Agnostic.com

6 9

LINK Norwegian Gas Station Becomes First in World to Replace All Pumps With Electric Chargers

And we're still battling the "climate change isn't real" propaganda. I wonder if America will eventuality be evicted by the rest of the world. Exiled under a cover of some sort, to die slowly and painfully, all alone on the planet. It would be a well-deserved price to pay.

SeaGreenEyez 9 Sep 28
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

6 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

1

Having done graduate level work in Environmental Studies I have two problems with electric cars:

  1. Unless you charge one exclusively with electricity generated strictly from renewable sources, they actually add more carbon to the atmosphere that running a equivalent modern internal combustion engine. This is inevitable due to the loss of efficiency introduced in the transmission of power over the grid to the car. Consider also that it is very difficult to match the thermodynamic properties of gasoline (i.e., how far you can go on how little you have to carry). Batteries for electric cars, or tanks sufficiently strong to transport hydrogen, add a significant weight penalty to a vehicle.

  2. A much more recent concern is that, even if we had 100% efficient transmission of power, and it all came from renewable sources, it will still take at least ten years to phase out internal combustion engines. I wish we had that long. The latest studies I have seen say we probably don't.

There have already been months when we have surpassed a 1.5ºC increase over pre-industrial average temperatures. At this level, we are flirting with hitting tipping points that may make recovery impossible (e.g., release of methane frozen in the permafrost or bottom of the ocean, or a change in ocean currents due to the fresh water from melting glaciers).

The bad news is that we may only have five years or less. The good news is that we can be completely off of fossil petroleum within three years or less if we decide to do it. And we don't have to shut down our economy and park all of our cars.

We can keep the "fuel", but lose the "fossil". Fossil fuel is derived from natural processes that trapped hydrocarbons beneath the surface of the earth hundreds of thousands of years ago. It is the release of this trapped carbon into the atmosphere that causes the problems with greenhouse gases. Why not use decomposed plants that we grow instead of decomposed plants that grew hundreds of thousands of years ago? All of the carbon we would release into the atmosphere would be carbon the plants had already taken out of the atmosphere.

We have the technology to do this. It is called pyrolysis. By heating plant matter to a very high temperature in a reduced oxygen environment, we get approximately 10% of the plant mass converted to methane and other gases we know how to use, 15% to carbon coke and 75% converted to sludge. The sludge is actually a reasonably high grade, very sweet (i.e., very low to no sulfur content) crude oil. Burning the carbon coke produces more than enough heat to sustain the process (to use the technical term, the process is exothermic).

This is well known technology we can deploy now. We could do so within three years or less based on historic precedents in the Liberty Ship and "Hemp for Victory" programs during WWII. The vessels used for pyrolysis are very similar to a boiler on a WWII Liberty ship. Eighteen American shipyards built 2,710 Liberty ships between 1941 and 1945 (an average of three ships every two days).

We only need the equivalent of the boilers, not the entire ship. But we do need a lot of them. In 2018 we used an average of 20.5 million barrels of petroleum per day. Allowing for growth, and some down time, we should build the capacity for 24 million barrels of production initially, with more if growth demands. At a 200 barrel capacity per unit we would need 120,000 units. This works out to 40,000 units per year, or approximately 110 units per day.

While this would require a wartime effort, twenty plants turning out an average of five units per day could have this done in just under three years. We would have to start with imported steel while we rebuilt our steel making capabilities and capacity. But think what this could do for our economy. Between the steel mills and the plants fabricating the units we are talking thousands of decent jobs.

The other half of the problem is what do we feed the pyrolysis units? The ideal plant for this is the one that produces the maximum biomass in the shortest time. That would be hemp, the industrial variety of which is now legal to grow in all 50 states. Hemp is one of the best things to grow in a fallow field for restoring the soil. About half of the fallow farmland in the US could provide sufficient biomass, and farmers could turn fallow fields into cash crops that they wouldn't even have to worry about losing their Chinese market for.

Yes, we can do this, and we have almost all of the infrastructure in place already. It would use our existing refineries, and gas stations to fuel our existing cars. The only thing stopping us is politics.

0

I also like that Oslo has made a big transition to a bicycling city: [citylab.com]

That article is yet another reason that I have a very big like of Norway!

2

Public healthcare is free after an annual payment of $220. Norway is the second wealthiest nation in the world monetarily, and is often first place in the United Nations Human Development Index (life expectancy, education, per capita income). Norway's surplus wealth each year is reinvested in the infrastructure. All education is free. Law enforcement is very progressive and humane, with prison terms no longer than twenty-one years for non-capital crimes. Norway has a very low crime rate. Norway is a representative democracy having a parliament based on proportional representation, and a prime minister with executive powers. The PM right now is a woman. In 1884, Norway granted to women the right to education, suffrage, right to work and other gender equality measures. Norway was the first country in the world to enact an anti-discrimination law protecting the rights of the LGBTQ community; it became the second country to legalise same-sex marriage; and it became the sixth country to grant full same-sex marriage equality.

There is much to admire...it’s a pity our politicians don’t follow their example.

@SeaGreenEyez Yes ...our penal systems don’t seem to be working...with more and more people being locked up. It’s time we had a rethink....both in the U.K. and the USA.

@SeaGreenEyez......and Norway has the handsomest men in the world! It’s the Viking blood.

@SeaGreenEyez No honest it’s true...my favourite band a-ha are typical of Norwegian men...Morten Harket has to be the best looking man, ever!

Their nation's wealth comes from the sale of North Sea Oil.

Their "going green" strikes me as hypocritical enough to qualify them for membership in the Republican Party.

@mcgeo52 In he 60s and 70s when exploration of the North Sea for oil first began, we were not aware of the harm that excessive use of petroleum and other fossil fuels would do to the world’s climate. We in Northern Europe were glad to have found our own oil, as prior to that we had been held hostage to USA and Middle East oil prices...and embargoes. Remember the Suez Crisis? Norway was more sensible than most countries who found they now had an independent flow of “black gold”, they wisely invested some of their revenues from oil into a wealth fund, something I wish the British Government had had the sense to do too. There is nothing at all hypocritical in Norway now being at the forefront of new technologies, and trying now to mitigate the harmful effects of climate change, being aware now of the damage to the environment which greenhouse gas emissions are causing, something that was not realised in the past.

@Marionville, have they completely stopped production of the North Sea Oil they control? Last I heard they had not.

@mcgeo52. Did I say that they had? At least they are working to mitigate and reduce consumption...more than other nations. They are now investing in Green technologies in order to end dependency on oil and fossil fuels.

1

As a teenager worked at pepi's pizza in Oslo. Thought I was rich until they took half my money for taxes. Gas tax was really high.

Great start and Smart deal, all electric cars.

High wages, high taxes, excellent services....no complaints from the citizens!

2

Awesome country the seed bank is there in case the monoculture seeds fail, it can prevent world wide starvation by reintroducing regular crops back , that a and the culture of taking care of it's people

bobwjr Level 10 Sep 28, 2019

Actually I am going to Europe to pick up heritage seed for my urban farming and cannabis true strains. I think there ancesual inteliigence in seeds as well in humans. ...

North America has killed much of their farms with mansanto products. In Canada most of food comes from 1500 km away. Too bad global warming has extended our growing year by 2 months. Planning on changing that, with urban farming.

4

Is it any wonder I admire this country and all things Norwegian so much. They are way ahead of the rest of the world in almost everything...we should all try to emulate them. Incidentally, they top the happiness index of countries too...rated by their own citizens, the U.K. and the U,S.A. lag well behind..needless to say!

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:407863
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.