#electricvehicles

XR excels in its own stupidity again

Extinction Rebellion (XR) truly take the cake in terms of not understanding their cause very well. Six XR activists were arrested for blocking one of London’s biggest concrete suppliers.

Did it occur to these Mensa members that massive slabs of concrete are required to form the base to anchor wind turbines to? Concrete is also used to ground solar panels. Perhaps more coking coal and bauxite to make steel or vast amounts of toxic materials that go to make solar panels and batteries should be encouraged?

One protestor said,

We have to pause and recognise the harm it is causing both locally and globally; locally with the dust in the air our children breathe and globally with the inextricable CO2 emissions involved which are destroying the world.”

Yet again proves this is just a religion where the disciples believe any old tosh that is thrown their way. No attempt to see reason. Just block traffic and cause more CO2 to be emitted. Well done on all counts. The laziness of the cause is exposed on a daily basis.

These people should be forced to pay damages to those they disrupt. Why should the concrete company or builder be forced to bear externalities created by these people?

Sydney to declare a Climate Emergency

If there was any city in Australia that was about to be swamped by rising sea levels, Sydney would be a front runner. Sydney Lord Mayor Clover Moore wants her council to announce a “climate emergency” in a vote next week and demand the Morrison government step in and help businesses exit fossil fuel industries.

Moore only needs to type in the waterfront suburbs on http://www.realestate.com.au and see all see for herself whether there is mass panic selling of multi million dollar properties for a song. She won’t find them. Much less banks willing to finance them.

The idea of Sydney joining the 600 other jurisdictions across 13 countries declaring this rubbish speaks for itself. These issues have been preached about for decades. Why not declare an emergency then? All Moore is doing is looking to hijack a trendy hashtag to appear “woke”. Don’t forget she used a slug of ratepayer funds to help promote same sex marriage. Hardly the remit of a local council but hey it’s social justice.

Perhaps she can commit to 100% renewables and claims to reduce CO2 by 2024. If she is so confident of her climate emergency perhaps she should guarantee that if sea levels don’t rise and hot temperatures don’t stray out of statistical norms for a sustained period that she promises to declare “climate normality” and lower rates to her constituents by the amount of any net excess caused by her declaration. For she knows that if absolutely nothing happens then there are no consequences.

Recall the climate action plan of Ireland and the lack of money to fund it. Or Canada and pipeline approvals the day after its declaration.

Follow the money!

Irish inhaling magic clovers

The Irish government is looking to ban new petrol and diesel car sales from 2030 in its ‘Climate Action Plan‘. One would imagine many car dealers will go out of business because the product offerings will be so slim and global supply won’t be there. Sadly the document contradicts itself too. Not to mention that Ireland’s contribution to global CO2 is only 0.000012%.

On page 33, the report drills holes in itself when it states,

Solar PV, some electrification of buses, and biofuel blending are identified in 2030 the NDP scenario but are not showing as cost- effective in MACC. Despite MACC analysis these technologies may remain in plan given other factors (e.g., exchequer cost, ease of implementation, need for public sector leadership)

So it is a poorly thought out plan to begin with such caveats.

For transport the manifesto denotes,

Accelerate the take up of EV cars and vans so that we reach 100% of all new cars and vans are EVs by 2030. This will enable achieving our target of 950,000 EVs on the road by 2030. This means approximately one third of all vehicles sold during the decade will be Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV) or Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV)

Hang on a minute. In its own document on page 24 it hopes for at least 500,000 EVs on the road. Thats almost half what is mentioned in the exec summary! Which is it? Hoping no one reads this rubbish?

Make growth less transport intensive through better planning, remote and home-working and modal shift to public transport.

That will work. Just tell companies to keep people working from home. Why not get people to grow their own vegetables so they don’t need to drive to the supermarket?

Increase the renewable biofuel content of motor fuels

On page 33 under volumes, it mentions nothing. Just the E10 and B12 biofuel mix plans. Maybe Germany holds clues.

The German authorities went big for bio-fuels in 2008 forcing gas stands to install E-10 pumps to cut CO2. However as many as 3 million cars at the time weren’t equipped to run on it and as a result consumers abandoned it leaving many gas stands with shortages of the petrol and gluts of E-10 which left the petrol companies liable to huge fines (around $630mn) for not hitting government targets.

Claude Termes, a member of European Parliament from the Green Party in Luxembourg said in 2008 that “legally mandated biofuels were a dead end…the sooner It disappears, the better…my preference is zero…policymakers cannot close their eyes in front of the facts. The European Parliament is increasingly skeptical of biofuels.” Even ADAC told German drivers to avoid using E10 when traveling in other parts of continental Europe.

• Set targets for the conversion of public transport fleets to zero carbon alternatives

It is unlikely that Public transport is a swing factor. The hope is to have 1,250 electric buses by 2030. Even then it has concerns it may not hit the plan.

It is scary to think countries are willing to submit to the altar of this green madness. The word “public leadership” should cause people to run for the hills. For such a minuscule impact on the climate, Ireland is about to kill its competitiveness to protect against what? 55% renewable target with a huge uplift in EVs and an extra 600,000 households using electric heating, 400,000

The most interesting thing is that in the 2019 Irish budget, the spending ceiling for “Communication, Climate Action and Environment Group” is €391m out of total expenditures of €59.25bn or 0.6% of its budget. Note this ministry will max out at €391m for 2020 and 2021. How much will be achieved on the Climate Action Plan if resources aren’t going to plug the infrastructure gaps?

As much as the “woke” nature of the plan here is betting it misses by a country mile on dates and achievements. In the history of government led climate initiatives, failures far outweigh successes. Don’t forget Ireland gets 5% of tax revenues from fuel excise. So once consumers save the planet they can expect an EV tax to slug them instead.

Bjorn Lomborg points to cold facts of global warming

Bjorn Lomborg has written a powerful piece in the Weekend Australian which looks at the “cost” of climate emergency driven policy. It makes a complete mockery of the people who tell us we must save the planet with their prescriptions. Although CM has made the assertion many times that politicians make promises which are so unaffordable for so little return that it makes no economic sense. The hypocrisy of signatories is also telling.

Some of the choice quotes,

After New Zealand made its 2050 zero emissions promise, the government commissioned a report on the costs. This found that achieving this goal in the most cost-effective manner (which strains credulity because policy seldom if ever manages to be cost efficient) would cost more than last year’s entire national budget on social security, welfare, health, education, police, courts, defence, environment and every other part of government combined. Each and every year.

To replace a 1ha gas-fired power plant, society needs 73ha of solar panels, 239ha of onshore wind turbines or an unbelievable 6000ha of biomass...We often hear that wind and solar energy are cheaper than fossil fuels, but at best that is true only when the wind is blowing or the sun is shining. It is deeply misleading to compare the energy cost of wind or solar to fossil fuels only when it is windy and sunny

Most people think renewables are overwhelmingly made up of solar and wind. Nothing could be further from the truth. Solar and wind contributed only 2.4 per cent of the EU total energy demand in 2017, according to the latest numbers from the International Energy Agency. Another 1.7 per cent came from hydro and 0.4 per cent from geothermal energy…In comparison, 10 per cent — more than two-thirds of all the ­renewable energy in the EU — comes from the world’s oldest ­energy source: [burning] wood.

Today, fewer than 0.3 per cent of all cars are electric, and even if we could reach 200 million electric cars in 2040, the IEA estimates this would ­reduce emissions by less than 1 per cent. That is why, in the face of years of failure, politicians have continued doing one thing: making ever bigger promises.

The promises made in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 and in the Kyoto Treaty in 1997 fell apart. A new study of the promises made under the Paris Agreement finds that of almost 200 signatories, only 17 countries — the likes of Samoa and Algeria — are living up to them, and these are succeeding mostly because they promised so little. But even if every country did everything promised in the Paris Agreement, the emission cuts by 2030 would add up to only 1 per cent of what would be needed to keep temperature rises under 2C.

Fail

Interesting article on Bloomberg discussing the obvious outcome of Sweden’s plan to get more EVs on the grid. As most hair-brained climate alarmist governments have a desire to outdo each other on the virtue signaling scale it often leads to poorly thought out decisions which end up costing tax payers a fortune.

Bloomberg’s Jesper Starn wrote,

Demand for electricity in Stockholm and other cities is outgrowing capacity in local grids, forcing new charging networks to compete with other projects from housing to subway lines to get hooked up.”

We’ve been here so many times before. Take Germany in bio-fuels.

The German authorities went big for bio-fuels in 2008 forcing gas stands to install E-10 pumps to cut CO2. However as many as 3 million cars at the time weren’t equipped to run on it and as a result consumers abandoned it leaving many gas stands with shortages of the petrol and gluts of E-10 which left the petrol companies liable to huge fines (around $630mn) for not hitting government targets.

Claude Termes, a member of European Parliament from the Green Party in Luxembourg said in 2008 that “legally mandated biofuels were a dead end…the sooner It disappears, the better…my preference is zero…policymakers cannot close their eyes in front of the facts. The European Parliament is increasingly skeptical of biofuels.” Even ADAC told German drivers to avoid using E10 when traveling in other parts of continental Europe.

Spain perhaps provides the strongest evidence of poorly planned subsidy execution. In 2004 the Spanish government wanted to get 1GW of solar under its feed in tariff over 4 years. Instead it got 4GW in 1 year meaning its budget exploded 16x and it had €120bn in tax liabilities over the course of the promise. In the end, the government reneged on the promises it made because it couldn’t afford it. So much for the assurance of government run programs.

Not to mention the overproduction that has often been created by subsidies. When the subsidies are withdrawn, we see fierce cost cutting which buries prices and sends many producers to the wall which was the experience of the last cycle. Take a look at India’s once largest wind power producer Suzlon. At the peak $425 a share. Now $4.35. 90% up in smoke.

To think Bill Shorten wanted 50% EVs by 2030. Clearly Australian voters disagreed.

If governments can’t sustainably raise living wages without regulation, cheaper energy prices act like a tax cut so sticking with coal, gas and nuclear make far more sense than the life experience of sharp price increases thanks to green madness.

Here is betting Sweden doubles down on green madness to remain “woke”

Woke Vic Police should have called the LAPD before selecting EVs

2fc237cb65e0a67e8ee4f94b76247581.jpeg

Victoria Police is renowned for its commitment to inclusion and diversity. Who could forget the push for segregated sessions in the recruitment drive? Stands to reason the coppers have introduced the Tesla Model X to the fleet to show “green” credentials. The point of a police car is instant dispatch when required to attend to a crisis situation, from thwarting a terrorist in the Melbourne CBD or rushing to a domestic dispute. It won’t look good when the police have to wait for the fast charger at the base to provide enough juice to make it the scene of the crime. Now that Hazelwood coal-fired power plant has been closed, good luck waiting on renewable energy to charge these cars for practical police use. Don’t be surprised when the shortcomings force a rethink.

What will they tell Victorians? “Sorry, in our quest to save the planet you’ll have to wait another 3 hours before we can attend to your domestic violence dispute. Bear with us. The car is on the charger!

In 2016, the LAPD bought $10m worth of BMW i3s to show its commitment to climate abatement. Sadly, the cars went largely unused as they were unsuited for police work.

CBS reported,

LAPD Deputy Chief Jorge Villegas said of the purchase, Money well worth itIt’s all a part of saving the Earth, going green … quite frankly, to try and save money for the community and the taxpayers.”

But sources say some personnel are reluctant to use the electric cars because they can only go 80-100 miles on a charge. And the mileage logs we obtained seem to back that up.

From April 2016 when the project started through August 2017, we found most of the electric cars have only been used for a few thousand miles…And a handful are sitting in the garage with only a few hundred on them.

Like this one in service since May 27, 2016, with just 400 miles on it!

That’s an average use of 6 miles a week!

With the monthly lease payment of a little more than $418, this one costs taxpayers over $15 a mile to use!… It just doesn’t make any sense!”

CM one posted this question to someone from the NSW St Johns Ambulance with respect to discussions about EV ambulances. He said unequivocally,

We have Webasto heaters in our cars in the colder areas. Running off the diesel they can operate 24/7 if needed. If we don’t have them some of our equipment doesn’t work like our tympanic thermometers, the blood glucose reader and then there is the problem of having cold fluids in the car. This is a problem if we are giving these IV because we can make a patient hypothermic if it’s cold. Then there’s just the general environment inside the cab. It needs to be warm in winter.

That is the point. Emergency services need to be able to operate on call. 5 minutes to fill up with gasoline or diesel means that efficient utilisation and dispatch is guaranteed for at least 500km+.

If end users have to weigh having their lives saved or rescue the planet, it is a no brainer which they will choose. We already know that Tesla P100Ds have done 167,000km in CO2 before they’ve left the factory. “To Protect after Charging” should be emblazoned on the doors.

Cate Faehrmann angry only 5 support her climate emergency

6 out of 42 NSW Legislative Councilors voted in favour of a “climate emergency” and Greens MLC Cate Faehrmann is upset. Only goes to show that two election drubbings on said subject should leave an “as expected” result like this. She should be embarrassed to publish such a post. “This is how poorly we prosecute our case” is all it suggests.

Faehrmann must understand that the NSW LC is not The Guardian. An editor can compel the speech of journalists to declare “climate emergencies”. Best not pick the motion on such a bitterly cold day. Good to see the majority of parties didn’t fold like the British parliamentarians did after being visited by a pig-tailed 16yo.