|
Post by slh1234 on Mar 26, 2021 16:44:06 GMT
Battery technology is like fusion energy. Read that it is just around the corner. Problem is, that corner is a long ways down the hall. Battery technology is currently here. You're seeing a development in battery technology in production now. Looking at newer developments like what I was talking about above, NAWA currently has carbon nanotubes in production, but they're not in cars currently. The question should be "Can they be put in production for cars?" If so, then energy storage looks to be about 5X what current lithium ion is. That is worth following, I think.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 26, 2021 16:58:50 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Mar 26, 2021 17:31:43 GMT
referring to 1234 post. I have been there in cities with inversion layers very bad.
I also know that modern car engines are very clean better than a 99% reduction in emissions the photochemical smog which you are highlighting is very likely from other sources if the photos are recent in the US.
I do remember my first landing in the '70s in the US and marveling at the inversion making the airport virtually invisible till seconds before landing not the case these days.
Much of that will be dust caught in an inversion in fact if you go to Bakersfield or Lancaster you still have that red haze it's not the cars or industry only.
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Mar 26, 2021 18:01:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by slh1234 on Mar 27, 2021 0:58:08 GMT
Nonentropic, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree.
I was stationed in Sacramento from 1987 - 1989, and in Merced from 1991 - 1992. I subsequently lived in the Bay Area from 2005 - 2010, and again in 2017 - 2019. In the last two stents in CA especially, I often travelled to SoCal for work. Sometimes I flew, but when my family wanted to come with me, I would drive it. We also drove it occasionally just to visit friends in LA.
In that first window when I lived in Sacramento, I could look out my window most days and see the Sierras in the distance. When I visit my Daughter in that area now, most days the Sierras are obscured by the pollution. Driving down I-5 from Sacramento or from the Bay Area to LA, in the central valley, there is, indeed, dust from agriculture, and a couple of feeder lots that make you not want to breathe for about 5 miles, but unless there is a fire, the air is not like Los Angeles at all. In fact, when I-5 and Highway 99 meet (not terribly far from Bakersfield), the air is desert-like, but as the highway starts up through the San Gabriel mountains, on the east side, it is still pretty clear, but as you get into the mountains, it becomes increasingly smoggy, and visibility becomes increasingly less. In Lancaster (where I've been for work a few times), it's not usually as bad as down in the valleys around the LA Metro, but there are times it gets bad. Consistently, as you start down into the valleys where most of the LA metro area is, the air changes pretty drastically. It has a taste to it, and a smell to it, and it feels different to breathe. It's not dust.
Beijing has pollution problems, and it also has yellow dust problems. I've lived in Shanghai also, and travelled to Beijing to work several times. LA visibility isn't as bad as Beijing when the wind is coming off the deserts, but it's the closest city I've seen to that. But even in Beijing, the air doesn't smell and taste as thick as it does in LA.
These days, the area around Sacramento is also very polluted as my description about not being able to see the Sierras may indicate.
Interestingly, the Bay Area may have improved since those days since I don't remember smog in the hills where those windmills are east of Livermore like I remember that from when I was stationed in Sacramento. The air moves a lot through the valley that houses San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose, but occasionally, it will get still for a few days. When it gets still, temperature rises there, and the air becomes very dirty again. I've seen this several times, and this makes me think that the dynamic that brings the marine layer in over that area most mornings is just blowing the pollution out of the area, and that's why it doesn't look worse than it does most of the time.
Even in Seattle, a beautiful area nestled into a temperate rain forest, in the summers when it is not raining regularly, Seattle air becomes quite visible. I can assure you Seattle is nothing like California's central valley - not a dusty place at all.
I grew up on a farm not too terribly far from Tulsa. That area is prairie, but the areas around rivers like where I grew up are heavily wooded with hardwoods. I remember being able to look at ridges in the distance and seeing only the blue haze that trees themselves produce. The air around that area doesn't look like that anymore. A few years ago, when I went back to that area for a relative's funeral, I couldn't even see the blue haze anymore. When I was a boy, we used to go into Tulsa maybe once every 3 months, the skyline of Tulsa was clear. It's not like that anymore.
In all of these areas, traffic has increased significantly.
You keep saying it is industry and not cars. What is your source on that? I've tried searching for that, and almost every article I read attributes NO2 to the burning of fuel including vehicle emissions, power plants, and some other processes, but none of them are breaking it out. I know when I was stationed in CA, we even had to keep track of how many spray paint cans we had used, and we were limited to how many could be used. I know there are significant restrictions on industrial emissions, too. I'm not buying that cars don't contribute to the pollution, but I also believe that industry still contributes significantly to it. So what is the breakdown of that? I think it will be a hard (impossible) sale to convince people that cars don't make a significant contribution to that on just one's word.
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Mar 27, 2021 2:10:50 GMT
Its improved dramatically that's a fact and the number of people has also risen, can they do better yes.
|
|
|
Post by slh1234 on Mar 27, 2021 3:28:12 GMT
I have read that particulate matter has improved in the LA air. It's not clean by a long shot, though, which means it definitely NEEDS to improve more. That's where discussions like different transportation become relevant. I'd like to see an authoritative source to compare what the air was like in the late 1970s and 1980s to now so we have something more objective to base it on.
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Mar 27, 2021 4:37:50 GMT
I think there is data and I also think cars emit a lot of dust such as from tires etc. Trucks are problematic because they occupy such a large portion of the problem and unlike cars are loaded so batteries would back out load weight demanding more trucks. An argument for bigger tonnages is valid we did it here in NZ out to 44T no issues. I think the particulates are a real issue and I don't see SiO2 as better than Carbon PM10 or 2.5 but have a look at the Sahara sand particulates. earth.nullschool.net/#current/particulates/surface/level/overlay=pm10/orthographic=-35.04,29.69,338
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 28, 2021 18:12:26 GMT
|
|
|
Post by slh1234 on Mar 29, 2021 18:49:49 GMT
I think there is data and I also think cars emit a lot of dust such as from tires etc. Trucks are problematic because they occupy such a large portion of the problem and unlike cars are loaded so batteries would back out load weight demanding more trucks. An argument for bigger tonnages is valid we did it here in NZ out to 44T no issues. I think the particulates are a real issue and I don't see SiO2 as better than Carbon PM10 or 2.5 but have a look at the Sahara sand particulates. earth.nullschool.net/#current/particulates/surface/level/overlay=pm10/orthographic=-35.04,29.69,338 I guess I'm not seeing what you're wanting me to see in this. Can you explain these, please?
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Mar 30, 2021 2:08:15 GMT
The particulates in the North Africa area are huge, they are a different mix of material but if I had a choice SiO2 or C as a particulate in my lung I am not sure the SiO2 would be my choice. Cancer rates from particulates that have been there for centuries are not sensational so we need to assume that the ability of humans to survive a measurable level of particulates is quite good.
The photochemical smog basically NOx is bad and it is well reduced nowadays the particulates are well down and way lower than North Africa why throw more massive resources on the pretext of saving lives or whatever. The spending of money on a nonissue is a way of throwing more of the poor under the bus.
It's not a big one for me but, is there an agenda when the world tries to ban something on week data. We all have different drivers clearly. California in the strip adjacent to the sea and bound to the east by mountains is very vulnerable to an inversion as well as being a massive population. difficult at any level.
|
|
|
Post by slh1234 on Mar 30, 2021 2:15:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by slh1234 on Mar 30, 2021 2:19:02 GMT
The particulates in the North Africa area are huge, they are a different mix of material but if I had a choice SiO2 or C as a particulate in my lung I am not sure the SiO2 would be my choice. Cancer rates from particulates that have been there for centuries are not sensational so we need to assume that the ability of humans to survive a measurable level of particulates is quite good. The photochemical smog basically NOx is bad and it is well reduced nowadays the particulates are well down and way lower than North Africa why throw more massive resources on the pretext of saving lives or whatever. The spending of money on a nonissue is a way of throwing more of the poor under the bus. It's not a big one for me but, is there an agenda when the world tries to ban something on week data. We all have different drivers clearly. California in the strip adjacent to the sea and bound to the east by mountains is very vulnerable to an inversion as well as being a massive population. difficult at any level. The numbers on that NOx, and contributions from cars vs. industry. is what I've been asking you for. With as many ozone alerts as even small cities are having these days, it certainly seems to be an issue.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jun 14, 2021 18:48:49 GMT
The coach should have had a diesel generator on a trailer; less waste power that way.
|
|