Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.

Liste des GroupesRevenir à ras written 
Sujet : Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.
De : lynnmcguire5 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (Lynn McGuire)
Groupes : rec.arts.sf.written
Date : 01. Nov 2024, 18:03:14
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vg31kj$3b0ou$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 11/1/2024 8:59 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
On 10/31/2024 4:15 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
On 10/31/2024 3:11 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
On 10/31/24 11:58, Lynn McGuire wrote:
On 10/31/2024 11:06 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
...
>
>
       But by use of fossil fuels we have ensured the death
of nations all over the planet.
       Now cities like San Francisco imagine that they can
in the future ameliorate the effects of rising waters by
building sea wall but these will not work when the water from
the SF Bay is high enough to intrude into the Central Valley.
The food supply will begin to suffer as the salt water intrudes.
Of course if we build a high dam at the Carquinez Strait we
might get a very contaminated fresh water lake. It would take
a long time to get the water cleaned up and might be simply
impossible.
>
       bliss
>
Good luck in getting batteries to work in tractors and harvesters that
run 24 hours per day as many do.
>
You are not a farmer, I see.     While there are short periods
of the year where a combine harvester may work the night, that's the
exception not the rule.  Likewise during field prep, although
there is seldom any demand to do that during darkness.
>
Mostly, tractor use is intermittent throughout a day.
>
The battery manufacturers and the
vehicle companies are having severe problems keeping today's liquid
lithium batteries in the 59 F to 85 F service range for severe service
>
https://www.tesla.com/semi
>
>
And of course, cost is a major condition here.  Many of the farmers now
buy tractors and harvesters using collectives due to the extreme costs
of such equipment.
>
Which is mostly in the electronics, IC engines, and proprietary software.
Replacing the IC powertrain with an electric powertrain will certainly
reduce the overall cost.
>
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelbarnard/2023/11/27/all-farm-equipment-including-tractors-and-combines-will-be-electric/
>
    "A couple of Hylio\u2019s biggest drones, the AG-272, can
     apply as much product in a day as a $700,000, top-end,
     John Deere tractor, but cost only $200,000 with trailer
     and support gear and run on dirt-cheap electricity. And
     they can be fixed at the side of the field. They are incredibly
     simple devices with few moving parts, and servicing them is
     trivial for farmers. That\u2019s no longer true for tractors and combines."
>
>
    "What about seeding? Well, as with product application, seeding
     is increasingly done with seeding drones that put seeds precisely
     where they should be with equal spacing and no soil compaction.
>
    "But you can\u2019t harvest crops with a quadcopter. And you can\u2019t
     spread tons of fertilizer across massive fields before planting. However,
     fields are flat, speeds are low and torque is king. Those are the
     conditions in which battery electric vehicles shine.
>
    "That\u2019s with today\u2019s battery energy densities. As the series
     has made clear, battery energy densities that are double what Teslas
     currently use are commercially available from Chinese EV battery giant
     CATL now. Further, silicon battery chemistries with a potential energy
     capacity five times that of CATL\u2019s new battery are commercializing
     in 2023. There are multiple vendors and groups which have demonstrated
     the technical breakthroughs required for their use. As a reminder,
     silicon is cheap and ubiquitous."
>
The harvesters (cotton, corn, maze, etc) around here run day and night
when they run for a couple of months in the fall.  There are not many
charging outlets on the fields surrounding my house and my office complex.
>
I have watched the farmer of 900+ acres just to the south of my office
complex plow his 900+ acres in just a week using a huge 300+ hp turbo
diesel tractor that can pull a 20+ foot wide batwing plow.  He has huge
flood lights on his tractor and runs 16+ hours a day at 70 years old.
He just plowed everything under for the third ??? time this year after
the harvester went through.
 And they'll be able to do all that with electric tractors.  Didn't you
read the article?
What some so-called journalist says just does not happen in a farm. Been there, done that at my grandparents farm back in the 70s and 80s.
Lynn

Date Sujet#  Auteur
30 Oct 24 * AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.45Titus G
30 Oct 24 +* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.36Bobbie Sellers
30 Oct 24 i+* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.8Cryptoengineer
30 Oct 24 ii+- Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.1Titus G
30 Oct 24 ii+- Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.1Lynn McGuire
4 Nov 24 ii`* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.5Robert Carnegie
5 Nov 24 ii `* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.4Cryptoengineer
7 Nov 24 ii  `* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.3Robert Carnegie
7 Nov 24 ii   +- Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.1Chris Buckley
7 Nov 24 ii   `- Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.1William Hyde
30 Oct 24 i`* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.27Scott Dorsey
31 Oct 24 i `* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.26Bobbie Sellers
31 Oct 24 i  `* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.25Lynn McGuire
31 Oct 24 i   +* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.16Bobbie Sellers
31 Oct 24 i   i`* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.15D
31 Oct 24 i   i `* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.14Paul S Person
31 Oct 24 i   i  +* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.10Lynn McGuire
31 Oct 24 i   i  i+* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.7Bobbie Sellers
31 Oct 24 i   i  ii+- Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.1D
31 Oct 24 i   i  ii`* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.5Lynn McGuire
31 Oct 24 i   i  ii +- Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.1Bobbie Sellers
1 Nov 24 i   i  ii +- Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.1Scott Dorsey
1 Nov 24 i   i  ii `* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.2Lynn McGuire
1 Nov 24 i   i  ii  `- Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.1Lynn McGuire
31 Oct 24 i   i  i+- Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.1D
1 Nov 24 i   i  i`- Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.1Paul S Person
31 Oct 24 i   i  +* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.2Bobbie Sellers
1 Nov 24 i   i  i`- Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.1Paul S Person
31 Oct 24 i   i  `- Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.1D
31 Oct 24 i   +* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.3Scott Dorsey
31 Oct 24 i   i`* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.2D
31 Oct 24 i   i `- Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.1Cryptoengineer
31 Oct 24 i   +* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.3D
31 Oct 24 i   i`* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.2Lynn McGuire
31 Oct 24 i   i `- Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.1D
31 Oct 24 i   +- Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.1D
2 Nov 24 i   `- Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.1Robert Carnegie
30 Oct 24 +* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.7Lynn McGuire
30 Oct 24 i`* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.6Bobbie Sellers
30 Oct 24 i `* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.5Titus G
30 Oct 24 i  +* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.3Bobbie Sellers
31 Oct 24 i  i`* Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.2Titus G
31 Oct 24 i  i `- Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.1D
30 Oct 24 i  `- Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.1Lynn McGuire
30 Oct 24 `- Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.1D

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal