climate change

[noosard]

Nicely put Tam

[rick]

I am slightly more optimistic. On the electricity front, SOME countries have made significant moves away from fossil fuels in the last 20 years The UK got 75% of its electricity from fossil fuels in 2000, now around 40% (mainly gas). Coal has virtually disappeared as a source of electricity in the UK. Renewables provide over 30% (in 2000 only 2.5%). Also, electricity production has fallen by 25%, due partially to efficiency savings. It shows where there is a will, the way exists.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/427 ... eneration/

The problem is that improved living standards in the world means that energy demand is still increasing massively. Only have to look at Udon Thani - in the villages around Udon, air conditioners where a rarity 15 years ago, now every other house has one. Also car numbers have boomed.

Also, renewable energy is now the cheapest, and could provide massive savings (12 trillion by 2050).

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62892013

[Whistler]

I am typically optimistic, but also a realist. The alarm bells on climate change started ringing louder and louder over the past few decades. For much of that time, the calls to action were dismissed as coming from over the top greenies.

They pointed out a couple of things, that have proven to be irrefutably correct. Increased CO2 in the atmosphere is directly related to the burning of fossil fuels. If you burn a tonne of coal we know it will release an astonishing 2.86 tonnes of CO2. Ditto burning other hydrocarbons. We know how much we burn each year so can accurately calculate why atmospheric CO2 levels have increased by about 50% in my lifetime.

These harbingers of climatic doom also predicted what this increased CO2 would do to our weather. Melting of glaciers and polar ice caps, more severe and more frequent extreme weather patterns. Now this has already started average temperatures have risen as predicted, extreme storms and rainfall as predicted, rising seas as predicted.

We are already seeing seeing the consequences in so many ways. Pakistan 30% flooded, the most severe droughts in many places including huge portions of the USA. Also in less severe ways. Tradition grape varieties in Australia are seeing vines ripped out of the ground to be be replaced with more heat tolerant varieties. More dams being built creating water shortages downstream, desserts growing. Hitting 100 degrees Fahrenheit in UK was rare, now it happens almost every year.

Now the somber thought that the CO2 levels in the air may take hundreds of thousands of years to reduce to tolerable levels and the growth in emissions will continue to grow for decades to come. Our planet is irreversibly damaged, we will, as human beings have to adapt to that reality.

[noosard]

these deserts cause the waistline to increase

[tamada]

Any EV protagonists out there? Thinking of jumping on the EV band wagon?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alanohnsma ... al-mining/

[Whistler]

Any EV protagonists out there? Thinking of jumping on the EV band wagon?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alanohnsma ... al-mining/

An interesting article, but I think it ignores another side of the impact of EV's. How many fossil fuel facilities will close as result of EVs replacing. Less oil will be needed, it would be great to see the trade off.

I am moving to a view that EV's will be a part of alternative transport, maybe as little as 20%.. They are already placing a strain on electricity grids and take too long to recharge. Even if we move towards a stop and swap battery system, recharging is kinda clumsy.

I am not knocking EVs, they will be great for some, such as inner city drivers who do not knock up a lot of kilometres. I am looking forward to more hybrids, particularly hydrogen powered hybrids. If these take off, they will be cheaper, lighter and more practical for almost all types of road transport.

[parrot]

Back in the early 2000's there was a lot of doom and gloom about the US's dependence on foreign oil/gas........then new methods to extract shale gas were discovered and by 2019 natural gas reserves more than doubled from that of the early 1990s.
There are some interesting stories about the idea of mining deep sea modules.....still in the early stages of development, but could very provide the necessary minerals necessary for the EV revolution. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/202 ... dules.html
There's a huge growing demand for these minerals....whether they're taking from traditional earth mines or from the deep sea, I've confidence that people will figure out a way to meet the demand. No doubt there will be plenty of 'nimby' protests, although people don't seem to mind if they're mined in Southeast Asia, China, or Africa. In the meantime, smart people are figuring out ways to power things many thought not possible.....semi-tractor trailers, pickups, ?airplanes?. Just in my small village, there are 4 elderly folks who get around on their 3 wheel battery operated trikes......otherwise they'd be homebound and dependent on others to go to the market for them.
I realize it's comparing apples to mangoes, but
How The Mobile Phone Market Has Evolved Since 1993
The mobile phone landscape looks drastically different today than it did three decades ago.
In 1983, the American company launched one of the world’s first commercially available mobile phones—the DynaTAC 8000X. The revolutionary analog phone cost nearly $4,000 and offered users up to 30 minutes of talk time before needing to be recharged. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cp/how ... ince-1993/
My current phone cost about $700 and goes a full day and a half on a charge. I still use my desktop, but I can do pretty much everything on my mobile if need be.

[Barney]

Any EV protagonists out there? Thinking of jumping on the EV band wagon?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alanohnsma ... al-mining/

It’s not only massive numbers of mines required but an equally number of ore processing plants.
First they have to find the ore (mostly rare earth minerals), they haven’t been found yet, and the greenies won’t let most start anyway, then you hi dig it up then process. Those who have never been involved in mining or for that matter O&G have no concept of how it all happens to get to a usable product.
The relationship of a ton of ore required to be dug to exactly how much mineral you get is totally not in the equation for those with an agenda.
Take coal, 100 % use. No processing. Dig it up and put in the power station or steel furnace.
Some rare earth minerals would be at very best 2%. So perhaps 1 ton to get 20 kg, and that’s after a massive processing plant or 2 using other chemicals. All with non environmentally chemical additives which need dumping.
All requiring more and more power.
It’s a pipe dream to just dig up the earths crust with 1000’s of mines.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Whistler]

Here we go again.

5.3 tonne of lithium carbonate ore produces 1 tonne of lithium. Not 2% closer to 20%.

As for coal 100% usable nonsense. Drive around Singleton or any other open cut coal mine and you see immense slag heaps. Underground mining not much better in many cases such as in the Illawarra region ground water from underground mining is heavily impacted.

One tonne of coal also requires between 1 and 2 tonnes of water to process.

More gross exaggerations from this UM , thousands of mines, where did this figure come from?

[parrot]

I don't think coal comes into the equation anymore.....even if it could be poured freely from a sink tap. Like DDT, it served a useful function......until the ill-effects outweighed the positive. Naturally the world will be using coal probably for decades to come, but it'll come with a black eye for any developed country that continues to depend on it.

[stattointhailand]

Surely as more and more govts push "cleaner" fuels the demand for those will outweigh the supply, thus maintaining a high price. where as those sticking with coal will see supply outweighing the demand and therefore keeping the price low. As many Western (first world) govt around the world are money worshiping parties, I'm not too convinced that they will do more than the bare minimum to switch if its gonna hit their "profit" figure

[Whistler]

Stat. Banks in many parts of the world will no longer provide finance for new coal mines or coal fired power stations. Even if, as you say, governments are treading water, the economics show solar and wind energy is a cheaper alternative.

[stattointhailand]

Problem is there are thousands of coal mines that have already had all their initial expense paid for, and any new solar/wind/clean energy providers still have to incorporate all the start up costs before they can start any serious production. I do not and cannot believe that banks will refuse loans to anybody if they can make enough profit ...History blows your argument clean out of the water

[noosard]

https://www.3dincites.com/2021/04/rare- ... inability/

[noosard]

Stat. Banks in many parts of the world will no longer provide finance for new coal mines or coal fired power stations. Even if, as you say, governments are treading water, the economics show solar and wind energy is a cheaper alternative.

Whistle is correct
the wording is "some banks around the world no longer provide finance"

[Barney]

Here we go again.

5.3 tonne of lithium carbonate ore produces 1 tonne of lithium. Not 2% closer to 20%.

As for coal 100% usable nonsense. Drive around Singleton or any other open cut coal mine and you see immense slag heaps. Underground mining not much better in many cases such as in the Illawarra region ground water from underground mining is heavily impacted.

One tonne of coal also requires between 1 and 2 tonnes of water to process.

More gross exaggerations from this UM , thousands of mines, where did this figure come from?

Here we go again
I
You only read what fits your argumentative narrative and just comment on that.
You mention only one mineral. Have a look at the number of minerals and what quantity are required for a vehicle battery.
My use of coal, the wash plants recycle water by the way, is only a comparison to the the extreme processes that will be required to extract rare earth metals.
Most of these rare earth metals are not on the surface to be just dug up.
How many millions of tons of overburden and environmentally unfriendly tailings waste do people think will be left in the future to clean up from these 1000’s of new mines and process plants that have not been built yet to reach 2030 or 2050 targets.
But you are the subject matter expert on every subject on UM including mining so just carry on.
Your desire to throw your expert personal commentary on all posts and subjects are actually irrelevant to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[stattointhailand]

Stat. Banks in many parts of the world will no longer provide finance for new coal mines or coal fired power stations. Even if, as you say, governments are treading water, the economics show solar and wind energy is a cheaper alternative.

Whistle is correct
the wording is "some banks around the world no longer provide finance"

and as soon as they get the chance to "U turn" with govt dept turning a blind eye they will....... I've yet to come across a bank or banker that turns their back on extra profit and bigger bonuses for them

[Whistler]

Here we go again.

5.3 tonne of lithium carbonate ore produces 1 tonne of lithium. Not 2% closer to 20%.

As for coal 100% usable nonsense. Drive around Singleton or any other open cut coal mine and you see immense slag heaps. Underground mining not much better in many cases such as in the Illawarra region ground water from underground mining is heavily impacted.

One tonne of coal also requires between 1 and 2 tonnes of water to process.

More gross exaggerations from this UM , thousands of mines, where did this figure come from?

Here we go again
I
You only read what fits your argumentative narrative and just comment on that.
You mention only one mineral. Have a look at the number of minerals and what quantity are required for a vehicle battery.
My use of coal, the wash plants recycle water by the way, is only a comparison to the the extreme processes that will be required to extract rare earth metals.
Most of these rare earth metals are not on the surface to be just dug up.
How many millions of tons of overburden and environmentally unfriendly tailings waste do people think will be left in the future to clean up from these 1000’s of new mines and process plants that have not been built yet to reach 2030 or 2050 targets.
But you are the subject matter expert on every subject on UM including mining so just carry on.
Your desire to throw your expert personal commentary on all posts and subjects are actually irrelevant to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Where do you get the figure of thousands of mines?

One of the side experiences you get from being involved in software development is to provide solutions for many different industries. In the course of my career my clients have been organisations like Kembla Coal & Coke, Longwall mining in Newcastle and a little Dutch company called Shell. Not a mining engineer but not devoid of all first hand knowledge either.

Coal mining, particularly open cut is acknowledged as one of the most environmentally damaging activities in the world. Your claim that Coal is 100% usable is utter nonsense as are most of your posts on the subject of the environment.

You should also note, I do not have to fabricate urls to back up what I say, the same cannot be said of yourself

[Barney]

Here we go again.

5.3 tonne of lithium carbonate ore produces 1 tonne of lithium. Not 2% closer to 20%.

As for coal 100% usable nonsense. Drive around Singleton or any other open cut coal mine and you see immense slag heaps. Underground mining not much better in many cases such as in the Illawarra region ground water from underground mining is heavily impacted.

One tonne of coal also requires between 1 and 2 tonnes of water to process.

More gross exaggerations from this UM , thousands of mines, where did this figure come from?

Here we go again
I
You only read what fits your argumentative narrative and just comment on that.
You mention only one mineral. Have a look at the number of minerals and what quantity are required for a vehicle battery.
My use of coal, the wash plants recycle water by the way, is only a comparison to the the extreme processes that will be required to extract rare earth metals.
Most of these rare earth metals are not on the surface to be just dug up.
How many millions of tons of overburden and environmentally unfriendly tailings waste do people think will be left in the future to clean up from these 1000’s of new mines and process plants that have not been built yet to reach 2030 or 2050 targets.
But you are the subject matter expert on every subject on UM including mining so just carry on.
Your desire to throw your expert personal commentary on all posts and subjects are actually irrelevant to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Where do you get the figure of thousands of mines?

One of the side experiences you get from being involved in software development is to provide solutions for many different industries. In the course of my career my clients have been organisations like Kembla Coal & Coke, Longwall mining in Newcastle and a little Dutch company called Shell. Not a mining engineer but not devoid of all first hand knowledge either.

Coal mining, particularly open cut is acknowledged as one of the most environmentally damaging activities in the world. Your claim that Coal is 100% usable is utter nonsense as are most of your posts on the subject of the environment.

You should also note, I do not have to fabricate urls to back up what I say, the same cannot be said of yourself

Here we go again
Hi
What url are you talking about. I’m not referring to any.
You keep referring to coal. Move on will you. Whoopee your did some work in the coal industry. My main thrust is the unknown environmental damage to come, not coal slag heaps. How many actual mines or poisonous concentrator/smelters have you worked on or in.

The environmental future damage is unknown in regards to EV battery mining. But of course you will know better. I’m sure you have a fancy nerd graph somewhere.

China has by far the most Rare earth deposits. They will be tapped soon without care or safety for local people and regions. No bank investment support needed in China. I’ll guess you’ll just accept the impending unsafe practice off to collateral damage, oh that’s right you can’t. Your a labor party supporter and with you knowledge of unions you can’t turn a blind eye to worker conditions. Or can you. Now what union were you in?? FCU?
No one wants to count the damage in cost and life suffering that will come when all these new mines open up. The current rare earth mines operating have actual customers outside the new EV battery industry otherwise they would not be operating, so therefore to fill the EV quotas new ones will open on a grand scale.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Whistler]

Nice dummy spit. You BS'd in your posts about the great barrier reef twice. You fabricated a url on this thread September 15. I can't be bothered to go through every one of your posts but here are three for a start.

You are a bullshitter plain and simple. What has union membership or walking into various plants got to do with me commenting on your lies and exaggerations?

Nada, nothing, zip. Your posts stand on their own as proof.