The Future of Motorcycles

[spiderman302]

Because it is not a debate.
When you go look, It is all about what someone else said, if you go to that source it is about what someone else said. That loop continues.
The bottom of the bucket refers to computer models and data from ice cores and tree rings. This data is derived with very weak precision.
Even their "average" temperature has been falling for the past several years, but Co2 has been increasing. So they changed their story....
Their consensus is filtered like everything else.
Do not believe me!!
Go look at their documents and reports and look for the hard science.
I only found a lot speculation and word salads....

But back to H2. It might be best to use it at the power generation plants since it can be safely stored in a fixed location and they can up scale the engine to get the power needed. Then put the electric power into the roads like your old slot car racers that you had as a kid.....

 

[Sadlsor]

It's good to know that internet posters are able to offer better information than the best scientists of nearly 200 countries. Yeah, what do they know and what is their agenda.

I understand your position.
I mean, it's not like the "experts" have ever changed their position on anything, right?
(Eggs, coffee, cocaine, tobacco, the automobile, sugar, salt, red meat, vegetables, cannabis, sleep, covid, yada, yada.)
Much less have they ever been proven wrong.
(The earth is flat, the sun revolves around the earth, etc.)

 

[TerryS]

Because it is not a debate.
When you go look, It is all about what someone else said, if you go to that source it is about what someone else said. That loop continues.
The bottom of the bucket refers to computer models and data from ice cores and tree rings. This data is derived with very weak precision.
Even their "average" temperature has been falling for the past several years, but Co2 has been increasing. So they changed their story....
Their consensus is filtered like everything else.
Do not believe me!!
Go look at their documents and reports and look for the hard science.
I only found a lot speculation and word salads....

But back to H2. It might be best to use it at the power generation plants since it can be safely stored in a fixed location and they can up scale the engine to get the power needed. Then put the electric power into the roads like your old slot car racers that you had as a kid.....

H2 (unless we are talking about a supercharged Kawasaki) is a poor choice of fuel. 96% of it comes from fossil fuel sources, so we'd be better off using the fossil fuel directly and curtting out the H2 middleman.

Earth's climate is a confusing, dynamic syste that no-one really understands. Climate change is real and always has been real, that's why you can find evidence of ice sheets in southern latitudes and evidence of forests in the Antarctic. I don't argue that we need to avoid polluting our air and water, and that we need to move to a more sustainable model where all of the life cycle costs are considered, not just tailpipe emissions.

Governments (especially my own) are great at "virtue-signalling" that sounds great but in practice is meaningless. The push to an EV fleet can't happen unless the generation and transmission is greatly upgraded, and I just don't see any efforts to do that, so for every Tesla on the road, the chance of household brown-outs just increased.

 

[ddemair]

I understand your position.
I mean, it's not like the "experts" have ever changed their position on anything, right?
(Eggs, coffee, cocaine, tobacco, the automobile, sugar, salt, red meat, vegetables, cannabis, sleep, covid, yada, yada.)
Much less have they ever been proven wrong.
(The earth is flat, the sun revolves around the earth, etc.)

Yup, it's enough to confuse the most analytically rationalizing amongst us.

And yet, it's still important to make decisions based upon the best knowledge we have today.

 

[Obo]

The way things are headed currently is seems likely to be a 2 solution system & it will end up with:

1. hydrogen based solutions replacing where diesel is used now and

2. electric solutions replacing where gasoline is used now.

There is no one size fits all here. Replacing an energy dense fossil fuel in the same stored energy / unit size is almost impossible.

 

[rwthomas1]

If anyone is so inclined, there is a fantastic book by Vaclav Smil, called How the World Really Works. Its apolitical, and based in facts and data. Read it, and come back and debate.

 

[Sadlsor]

It's good to know that internet posters are able to offer better information than the best scientists of nearly 200 countries. Yeah, what do they know and what is their agenda.

And how do we know these are "the best" scientists, when so many other scientists have been shut down?
And I'm being serious.
This is, in my view, absolutely no difference than all those healthcare professionals who dissented against Fauci's narrative (who was backed and supported by this administration, his sycophants, Pfizer, the WHO, the CDC, the NIH...) and were fired in the midst of covid? All because THEIR personal and professional experiences in the front lines of the plannedemic differed than the acceptable and approved storyline. George Orwell, anyone?
Even social media shut down their accounts, and the accounts of those who would share their views and their posts.
And then the mainstream propagandists, including Fauci, were proven wrong, were shown to have financial interest in keeping their story alive, and largely discredited.
I find that highly disturbing.

 

[Gerhard]

If anyone is so inclined, there is a fantastic book by Vaclav Smil, called How the World Really Works. Its apolitical, and based in facts and data. Read it, and come back and debate.

Smil's conclusion is basically that in order for society to survive we have to wean off fossil fuels and convert to electricity, he is a proponent for nuclear power.

 

[Slammer]

We need deasil, gas, natural gas, solar, H2, hydro, wind, nuclear, geothermal - any energy. I am all for progress.
But the climate is normal. Change is normal variation. There is no crisis. It is good to be prudent with our climate.
There is no scientific proof that C02 effects our temperature by any amount that is measurable.
You can believe what you like, but I see that the data and basic science shows other that what they claim.
If they were right. I would back them up. There are too many flaws in their reports and studies. Yes, I read them.
A mountain made out of an ant hill.
If you want to know more about Co2 get yourself a cheap Co2 meter and stick it in your bedroom or family room.
400ppm will quickly rise to 800ppm and in the morning it will be over 1600ppm.
The ISS has an upper limit of 5000ppm and submarines are said to be 8000ppm.
High levels are not healthy, but not deadly, and plants love it....
Open a window and let in fresh air you will sleep better.

A fellow engineer was telling me in a previous job he had two trucks, one gas, the other LNG.
The power difference was significant. H2 has a lower power density, as the article said, it will be good for scooters.

E-motorcycles are 4 to 12 HP (Suron, Zero) and the Tesla car runs at 15 HP !!! - Our ST1300 runs at 75 HP.
One has to be careful about these numbers as there is a difference in efficiencies.
But if you sucked out 350 hp on the Tesla car throttle, the 1,000 pound battery would be dead in ten minutes, since it only has the energy of two gallons of gas. Then you have to worry about dendrites. E-trucks get only one quarter the distance under load.

Again we need ten times more electric generation and transmission than we have. Not fifty percent more, ten times more!
All those charging stations have to get power from somewhere. They only give you the half that fits their story line.

I am looking forward to getting an E-Bike and a E-motorcycle, not by being falsely driven by climate fanticity,
but because it would be fun and it would fit the purpose of short trips with a light load.
Long trips I will stick to the ST1300. We can claim to be green as we are feeding the plants.....

I really don´t agree with this line of thought. In the last decade the mean global temperature has risen by 1.1° C from the pre-industrial age and it is rising by 02° C every year. This is not dragged from somewhere controversial this is happening, and we are seeing the consequences of it right now. This is already a huge increase and we are set to reach or go higher than 2°!
1.5! means we lose the icecaps, especially the Greenland ice shield and that will seriously challenge our way of life on this planet. Due to the increase in temperature the permafrost is thawing releasing gigatons of methane into the atmosphere. Methane is 90times a greater climate gas than Co2 is, and the concentration of atmospheric methane is skyrocketing, luckily it breaks down much easier than Co2. However were the worst case to happen then the amount of methane released into the atmosphere could trigger what is called "the great dying" like it did at the end of the Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum.
But that is apocalyptical and we won´t be around for that.
Worrying at the moment is that our climate relies on a defined border between the hot tropics and the cold arctics, seperated by the jet stream this global climate engine keeps things the way they are. But it needs the temperature differential to work. cold north, temperate zones, hot tropics, then temperate zone and finally a cold south. That is our basic planetary climate model. What is happening now is that these defined bands are beginning to change and meander and that is bad, very bad.

 

[catcher]

Of course we'll gradually get away from fossil fuels, simply because that's a finite resource. Although hydrogen use will increase, nuclear is the way of the future. There's research and testing being done to replace fission with fusion, and when viability is established, we're on our way! Forward, that is! We already have electric toothbrushes and lots more. The grid is already in place, although enhanced safety will somewhat negate it's importance. That's because every city and even small municipalities will have their own safe generating plant. Electric mass transit will become so prevalent that only a limited few will have cars, electric, that is. And us motorheads will have hydrogen powered motorcycles, so we can be fast, furious, and loving it!

 

[Slammer]

Of course we'll gradually get away from fossil fuels, simply because that's a finite resource. Although hydrogen use will increase, nuclear is the way of the future. There's research and testing being done to replace fission with fusion, and when viability is established, we're on our way! Forward, that is! We already have electric toothbrushes and lots more. The grid is already in place, although enhanced safety will somewhat negate it's importance. That's because every city and even small municipalities will have their own safe generating plant. Electric mass transit will become so prevalent that only a limited few will have cars, electric, that is. And us motorheads will have hydrogen powered motorcycles, so we can be fast, furious, and loving it!

Fusion is always another ten years away, as it has been since the 1940ties, so don´t hold your breath. Hydrogen is a cute idea but not realistic as it is not scalable to what we would require, and there is the little issue that Hydrogen is an energy carrier and not an energy source, also there is the other small matter that makes it that you wont be riding the Honda Hindenburg 1100 GT anytime soon.

 

[catcher]

@Slammer - you're right when you say fusion is not available quite yet.

What Is the Future of Fusion Energy?

Nuclear fusion won’t arrive in time to fix climate change, but it could be essential for our future energy needs

www.scientificamerican.com

).
Hydrogen is just something that'll make it possible to enjoy ICEs (for a price) when petroleum is gone, not to the races!
Now if we could just find the fountain of eternal youth - the happenings on planet earth would be interesting to watch during the next fifty years or so...

 

[Gerhard]

In 50 years riders might get a real thrill from a low frequency hum.

If you believe in an afterlife you should be able to vicariously enjoy the tech of the future unless you are assigned to shoveling coal.

 

[jfheilman]

And how do we know these are "the best" scientists, when so many other scientists have been shut down?
And I'm being serious.
This is, in my view, absolutely no difference than all those healthcare professionals who dissented against Fauci's narrative (who was backed and supported by this administration, his sycophants, Pfizer, the WHO, the CDC, the NIH...) and were fired in the midst of covid? All because THEIR personal and professional experiences in the front lines of the plannedemic differed than the acceptable and approved storyline. George Orwell, anyone?
Even social media shut down their accounts, and the accounts of those who would share their views and their posts.
And then the mainstream propagandists, including Fauci, were proven wrong, were shown to have financial interest in keeping their story alive, and largely discredited.
I find that highly disturbing.

An excellent and spot on response.

 

[Belisaerio]

I think our best hope is e-fuels, artificially created fuels.
The biggest problems with solar and wind is that they aren't consistent and power storage is insufficient. Gasoline and diesel are incredibly efficient batteries. You can build a nuclear plant anywhere and run it fully optimized to produce the fuels.
Best of all, it is literally gasoline, diesel or whatever hydrocarbon you created, so no new infrastructure is needed beyond production.
Yes the power needs are significant, but not near what would be needed to run an all electric traffic system, let alone build it in the first place.

 

[spiderman302]

mean global temperature taken out of context is deceiving.
global temperatures change 144° C from -90°C to 54°
5° C average change is normal variation.
Your temperature changes every day 5° to 17° C. Winter to summer it changes 17° to 72° C
1.1° C is just a few hours difference....
We live in extremes not averages.
just an empty scare tactic.

 

[Gerhard]

mean global temperature take out of context is deceiving.
global temperatures change 144° C from -90°C to 54°
5° C change is normal variation.
Your temperature changes every day 5° to 17° C. Winter to summer it changes 72° C
1.1° C is just a few hours difference....
We live in extremes not averages.
just an empty scare tactic.

Either you are talking about a subject you lack a basic understanding of or worse you are intentionally deceptive, there is a wee bit of difference between climate and weather.

 

[spiderman302]

https://earth.gsfc.nasa.gov/cryo/data/current-state-sea-ice-cover

.

At its peak, the Greenland Ice Sheet is 3,200 meters above sea level, and on average it is approx. 2,135 meters thick.
In fact, 65 % of the surface of the ice is more than 2,000 meters above sea level. Not likely to ever melt.

 

[Slammer]

And how do we know these are "the best" scientists, when so many other scientists have been shut down?
And I'm being serious.
This is, in my view, absolutely no difference than all those healthcare professionals who dissented against Fauci's narrative (who was backed and supported by this administration, his sycophants, Pfizer, the WHO, the CDC, the NIH...) and were fired in the midst of covid? All because THEIR personal and professional experiences in the front lines of the plannedemic differed than the acceptable and approved storyline. George Orwell, anyone?
Even social media shut down their accounts, and the accounts of those who would share their views and their posts.
And then the mainstream propagandists, including Fauci, were proven wrong, were shown to have financial interest in keeping their story alive, and largely discredited.
I find that highly disturbing.

Where do you get your information from?

 

[Slammer]

https://earth.gsfc.nasa.gov/cryo/data/current-state-sea-ice-cover

.

At its peak, the Greenland Ice Sheet is 3,200 meters above sea level, and on average it is approx. 2,135 meters thick.
In fact, 65 % of the surface of the ice is more than 2,000 meters above sea level. Not likely to ever melt.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but real scientist-y folk are worried

Greenland’s Ice Sheet might be close to first tipping point — Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

04/05/2023 - The Greenland Ice Sheet is likely to be halfway towards a tipping point whose crossing would imply extensive further melting, a new study finds. While humanity has emitted ca. 500 gigatons of carbon so far, with about 1000 gigatons of carbon much of the massive ice sheet will melt...

www.pik-potsdam.de

.

As I have said before, where we are now, who cares about the nitty gritty who and how. Fact is, the climate is changing for the worse, sorry deniers, like it or not, facts are facts.
Thing is our civilization can´t survive the projected change in it´s current form.
So.... What are we going to do about it?