definition of anxiety to get people riled up because they're competing with other people doing the same thing. That's their job. The PR people end up in charge, and now they're data driven. I doubt the outcome or outlook is really that much different than it was 25 years ago, but the profitability is way up. 

Potential catastrophe in the future is an ideal hook. It can't be solved now, so you can just beat the drum endlessly and write off any bits and bobs where you're wrong. You haven't arrived at the date that the world ends yet, so there's no holding anyone to a point.


----------



## D_W (29 Jul 2021)

doctor Bob said:


> It will all be fine in the end, whether humans are around at that point, is another matter.



Of course we will be around - it's just a matter of how many and where. 

When the sun expands or another extinction event occurs due to a giant asteroid, then we may not fare quite so well.


----------



## Blackswanwood (30 Jul 2021)

Making the use of cars less attractive in towns and cities would be a useful step. Changes are being made to the Highway Code that prioritise pedestrians and cyclists and more money is going into cycle lanes and highways.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (30 Jul 2021)

I hope the law changes that cyclists have to use cycle lanes where provided - they cycle anywhere but on cycle lanes around here.

Changes in the law are fine, but I do wish the people who make them would realise that what is necessary in cities isn't necessarily good for everyone else - up to now most changes in any areas have been blanket cover.


----------



## Jameshow (30 Jul 2021)

Phil Pascoe said:


> I hope the law changes that cyclists have to use cycle lanes where provided - they cycle anywhere but on cycle lanes around here.
> 
> Changes in the law are fine, but I do wish the people who make them would realise that what is necessary in cities isn't necessarily good for everyone else - up to now most changes in any areas have been blanket cover.



That's fine so long as they aren't shared with pedestrians or end every 100m. 

Cheers James


----------



## Jacob (30 Jul 2021)

Phil Pascoe said:


> I hope the law changes that cyclists have to use cycle lanes where provided - they cycle anywhere but on cycle lanes around here.
> 
> Changes in the law are fine, but I do wish the people who make them would realise that what is necessary in cities isn't necessarily good for everyone else - up to now most changes in any areas have been blanket cover.


Cyclists do use cycle lanes when they are fit for purpose but they very often are not. The Warrington "farcility of the month" site is down but there are a few images here: cycle lanes farcility of the month - Google Search
PS its archived here Cycle Facility of the Month


----------



## Trainee neophyte (30 Jul 2021)

Anthraquinone said:


> I do not see how any Government will be able to or even want to reduce the consumption of their populations sufficiently to make a difference.



The conspiracy theorists would note that covid lockdowns look suspiciously like the sort of behaviours being advocated to reduce the "Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Emergency " (tm).

We also have the loonies at the World Economic Forum with their "Great Reset(tm). They seem to have bought all the EU politicians, and quite a few others, too. The Great Reset

Interestingly, we also had the bank crisis of autumn 2019 (which was kept fairly quiet), which _might_, if your tinfoil hat is snug and at the right angle, be the reason for everything that has happened since. Consumption is down, energy usage is down, and the world economy is still functioning, sort of. The plate jugglers are actually doing a pretty good job of managing a gentle decline instead of bringing about catastrophic banking failure. The same emergency funding which saved the day in 2019 has just been reinstated as a normal, everyday, longterm facility, so that must mean everything is just fabulous in the system. 









Fed Takes Big Step Toward Preventing More Repo-Market Blowups


The Federal Reserve has toyed for years with opening something called a standing repo facility to prevent short-term rates markets from blowing up. Following a 2019 disruption and another early in the pandemic, the central bank finally took that step.




www.bloomberg.com





But obviously all the above is just conspiracy theories. Everything is actually exactly as explained by the Guardian and the BBC.


----------



## jim1950 (30 Jul 2021)

is the long term plan for overhead powered HGV'S driverless trucks??


----------



## stuart little (30 Jul 2021)

Trainee neophyte said:


> The real failure is in growing trees up mountains rather than next to the rail terminus. Trees are felled, logged and loaded onto trucks which must then get to civilization. Is it sensible to then offload the logs onto flatbed railway trucks, ship them, then reload onto trucks to get to the factory which is also not at the rail terminus? Perhaps we should lay rail tracks directly from the forest to the pulp mill.


There used to be 'logging railroads', but they all went into disuse decades ago.


----------



## Jacob (30 Jul 2021)

jim1950 said:


> is the long term plan for overhead powered HGV'S driverless trucks??


There are no long term plans, just a few vague sketches. The easy option for govts is to look at mitigation of effects rather than the much more urgent and significant causes of Climate Change


----------



## D_W (30 Jul 2021)

stuart little said:


> There used to be 'logging railroads', but they all went into disuse decades ago.



Here where logging is still common on some private land, railroads may have gone to certain landings, but the bulk of complicated log movement was done by steam donkeys, etc (I think there are cable systems now with independent gasoline motors running on the cable systems toting the logs). 

The reality is in terms of logging those dangerous areas is that the price of lumber won't support it and it's not needed. The hills were stripped here by the railroads as I recall (and the state that I live in is more than 50% wooded now, 150 years later). The forests aren't the same trees as they were the first time around.


----------



## Cabinetman (30 Jul 2021)

D_W said:


> Here where logging is still common on some private land, railroads may have gone to certain landings, but the bulk of complicated log movement was done by steam donkeys, etc (I think there are cable systems now with independent gasoline motors running on the cable systems toting the logs).
> 
> The reality is in terms of logging those dangerous areas is that the price of lumber won't support it and it's not needed. The hills were stripped here by the railroads as I recall (and the state that I live in is more than 50% wooded now, 150 years later). The forests aren't the same trees as they were the first time around.


 I must say you’re right I noticed it when I first arrived in Pennsylvania there were no large trees, nothing above 24 inch diameter – that I could see from my car lol


----------



## D_W (30 Jul 2021)

yes, lots of unmanaged brushy areas. 

Some parks and yards (and open pastures) do have some big ones in them, though. 




__





Kid's Kingdom | Avonworth Park


Watch the flowers bud and the leaves transition from summer to fall as the kids play on an enormous castle-like playground featuring swings, slides and teeter-totters.




www.avonworthcommunitypark.org





This is a local free park here - the sycamore on the right is about 6 feet on the stump or a little more. I doubt it's more than 120 years old. The oak in the foreground is about 2/3rds that. I'd love to get my fingers on a couple of sections of the sycamore to quarter, though, even though it's a leaner. American sycamore quartered is really vivid. 

Oak, not so much. 

(pinoaks are one local favorite here due to fast growth, though. They're the "you'll find out that's too close to the house in a few years" tree. Neighbor planted three 15 years ago - one was already removed and the next closest tree is getting a little iffy. They can be 4 or 5 foot at the stump when they're 8 years old, and hard, but I don't know if they're usually hollow - lots of disease in second growth trees here).


----------



## Cabinetman (30 Jul 2021)

That means they put on 6 inches a year in diameter! So 3 inches between the growth rings?


----------



## D_W (30 Jul 2021)

Sorry, 80. When they're four or five feet at the stump, they are gigantic trees with a huge canopy. Yes on large growth rings when they're planted in the open to start. There's a county park here that's wooded with the same trees and they'll 2/3rds the size with at least 125 rings. Some are very close together, I guess depending on what lived around them.

I'm guessing at 80 years old because this hilltop was an airport until the late 1930s and the oldest houses in the neighborhood are from the mid 1940s. Old neighborhood, so houses not very american....smaller on relatively small lots. 350 houses on 200 acres including dropoffs. At any rate, the large trees wouldn't have meshed with airplanes well. It went from open pasture to that to houses.

A5 5 feet, rings would be just under 3 per inch on average. Fil has 50 year old pinoaks that are about 30 in diameter. If the neighbors go on vacation, I can measure their 60 or so foot tall tree. It's 16 plus nursery age, probably 25-30 total and chest diameter around 20 inches. Oaks here are choice firewood trees as their density is better when they grow fast, despite it making for ugly lumber.


----------



## D_W (30 Jul 2021)

Those are red and pinoaks. White oak are taller and more slender and more desirable.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (30 Jul 2021)

Cabinetman said:


> That means they put on 6 inches a year in diameter! So 3 inches between the growth rings?


There is apparently a tree planted to prevent soil erosion in Brazil that has four inches between the rings.


----------



## D_W (30 Jul 2021)

I've got a guitar blank made out of honduran mahogany that was supposed to be good flatsawn wood. The ends were sealed. I scraped the wax off after it had some time to complete drying and it's clear that it was an open sun plantation tree. The rings near the pith are an inch apart. 

The old county park trees here are much closer rings at the outside - once the stand was mature, they stopped growing much. 

(looking up pinoak, my neighbor's trees fit the description. "more than 2 feet of growth per year"). The trees at the lower end of the neighborhood are bigger than the size range provided in wiki and definitely a lot taller than 70 feet - the canopy is probably close to 70 feet wide. I'll try to figure out what they are..
...

the discussion of rings is probably a clue that the sycamore tree that I covet wouldn't be that great. Who wants quartersawn wood with rings half an inch apart. 

American sycamore trees prior to settlement could grow large enough to take shelter in after the center of the stump rotted out - looking up the description now (they're generally found near creeks, rivers and draws here), they will grow up to 10 feet in diameter at the trunk second growth, and they shed bark (which some people don't like - it just falls off like they're sick, but it happens constantly). The tree advice site said they destroy sewer lines which explains why nobody plants them. flecking in it can be intense and it works nicely by hand (it's not hard - maybe about as hard as cherry). 









American sycamore producers strive for quality


When dramatic figure is needed, American sycamore gives the most ‘bang for the buck’, say those that know the species.




www.woodshopnews.com





(All that said, really large trees left unmolested are the exception, and the original tall pines were removed for railroad fuel and never came back. Neither did the big disease resistant beaches and along the east coast, like maine, the coast is deciduous as that beats the conifers after clearcutting. Too bad).


----------



## D_W (30 Jul 2021)

Not sure if this can be seen there - goog doesn't do these trees justice - you can get a little bit of an idea of their width comparing them to the sidewalk. They're not 5 feet but probably 4 -the canopy is spectacular and maybe they're older than I think. I always wonder what's in the middle of them when I walk by them (But they're yard trees, so likely to be pretty ugly if opened up - streaks of stain from steel). Extremely sound strong trees with canopies wider than the lots (lot width is about 60 feet.

Glad not to own them. The arborists here have all gone to bucket trucks, which just makes the price even higher, and the shade that they cast is hard on asphalt roofs. This pair is enormously larger than the rest of the trees around, and they're far enough at the edge that they may have been out of the way re: the airport strip. 









Google Maps


Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.




www.google.com


----------



## Jameshow (30 Jul 2021)

D_W said:


> Not sure if this can be seen there - goog doesn't do these trees justice - you can get a little bit of an idea of their width comparing them to the sidewalk. They're not 5 feet but probably 4 -the canopy is spectacular and maybe they're older than I think. I always wonder what's in the middle of them when I walk by them (But they're yard trees, so likely to be pretty ugly if opened up - streaks of stain from steel). Extremely sound strong trees with canopies wider than the lots (lot width is about 60 feet.
> 
> Glad not to own them. The arborists here have all gone to bucket trucks, which just makes the price even higher, and the shade that they cast is hard on asphalt roofs. This pair is enormously larger than the rest of the trees around, and they're far enough at the edge that they may have been out of the way re: the airport strip.
> 
> ...


So which garage has all the fine chisels in....?!!!


----------



## D_W (30 Jul 2021)

hah...one of the dumpier houses, different end of the neighborhood. 

I haven't met a woodworker here in the neighborhood so not much potential trouble with things getting lifted.


----------



## NikNak (31 Jul 2021)

Saw this a while back, it made me chuckle


----------



## llangatwgnedd (31 Jul 2021)

flying haggis said:


> how many amazon depots are anywhere near a rail line?


Swansea


----------



## TRITON (31 Jul 2021)

Well that's me joined the modern world of EV's. Although its more EB as in electric bike.
Deposit paid, hopefully be getting it the coming Wednesday or the week after.


https://www.scott-sports.com/gb/en/product/scott-genius-eride-920-bike


Looking for forward to being able to cycle up hills again


----------



## Spectric (31 Jul 2021)

The Uk government wants to stop diesel use, to much pollution so what about that new carrier, the Elizabeth that requires 4,000,000 litres (880,000 gallons) of F-76 diesel every time it's refueled. Where will they get that if our refineries are no more?


----------



## TRITON (31 Jul 2021)

Spectric said:


> The Uk government wants to stop diesel use, to much pollution so what about that new carrier, the Elizabeth that requires 4,000,000 litres (880,000 gallons) of F-76 diesel every time it's refueled. Where will they get that if our refineries are no more?


It's not that we'll stop using it, its the public will be forced to stop using it. Trucks to trains to aeroplanes, industry et all will still use it as a source of power
Help offset all those import goods sailing up from South America or China, and still be able to state the UK is nearly carbon neutral.


----------



## Jacob (31 Jul 2021)

Spectric said:


> The Uk government wants to stop diesel use, to much pollution so what about that new carrier, the Elizabeth that requires 4,000,000 litres (880,000 gallons) of F-76 diesel every time it's refueled. Where will they get that if our refineries are no more?


Tories are hoping to open another oil field Biggest un-developed oil field in North Sea found is off Shetland by Hurricane Energy | Scottish Energy News the Climate change issue hasn't hit them yet. Scottish Greens call UK Government an 'embarrassment' over Shetland oil project


----------



## Jacob (31 Jul 2021)

TRITON said:


> It's not that we'll stop using it, its the public will be forced to stop using it. Trucks to trains to aeroplanes, industry et all will still use it as a source of power
> Help offset all those import goods sailing up from South America or China, and still be able to state the UK is nearly carbon neutral.


China is catching up fast on climate change: " China is the world's leading country in electricity production from renewable energy sources, with over double the generation of the second-ranking country, the United States." Climate change in China - Wikipedia.


----------



## doctor Bob (31 Jul 2021)

Jacob said:


> China is catching up fast on climate change: " China is the world's leading country in electricity production from renewable energy sources, with over double the generation of the second-ranking country, the United States." Climate change in China - Wikipedia.



I suspect it's like running a private jet but having a solar powered wrist watch.


----------



## D_W (31 Jul 2021)

Spectric said:


> The Uk government wants to stop diesel use, to much pollution so what about that new carrier, the Elizabeth that requires 4,000,000 litres (880,000 gallons) of F-76 diesel every time it's refueled. Where will they get that if our refineries are no more?



There is no way they burn fuel as clean as motor diesel fuel in that boat, either.


----------



## RobinBHM (31 Jul 2021)

doctor Bob said:


> I suspect it's like running a private jet but having a solar powered wrist watch.


1.4 billion people all cooking noodles.

Im not sure me turning my thermostat down 1deg offsets that.

it’s all rather depressing tbh


----------



## Jacob (31 Jul 2021)

doctor Bob said:


> I suspect it's like running a private jet but having a solar powered wrist watch.


 The Chinese are not as daft as they seem. They also have the dubious advantage of being a totalitarian regime and being able to impose carbon policies on their population. Per capita they are still way behind USA and Europe in terms of carbon footprint.
Can't help feeling that the future (if we have one) is going to be very Chinese.


----------



## Terry - Somerset (31 Jul 2021)

The Chinese have demonstrated in 2-3 decades how to go from third world to an economic, technological and military superpower.

They could only build that with energy - and coal was cheap, low tech and locally available.

If they feel the urge to go green (I am not being disparaging) they will do so within 10-20 years. With the departure of Trump and someone a little more rational in the White House the climate agenda may now have genuine international support become a reality.


----------



## D_W (31 Jul 2021)

doctor Bob said:


> I suspect it's like running a private jet but having a solar powered wrist watch.



Pretty much - that was a shiny hook that won't catch too many folks. 

China is 58% coal, 19% crude oil and 8% gas. There's some rounding in there that's off as renewables are 15%.


----------



## D_W (31 Jul 2021)

Jacob said:


> China is catching up fast on climate change: " China is the world's leading country in electricity production from renewable energy sources, with over double the generation of the second-ranking country, the United States." Climate change in China - Wikipedia.



Yes, they burn more fossil fuels each year than they did the prior year. In 1990 35% of their energy was renewable (probably from dams). Since then, they've managed to bring that number down to 15% by increasing consumption and not supplementing the hydropower with renewables at a high enough rate. 

Their use of solar and wind is probably more related to defense strategy than climate anything.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (1 Aug 2021)

World energy use is overwhelmingly dependent on carbon fuels. Low carbon energy is an impressive 15%, but that includes hydro power and nuclear. Wind and solar come in at about 2%. Bear in mind that the energy needs of the global population are endlessly growing, and the increase in renewables just about covers the total energy increase needed each year. We are all permanently dependent on fossil fuels for all of modern life - from sufficient food to long life expectancy to leasure time to lack of slavery.









Global primary energy consumption by source


Primary energy is calculated based on the 'substitution method' which takes account of the inefficiencies in fossil fuel production by converting non-fossil energy into the energy inputs required if they had the same conversion losses as fossil fuels.




ourworldindata.org





The UK is, apparently, about to run out of electricity. It already imports more than 10% from the continent, but the Europeans are also going green and so it may not be an option to import for much longer, as the foreigners will need it themselves. 

"This leaves the UK with a big hole in its electricity mix in the 2020s _even if_ the sole aim of the policy is just to replace coal. Throughout the last year, the UK has imported electricity via undersea cables in every month. In the best month – July 2020 – just two percent of our electricity was imported. In the worst month – June 2021 – 13 percent of our electricity was imported. As coal plants close and older nuclear plants are decommissioned, the demand for imported electricity is expected to rise. Although whether that electricity will be available is a moot point given that France and Belgium are also decommissioning nuclear power plants and most of continental Europe is switching to intermittent renewable energy."

The above is a quote from When green gets real


----------



## Jester129 (1 Aug 2021)

£4,800 for an electric bike??? WTF??? That could buy you a motor scooter or a second-hand motorbike!


----------



## NormanB (1 Aug 2021)

D_W said:


> There is no way they burn fuel as clean as motor diesel fuel in that boat, either.


It’s probably a whole lot cleaner if you are talking about the amount of suspended solids/water in the fuel as they have extensive fuel management systems, including centrifuges, pre filters and coalescers. It is essentially aviation fuel standards of cleanliness - because their generation plant includes two big fat marinised aircraft gas turbine driven generators, as well as diesel generators.

if you are talking green issues then their impact on the environment then it is the same effect as a diesel powered motorboat - obviously greater than any one of them because of the volume being burned.

Obviously CVN are much greener and only the air wing is in need of electrifying.


----------



## Jacob (1 Aug 2021)

Trainee neophyte said:


> World energy use is overwhelmingly dependent on carbon fuels. Low carbon energy is an impressive 15%, but that includes hydro power and nuclear. Wind and solar come in at about 2%. Bear in mind that the energy needs of the global population are endlessly growing, and the increase in renewables just about covers the total energy increase needed each year. We are all permanently dependent on fossil fuels for all of modern life - from sufficient food to long life expectancy to leasure time to lack of slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for Home looks jolly interesting, though appears to be only concerned about the hopelessness of everything. Maybe he's right.


----------



## Terry - Somerset (1 Aug 2021)

Building sufficient green capacity is entirely feasible if the will is there. It is rapidly becoming cost competitive with fossil fuels which make investment more plausible even without subsidies.

National Grid - since 2012 total demand has fallen from 36GW to 31GW. 

Renewables have increased from 2GW to 7GW. Interconnect is currently 3GW. Fossil fuel generation has halved from 25GW to 13GW. Other sources (mainly nuclear and biomass) have remained fairly constant at 8GW.

There are some issues however:

to what extent can energy efficiency measures reduce demand further, as EV (the subject of this thread) are likely to increase materially
how to manage the variability inherent in solar and wind energy - storage, alternative generating capacity, etc.


----------



## Jacob (1 Aug 2021)

Terry - Somerset said:


> Building sufficient green capacity is entirely feasible if the will is there. It is rapidly becoming cost competitive with fossil fuels which make investment more plausible even without subsidies.
> 
> National Grid - since 2012 total demand has fallen from 36GW to 31GW.
> 
> ...


Mr Doom & Gloom (thanks TN!) says no chance Are you still buying this?

This from 2012. The figures would be better now by a small margin A reality check on renewables


----------



## Spectric (1 Aug 2021)

D_W said:


> China is 58% coal, 19% crude oil and 8% gas. There's some rounding in there that's off as renewables are 15%.


What about hydro, they have a very large set of dams on the Yangtze river, producing something like 100 billion kilowatt hours, the largest power generating plant on earth and producing more than fifteen nuclear plants.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (1 Aug 2021)

Jacob said:


> Mr Doom & Gloom (thanks TN!) says no chance


I've been reading a bit about the ban on gas central heating and it's conversion to electricity. Apparently it will be cheaper to bulldoze the average older house and start again, rather than try to retrofit sufficient insulation and install electric heat pumps. Oh, and if you do fork out the cost of a house to change your heating system, the running costs are significantly higher than gas. Who voted for _that_? Especially as the electricity will be mostly produced by burning...gas.

I am thinking of investing in yellow vest manufacture - looks like they will be in demand soon.


----------



## Spectric (1 Aug 2021)

Trainee neophyte said:


> I've been reading a bit about the ban on gas central heating and it's conversion to electricity. Apparently it will be cheaper to bulldoze the average older house and start again,


That is very true, with buildings in very poor condition they are often accessed against the cost of clearance and rebuild against cost of renovation. But many of these would be renovated if the criteria was like for like, ie all character and detail must remain rather than building just a characterless set of boxes. Also when you look at the modern house you can find it very hard to find any wood, all MDF and joist/trusses manufactured from OSB sheets rather than timber trusses.


----------



## D_W (1 Aug 2021)

Spectric said:


> What about hydro, they have a very large set of dams on the Yangtze river, producing something like 100 billion kilowatt hours, the largest power generating plant on earth and producing more than fifteen nuclear plants.



That's why they used to have such a high percent renewable, due to the dams. As their consumption has tripled or more, they haven't kept up, just mostly coal and gas. They are back to about 15 percent or so. I believe nuclear was about 20 percent in the US ( lower in china), but not sure if it is now. It's having economic difficulties against gas and wind.


----------



## Spectric (1 Aug 2021)

That is the big issue, we are trying to solve a growing problem and really the bottom line is that we have too many people living on this planet, as population grows they produce more waste and use more resources so we are just trying to keep pace. The output from the Chinese hydro is absolutely an amazing feat of engineering yet they have outgrown it already.


----------



## TRITON (1 Aug 2021)

Jester129 said:


> £4,800 for an electric bike??? WTF??? That could buy you a motor scooter or a second-hand motorbike!


I know, but ive no license and tbh ive been a cyclist for 25 years, so its what im used to and getting on these old legs need a bit of assistance getting up the hills,especially when carrying shopping.
The cost of all 'capable' full suspension bikes is partly down to the cost of the motor and battery taking up about £1800, and in the cycling world, you get what you pay for component wise. For example a 3000-3500 bike, the components are just not up to any sort of intensive use or longevity. On a suspension bike the main parts are the suspension bits, on the cheaper options, these would retail at about £250 for the fork, £150 for the shock. By going the slightly more expensive, you get a fork that retails at nearly a grand and a shock retails about £350-400 Plus suspension frames can start about the thousand mark. So when you deduct that along with the expensive motor and battery, you can actually see that the deal is quite a good one. This bike I've bought can handle real hard on mtbing, whereas the cheaper bike cannot. 20 years of building bikes have taught me much on bikes,components and their real worth.


----------



## ian33a (2 Aug 2021)

TRITON said:


> I know, but ive no license and tbh ive been a cyclist for 25 years, so its what im used to and getting on these old legs need a bit of assistance getting up the hills,especially when carrying shopping.
> The cost of all 'capable' full suspension bikes is partly down to the cost of the motor and battery taking up about £1800, and in the cycling world, you get what you pay for component wise. For example a 3000-3500 bike, the components are just not up to any sort of intensive use or longevity. On a suspension bike the main parts are the suspension bits, on the cheaper options, these would retail at about £250 for the fork, £150 for the shock. By going the slightly more expensive, you get a fork that retails at nearly a grand and a shock retails about £350-400 Plus suspension frames can start about the thousand mark. So when you deduct that along with the expensive motor and battery, you can actually see that the deal is quite a good one. This bike I've bought can handle real hard on mtbing, whereas the cheaper bike cannot. 20 years of building bikes have taught me much on bikes,components and their real worth.



Beyond a certain point the price you pay for a bike is down to demand and what a consumer is prepared to pay in order to be different. Off road bikes price hike, as you have stated based upon ruggedness of components - no sense single track riding and snapping forks every twenty minutes. Road bikes tend to be priced based upon weight and the lighter the bike the more it costs. Just don't put a lump of lard like me on a £10K light weight road bike and expect Strava bests and local legends on every segment.

Below a certain price a bike is capable but not exceptional and becomes an introductory mode of transport which craves improvement. 

£4,800 actually isn't that much to spend on a non electric bike let alone one with a motor and a battery pack and control hardware. Yes, if you are from the cycling clips and three speed hub based gears then £4,800 seems like a fortune. It's also a daft investment if you use it to ride to the station and back as it's a recipe to throw your money away. If you enjoy cycling and can afford and justify it, why not?

Me ? : off road and road cycling but, just because it's easier to get out there, it's more road cycling these days. I'm still able to turn the cranks myself and turn in decent enough times but there are times when dragging a heavy mountain bike up an incline seems like a chore that an electric motor would take away. ... but not quite yet. Same is true for electric cars, still too much in love with internal combustion but I can see the appeal of EV's.


----------



## Terry - Somerset (2 Aug 2021)

A £4-5k bike probably aligns with a £80-100k car.

Bikes and cars can both deliver 80%+ of the functionality at 20% of the cost. Bikes I can't comment on, but a £20k hatchback will do precisely what a £100k premium 4WD or high performance car will deliver - unless crossing deserts or track days are part of the requirement.

Getting 2-5 people from A-B on normal roads - a modern hatch is entirely capable with minimum stress of covering 400 miles in a day and comfortably exceeding speed limits (if wanted)

For most of us the 20% is generally what can be reasonably afforded. But if you have the cash and wish to indulge (often the honest reason) or have a specialist requirement (occassionally the case) - it is just a personal choice.


----------



## Jameshow (2 Aug 2021)

Take a Cannondale supersix hi mod ultegra is £5000 dura ace £10,000 yet the ultegra is 99% of the durace. 

Or further down the pecking order a 105 at £2500 is 95% of the dura ace bike. 

Unless racing do you really need top drawer bikes probably not! Races have been win on ultegra bikes that's for sure! 

Cheers James


----------



## niemeyjt (2 Aug 2021)

Remember the physics - a circuit needs at least two connections - a feed and a return. Trains and trams use one conductor overhead for feed with a return through steel wheels and steel tracks.

Buses, on the other hand, with rubber tyres and no metal tracks need two overhead lines for feed and return. 

Some of the mock-up photos do show the double pickups overhead - but many seem to overlook it. And the complexity of getting two wires to cross and branch without short circuits is greater than a single line like a train (or dodgem)

Sure, here in Switzerland we have electric buses - and the overhead wires do split and cross - but at set points, with the bus following a known fixed route and probably at not much over 30kph. None of which matches the projected lorry usage. And the buses also have a diesel engine / generator and it is used.

And let's not get onto the concept of stupid motorways - and closing a lane!

My preference is trains - but what a mistake to build on all the goods yards. Mind you, if they can flatten houses for HS2 I am sure they can flatten more for replacement goods yards.


----------



## Jacob (2 Aug 2021)

niemeyjt said:


> Remember the physics - a circuit needs at least two connections - a feed and a return. Trains and trams use one conductor overhead for feed with a return through steel wheels and steel tracks.
> 
> Buses, on the other hand, with rubber tyres and no metal tracks need two overhead lines for feed and return.
> 
> ...


Yes trains a good idea!
Trolley buses used to change connectors at junctions. Conductor would hop out with a long bamboo pole and swap pickups from one set to another. I was that man, briefly, during one of my many failed attempts at a career.
Battery EVs have a double demand - not only have to carry a battery but also have to have electricity conducted to a charging point. Not a good idea except for short trips, milk floats etc.


----------



## xy mosian (2 Aug 2021)

Jacob said:


> Trolley buses used to change connectors at junctions. Conductor would hop out with a long bamboo pole and swap pickups from one set to another.



The system here, in Bradford, was slightly different. The points were changed, when needed, by a dip of the 'acelerator'. Timing was a real art. Sometimes the driver got it wrong, this generated a loud bang and cheer from the passengers. That was the time the conductor got out his long pole, bamboo with hook, to re-attach. This was in 1969 when I arrived here.
geoff


----------



## D_W (2 Aug 2021)

TRITON said:


> I know, but ive no license and tbh ive been a cyclist for 25 years, so its what im used to and getting on these old legs need a bit of assistance getting up the hills,especially when carrying shopping.
> The cost of all 'capable' full suspension bikes is partly down to the cost of the motor and battery taking up about £1800, and in the cycling world, you get what you pay for component wise. For example a 3000-3500 bike, the components are just not up to any sort of intensive use or longevity. On a suspension bike the main parts are the suspension bits, on the cheaper options, these would retail at about £250 for the fork, £150 for the shock. By going the slightly more expensive, you get a fork that retails at nearly a grand and a shock retails about £350-400 Plus suspension frames can start about the thousand mark. So when you deduct that along with the expensive motor and battery, you can actually see that the deal is quite a good one. This bike I've bought can handle real hard on mtbing, whereas the cheaper bike cannot. 20 years of building bikes have taught me much on bikes,components and their real worth.



Once you get the batteries doing the work for you, you can just go to all steel and rigid!

(of course, that won't help your tail, nor will it help when you're past battery range). I couldn't begin to comment on the composites as matrix steel was the last bike I got that I paid attention to (18 pounds for a road bike or slightly more and at the time, composite was coming along and taking a few pounds off and was the bees knees, supposedly). 

I see the world of baseball bats has been taken over by composites and some of them have a swing life of about 100  They are "game bats" that can cost $100 to $500. Sitting behind my desk, I have a bat from 1992 that is illegal in current competition (Too hot) that has hit thousands of balls and could still hit illegally long home runs - those rules didn't exist when I was a kid, though - they came about due to ball speeds bettering reaction time with predictable results. We just played a little on edge back then if you were pitching or at third base.

Joking aside, I like to think of the ebikes and such as cost per mile after maintenance and repair. When they exceed a decent used car, it starts to elicit scrunch face.


----------



## Spectric (2 Aug 2021)

Trains have to be the better solution, an ICE lorry can carry bout 38 tonnes, a modern freight train can move 90 containers, thats a lot less lorries and no issue with making them electric. Both Southampton and London Gateway are using new 775 metre freight trains, operated by freightliner and will take 300,000 trucks off our roads each year with other ports looking to follow so the future is railway, back to where the victorians new about moving people and cargo.


----------



## D_W (2 Aug 2021)

Jacob said:


> Yes trains a good idea!
> Trolley buses used to change connectors at junctions. Conductor would hop out with a long bamboo pole and swap pickups from one set to another. I was that man, briefly, during one of my many failed attempts at a career.
> Battery EVs have a double demand - not only have to carry a battery but also have to have electricity conducted to a charging point. Not a good idea except for short trips, milk floats etc.



transit rail burns about 1 gallon for each 50 passenger miles. That's not that great. The quality of the fuel and the emissions may also not be that strict. 

A battery EV of almost any kind will match that. 

The *potential* efficiency of transit rail is much higher, but that assumes that the rail only runs at capacity - that figure is about 4 times higher than the actual burned fuel. 

Actual transit bus experience in the US is about 25 miles per gallon, but there's no need to pay to park and the buses don't pay fuel taxes here - so they're not really burning less, but they're not paying about 1/4th of the fuel cost that other means need to.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (2 Aug 2021)

Spectric said:


> Both Southampton and London Gateway are using new 775 metre freight trains, operated by freightliner and will take 300,000 trucks off our roads each year ...


So these trains must go door to door?


----------



## D_W (2 Aug 2021)

Spectric said:


> Trains have to be the better solution, an ICE lorry can carry bout 38 tonnes, a modern freight train can move 90 containers, thats a lot less lorries and no issue with making them electric. Both Southampton and London Gateway are using new 775 metre freight trains, operated by freightliner and will take 300,000 trucks off our roads each year with other ports looking to follow so the future is railway, back to where the victorians new about moving people and cargo.



maximum potential ton miles for trains here is about 500, but you can more easily load a freight train than you can a heavy passenger train (or commuter rail) with lots of pounds of people. 

The US DOE pegs transit rail at 50 miles per person per gallon, and under 40 for commuter rail. Maybe your commuter rail is better utilized there (it's well utilized here - it's just limited in geographic scope, or it would be worse.)

Ton miles of freight by truck here is something like 150 miles per gallon for each ton of freight. (that's assuming slightly greater than 1/2 loaded on average vs. the road weight limits). I don't know what freight trains actually do here - it's not 500.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (2 Aug 2021)

This is different:









Rail versus road — Institute of Economic Affairs


Decades of propaganda have established the myth that railways cost much less, are far safer, have much more capacity, use … Continue reading "Rail versus road"




iea.org.uk


----------



## Cabinetman (2 Aug 2021)

Trainee neophyte said:


> This is different:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If you compare the way a train is built with cast-iron wheels etc, to a coach or truck it seems obvious to me that the amount of energy needed to make it go must be higher for trains.
I’ve always found it very annoying that the barriers come down and umpteen cars and their passengers have to stop and watch a train with two people on it trundle past. It’s never made any sense to me at all. And when the train stops the passengers have to then get in their cars, failing that queue up and pay again to use another form of transport it’s just so inconvenient. 
Never liked the things- just in case you hadn’t guessed.


----------



## ian33a (3 Aug 2021)

Jameshow said:


> Take a Cannondale supersix hi mod ultegra is £5000 dura ace £10,000 yet the ultegra is 99% of the durace.
> 
> Or further down the pecking order a 105 at £2500 is 95% of the dura ace bike.
> 
> ...



The only spanner in the works is that Dura-ace and Ultegra can be set up with electric Di2 shift while 105 and below cannot. 

For many, Di2 is of no interest. For me, and it's just my choice, it's a must have and I wouldn't now buy a road bike without an electric shift.

Otherwise, I agree - Dura-ace isn't worth the extra cost above Ultegra.


----------



## MikeJhn (3 Aug 2021)

I hope DI2 is more reliable than the Mavic electric shift of twenty years ago, many a day I would come back from a ride on a fixed wheel.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (3 Aug 2021)

Railways - a 19th century solution to an 18th century problem.


----------



## Jacob (3 Aug 2021)

This is interesting. I'd never heard of the "Electrobat" etc The lost history of the electric car – and what it tells us about the future of transport
The don't use the expression "boys' toys" but it is certainly was a theme, from early days.


----------



## TominDales (3 Aug 2021)

Jacob said:


> Simple - no batteries required - tried and tested.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Interesting. In Germany there is already a study underway on a motorway for this. The truck will still need a battery to get it from the motorway to the delivery point. This seems a good way to solve the range problem for long range delivery. Also as autonomous vehicle come in, they can pack more trucks into the EV lane and in effect cheaply expand the rail network.
The alternative is a biofuel or hydrogen, both are much less efficient. It will however be a huge investment electrify the major trunk roads.


----------



## TominDales (3 Aug 2021)

Spectric said:


> If you really think about the proposal then it is completely stupid and absurd, just like HS2 and many other big government projects like cross rail which will be no use once the sea levels rise, so has the government got a secret money tree or something because they seem to want to waste as much money as they can.
> 
> They want to electrify motorways so electric lorries can be used, do we not already have electrified routes called railways! so put the containers onto the railways for transport between major hubs and then smaller vehicles to deliver within a radius of each hub. Is the human race losing the inteligence to think or is it that dummmmies work for the government in a special stupidity department, perhaps as we have ministers for everthing these days there will be a minister for stupidity and can have an office near to the minister for farting.


UK rail is pretty much at capacity. And lots of problems trying to share lines between high speed passenger and rail freight. A mix of systems is the likely answer. The problem with electrifying the motorway will be up-front cost, so I guess it will be rolled out slower than required.


----------



## Jacob (3 Aug 2021)

TominDales said:


> UK rail is pretty much at capacity. And lots of problems trying to share lines between high speed passenger and rail freight. A mix of systems is the likely answer. The problem with electrifying the motorway will be up-front cost, so I guess it will be rolled out slower than required.


The other argument for HS2 is that it will take traffic from other lines and benefit the whole network. 
Personally I think the future is going to be stranger than we think.


----------



## Spectric (3 Aug 2021)

Jacob said:


> Personally I think the future is going to be stranger than we think.


If globally we do not get our carbon emisions to almost zero within five years then listening to the scientist it will be stranger but also much shorter!


----------



## TominDales (3 Aug 2021)

MikeJhn said:


> Its the idiocy of the drivers who are only doing 0.5mph more than the lorry they are overtaking, foot flat to the floor don't lift it until you reach your destination.


I suspect it is also to do with the time pressure some of the drivers are under. Our Sainsbury delivery drivers were always hassling to save time and trying to arrive earlier than the booked slot, so we switched to Tesco where they put customer service and drivers health higher up the pecking order.


----------



## TominDales (3 Aug 2021)

D_W said:


> Only 9 dollars a gallon and reformed from natural gas.


that is grey hydrogen, to get blue hydrogen you have to pump the co2 back into the gas caverns at great pressure. Green hydrogen is from electrolysis. 
We are likely to have a mix of fuels, EVs hydrogen, bio/sustainable. Scania believe battery EV will outperform hydrogen for trucks so the debate is not finished. 
Personally I like the idea of a wired motorway as it will reduce the size of batteries on-board which will reduce the need to mine metals such as Nickle and cobalt. Just more copper and aluminium for the wires.


----------



## Terry - Somerset (3 Aug 2021)

Wired motorways (induction??) seems sensible. If HGVs also carry onboard battery packs for the non-motorway segment of their journey, it may be that not all motorways need wiring for their entire length. 

Wired sections would only need to be installed during other upgrades or repairs. 

Being non-intrusive other (ICE) HGVs could continue to use the whole motorway - probably until there is sufficient cabling and appropriately equipped vehicles to justify a dedicated lane with automated driving systems.

Only question - what percentage of the road would need electrification - with onboard batteries it would not need 100% - but would it be feasible with 20%, 30% 40% etc etc.


----------



## TominDales (3 Aug 2021)

Terry - Somerset said:


> The most intelligent solution by a considerable margin is to behave intelligently.
> 
> Whether trains taking the strain of HGVs is economically or environmentally sound is worth debating. Assuming that anyone who questions the use of trains displacing road freight is making a solely financial judgement is misplaced.
> 
> ...


Some of this is already happening through pressure for corporate responsibility. 

The guys near us in Sunderland have looked a how many miles their lithium and other raw material travels to make a battery. Supply chains have grown to be lean and efficient, but the low cost of shipping goods around the globe meant that distance travelled did not figure before.

The Net Zero agenda is getting this number into the mix. We will see measure for on-shoring key materials. Its a start, but intimately recycling and circular economy will mean localisation of manufacturing and distribution. 

A few years ago Corus imported 15m tonnes of iron or and the UK exported 8mte of scrap steel, because we didn't have electric arc furnaces in the UK, which is now the basis of liberty and other steel production. JLR have used 75% recycled aluminium in their car body panels since 2014 and aim to get this figure up to 90%.
I would not take a big insentive to roll this kind of programme out nationally to other materails.


----------



## Topaz (3 Aug 2021)

Slightly off-topic: last weekend (30/07-1/08) there was reported to be, at times, 1000 kms of traffic jams in France. A growing proportion of those stuck will probably have been EV's. 
Did they all reach their destination or charging point before the "juice" ran out ? 
"Yes, it really is flat. Where's the Tesla truck ?"
It is strange, but I have yet to see any reports of lifeless cars, in France or elsewhere.
Do UKWS members have any (anecdotal) sightings of this since EV started to appear on our roads ?


----------



## TominDales (3 Aug 2021)

Terry - Somerset said:


> Wired motorways (induction??) seems sensible. If HGVs also carry onboard battery packs for the non-motorway segment of their journey, it may be that not all motorways need wiring for their entire length.
> 
> Wired sections would only need to be installed during other upgrades or repairs.
> 
> ...


That may be the way to roll our a national programme. As the length of motorway wire extends the size of battery in the truck can come down. There would need to be a clever meter charging system to provide the right insensitive for someone to wire up the motorway and get their investment back. Another think it could do is have variable tariffs at different times of day etc to smooth out traffic flow.


----------



## D_W (3 Aug 2021)

Jacob said:


> The other argument for HS2 is that it will take traffic from other lines and benefit the whole network.
> Personally I think the future is going to be stranger than we think.



It will be for the chicken littles who are all over the place right now.


----------



## Spectric (3 Aug 2021)

Terry - Somerset said:


> Wired motorways (induction??) seems sensible.


Addressing the means to provide propulsion is just a part of the story, what you also need is to look at is reducing friction and minimising drag due to aerodynamics. To provide propulsion through induction is going to need a lot of energy, in a transformer it is very efficient because you have the iron core that creates a more concentrated field and good coupling factor K, with an air core the efficiency is lost so more power required. Also what about the health aspect, subjecting people to high magnetic fields is not ideal, just like living in the wrong orientation close to high voltage overhead power lines.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (3 Aug 2021)

Topaz said:


> Did they all reach their destination or charging point before the "juice" ran out ?


Far be it for me to sing the praises of electric cars, but if they are not moving, they are not consuming power. Unlike ICE cars which tend to have the engine running even when stationary, especially when stop start or crawling along. Sitting in a hot car with no air con, on the other hand...


----------



## Lons (3 Aug 2021)

Trainee neophyte said:


> Far be it for me to sing the praises of electric cars, but if they are not moving, they are not consuming power. Unlike ICE cars which tend to have the engine running even when stationary, especially when stop start or crawling along. Sitting in a hot car with no air con, on the other hand...


The vast majority of modern newish ICE cars have stop start systems though they can be switched off so tend not to have the engines running if used correctly, some systems are better than others of course, I've had that system on my last 3 cars and EVs still consume power when stationary, what about the aircon, radio, lights, and system modules for example.


----------



## Terry - Somerset (4 Aug 2021)

Some years ago whilst stuck in a traffic jam the engine temperature of my 2L diesel started to fall and the heater ran cold.

External temperature was ~2C so the heater was somewhat useful!

Rev the engine for a minute and heat returned. I can only conclude that the fuel consumption in an idling diesel engine is utterly negligible.


----------



## Cabinetman (4 Aug 2021)

The only thing I can think apart from that, is that maybe your fan was permanently on – the thermostat was faulty?


----------



## niemeyjt (4 Aug 2021)

Jacob said:


> The other argument for HS2 is that it will take traffic from other lines and benefit the whole network.
> Personally I think the future is going to be stranger than we think.



I think you will also find the HS2 Loading Gauge, as with HS1, will be to latest GC European Standards which when connected will allow freight to/from Europe by rail in largest containers and to put lorries on trains like in Switzerland.

Mind you, how journeys will be faster than they are now when a 250kph Express is stuck behind freight train running at half that speed remains to be seen.


----------



## Ozi (4 Aug 2021)

Terry - Somerset said:


> Some years ago whilst stuck in a traffic jam the engine temperature of my 2L diesel started to fall and the heater ran cold.
> 
> External temperature was ~2C so the heater was somewhat useful!
> 
> Rev the engine for a minute and heat returned. I can only conclude that the fuel consumption in an idling diesel engine is utterly negligible.


The main issue with idling engines particularly diesels is the emissions NOX and particulate, very bad for air quality in town. Also with electric motors the efficiency is almost independent of speed.


----------



## Suffolk Brian (4 Aug 2021)

I must hold up my hand and confess to an affection for trains, particularly of the steam kind. My father worked for British Rail for over 40 years, and he often said that he couldn’t retire quick enough. It was often quoted at the time that freight moved around the rail network at an average speed of 5 mph. Hopefully we can/could/should do better than that nowadays.


----------



## MikeJhn (4 Aug 2021)

TominDales said:


> I suspect it is also to do with the time pressure some of the drivers are under. Our Sainsbury delivery drivers were always hassling to save time and trying to arrive earlier than the booked slot, so we switched to Tesco where they put customer service and drivers health higher up the pecking order.


Also changed to Tesco during the pandemic, more reliable and slot choice, and the quality of food is on par with Sainsbury's, also get deliveries from Waitrose, much better quality and varied choise, but expensive in comparison.


----------



## RobinBHM (4 Aug 2021)

MikeJhn said:


> Also changed to Tesco during the pandemic, more reliable and slot choice, and the quality of food is on par with Sainsbury's, also get deliveries from Waitrose, much better quality and varied choise, but expensive in comparison.


and Tesco's delivery saver is great -its allows an extra week ahead and all deliveries are free.

mind you Tesco meat and veg is pretty terrible compared to Waitrose, or even Lidl/Aldi


----------



## Phil Pascoe (4 Aug 2021)

Around here Tesco has the best fruit of all of them.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (4 Aug 2021)

Phil Pascoe said:


> Around here Tesco has the best fruit of all of them.


I didn't think you were allowed to call people that any more. Even if he does swish.


----------



## RobinBHM (4 Aug 2021)

Phil Pascoe said:


> Around here Tesco has the best fruit of all of them.


So it’s you getting all the best fruit


----------



## Cooper (4 Aug 2021)

Who needs an EV car when you can fly?





__





Icaro electric trike






www.icaro2000.com


----------



## Spectric (5 Aug 2021)

What we need is not EV's with wheels but electric boats, the amount of rain we seem to get now puts an end to EV's, or perhaps some form of hover craft.


----------



## TRITON (5 Aug 2021)

Cooper said:


> Who needs an EV car when you can fly?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


A bit tricky on the highstreet 


Spectric said:


> What we need is not EV's with wheels but electric boats, the amount of rain we seem to get now puts an end to EV's, or perhaps some form of hover craft.


Watched a vid the other week on E-Canal boats.


----------



## TominDales (5 Aug 2021)

Suffolk Brian said:


> I must hold up my hand and confess to an affection for trains, particularly of the steam kind. My father worked for British Rail for over 40 years, and he often said that he couldn’t retire quick enough. It was often quoted at the time that freight moved around the rail network at an average speed of 5 mph. Hopefully we can/could/should do better than that nowadays.


I share your affection to train travel, however I also share your pessimism for rail freight.

About 25 years ago the rail siding that unloaded ICI's methanol made at its Teesside works (Billingham) to its Runcorn works (Rocksavage) subsided and was out of action for months. During that time they switch to road transport, instead of 1000s tonnes in one shipment every few days in went in a continuous stream of 40te road tankers day and night. The costs plummeted, not only that but the working capital fell as stocktanks and inventories could be reduced, it became like a just in time basis. The whole thing was more reliable, so much so that they closed the line.

We found a similar thing shipping goods to Spain via the channel in road rather than the previous ships and rails operations across Spain. The freight times were incredibly long just crossing Spain took 2 weeks.
By contrast I had to buy thousands of tonnes of a chemical from a Russian plant on the Mongolian boarder and the good arrived by rail 5000 miles from the Mongol border to Rotterdam in about 2 weeks at very completive rates. I presume Siberia relies on its rail or subsidises it. It was cheaper than (what was low cost sea frieght via China at the time.


----------



## Terry - Somerset (5 Aug 2021)

I can understand how bulk freight by rail could once have made sense. As a child living in a house that backed on to a main line I occasionally saw very long freight trains moving slowly.

In those days the UK needed bulk transport for iron ore for steel works, coal for power stations, etc. The motorway network was relatively undeveloped and the ability of trucks to haul heavy loads at reasonable speeds was limited.

We now have a better (albeit congested) motorway network and trucks routinely capable of hauling large loads. We have lost most of our bulk industries for one reason or another.

The bulk freight argument for rail seems to have gone much the same way as the argument for maintaining the canals. Canals - an 18th century development rendered largely obselete by rail in the 19th. Rail - a 19th century phenomenon past its best by the end of the 20th.


----------



## Jacob (6 Aug 2021)

Terry - Somerset said:


> ...
> 
> The bulk freight argument for rail seems to have gone much the same way as the argument for maintaining the canals. Canals - an 18th century development rendered largely obselete by rail in the 19th. Rail - a 19th century phenomenon past its best by the end of the 20th.


Maybe so but with things as they are we are faced with urgent need for radical change. 
It looks extremely unlikely that technological advance will provide this, except marginally, so the alternative will be more in the way of a retreat; by a route we choose, or if not, by a route forced upon us.
Some things could be done very quickly e.g. moving from animal farming Reduce methane or face climate catastrophe, scientists warn but it doesn't seem to be on any popular agenda.
COP26 should be very significant.


----------



## Droogs (27 Aug 2021)

This is quite a interesting developement regarding BYD


----------



## Droogs (29 Aug 2021)

Is this the future of container ships








World's first crewless, zero emissions cargo ship will set sail in Norway


The Yara Birkeland is what its builders call the world's first zero-emission, autonomous cargo ship.




edition.cnn.com


----------

