• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

EV's, Gas/Oil, and The Future- another swerve split from- JT Hints Boosting Canada’s Military Spending

A bit of good news
I worked on this project and wrote the approval for them. They are using a existing CN loading ramp. Rail cars are rolled onto the large barge and then they discharge their contents into the barge. The barge moves over to it's dock. The smaller bunkering barge brings fuel to the ships at anchor. The Ramp is still being used for other vessels as well. This means Deep Sea vessels can bunker in PR. The only down side is that PR was exempt from the low sulphur oil requirements as there was no bunkering there. I suspect they will lose that status, but I think PR is to important now for that to matter.

 
When we burn carbon-based fuels, I have a pretty good idea what waste products are going up the stack and into the community's air.

If we burn whatever people are throwing into their refuse, I have no real idea what kind of sh!t is being produced for people to inhale.
 
Brad Sallows said:
When we burn carbon-based fuels, I have a pretty good idea what waste products are going up the stack and into the community's air.

If we burn whatever people are throwing into their refuse, I have no real idea what kind of sh!t is being produced for people to inhale.
Click to expand...
true, but I haven't heard of any major epidemics developing in Sweden as a result of contaminated air so they must have figured something out
 
YZT580 said:
true, but I haven't heard of any major epidemics developing in Sweden as a result of contaminated air so they must have figured something out
Click to expand...
The numbers of unusual illnesses might simply be so low as to be ignored, unless clusters start popping up.
 
Brad Sallows said:
The numbers of unusual illnesses might simply be so low as to be ignored, unless clusters start popping up.
Click to expand...
just as an observation, it intrigues me that we constantly come up with negatives and barriers to concepts that go against our notion of the 'right' way to do things instead of trying to take the good things from an idea and make it work. Incineration is a case in point. Don't you think that the Swedes have identified and dealt with any potential issues?
 
YZT580 said:
just as an observation, it intrigues me that we constantly come up with negatives and barriers to concepts that go against our notion of the 'right' way to do things instead of trying to take the good things from an idea and make it work. Incineration is a case in point. Don't you think that the Swedes have identified and dealt with any potential issues?
Click to expand...
Consider these two schools of thought.

1. Start now, and work out the problems later.

2. Conduct a bunch of reviews to ensure we take every opportunity to mitigate damage.

What happens in public debate is that many people tend to choose whichever principle suits their current position. Those who land on the proponent side go with "1"; those opposed go with "2". If their positions switch on a different issue, their principles flip.

The courts have a never-ending stream of cases in which people seek damages and restitution for earlier mistakes, so I lack any confidence that it is ever possible to assume that "it's OK" can be concluded from "someone is doing it". What is true is that the kinds of awards made by courts seem to dwarf whatever it might have cost to do things right in the first place.
 
YZT580 said:
just as an observation, it intrigues me that we constantly come up with negatives and barriers to concepts that go against our notion of the 'right' way to do things instead of trying to take the good things from an idea and make it work. Incineration is a case in point.
Click to expand...
To be honest waste to fuel makes sense if it is not actually recyclable. To environment idealistic people there is only one solution. It is not burning it. The current government and its supporters are idealistic towards recycling. Have no clue what's actually involved. But dam do they feel good when those blue bins get dumped into the truck.
YZT580 said:
Don't you think that the Swedes have identified and dealt with any potential issues?
Click to expand...
Yes they did, that is why they do not include burning of recycled materials as part of their carbon/pollution foot print. They consider it offset.
In Canada we won't consider it an offset. Instead due to the carbon and ash waste is considered worse by some.
 
Brad Sallows said:
Consider these two schools of thought.

1. Start now, and work out the problems later.

2. Conduct a bunch of reviews to ensure we take every opportunity to mitigate damage.

What happens in public debate is that many people tend to choose whichever principle suits their current position. Those who land on the proponent side go with "1"; those opposed go with "2". If their positions switch on a different issue, their principles flip.

The courts have a never-ending stream of cases in which people seek damages and restitution for earlier mistakes, so I lack any confidence that it is ever possible to assume that "it's OK" can be concluded from "someone is doing it". What is true is that the kinds of awards made by courts seem to dwarf whatever it might have cost to do things right in the first place.
Click to expand...
too true.
 
Meanwhile, at Ford... the retreat is in full swing

Reality Strikes – Ford Shifts From EVs to Gasoline Trucks in Oakville Due to Declining Demand and Financial Losses, Challenging Government EV Targets.​


In October 2020, the federal and Ontario governments announced with fanfare that they would each pour $295 million into helping Ford upgrade its assembly plant in Oakville to start making electric vehicles.

“The upgrade of the Ford plant will make Oakville into the company’s No 1. electric vehicle factory in North America,” we were told.

And Prime Minister Trudeau declared: “This is a win-win. . . . helping accelerate our transition to a low-carbon, clean-growth economy, which will help protect our environment, drive innovation, and create many good middle-class jobs.”

In April 2023, Ford announced it will spend $1.8 billion to retool its Oakville Assembly Complex, beginning in mid-2024, to build next-generation passenger electric vehicles in 2025.

Then the target date of 2025 becomes 2027.

And now, in July 2024, reality strikes: Ford confirmed that the Oakville plant would no longer produce electric three-row SUVs but would instead turn out larger, gasoline-powered versions of its flagship F-Series pickup truck.

The reason: a global slowdown in electric vehicle demand, with hesitant customers delaying plans to buy EVs, and many opting instead for hybrid-electric vehicles.

Ford, for one, said it will step up hybrid offerings and that by 2030 it expects to offer hybrid powertrains across its lineup of gas-powered vehicles. Ford has also delayed production of electric pickup trucks in Tennessee.

energynow.ca

Reality Strikes - Ford Shifts From EVs to Gasoline Trucks in Oakville Due to Declining Demand and Financial Losses, Challenging Government EV Targets. - Canadian Energy News, Top Headlines, Commentaries, Features & Events - EnergyNow

In October 2020, the federal and Ontario governments announced with fanfare that they would each pour $295 million into helping Ford upgrade its assembly plant in Oakville to start making electric vehicles. “The upgrade of the Ford plant will make Oakville into the company's No 1. electric...
energynow.ca
 
daftandbarmy said:
In October 2020, the federal and Ontario governments announced with fanfare that they would each pour $295 million into helping Ford upgrade its assembly plant in Oakville to start making electric vehicles.
Click to expand...
Thank goodness we have politicians and bureaucrats to pick winners and losers. Otherwise, we'd have to resort to simply pounding C-notes down gopher holes.
 
They were also a company basing a business plan around a tie up with Chinese companies. Until recently (post-FIPA) that was not illogical.
 
The electric market seems to be crashing all around our ears. Whether governments see it or not, it appears the industry has evaluated their chances of surviving in an all electric world and are starting to hedge their bets by examining alternative power sources. Attached address provides a cursory look at the world outside of the propaganda. The Future of the EV Mandate The costs and time involved with the change=over are going to prove a bridge too far. Emterra rolled out their new E=trucks in Comox last week and have already petitioned for power upgrades in the region to support chargers. (and they are only one company operating 8 trucks).
 
Just a reminder. Peter Zeihan also argued that Russia was going to steamroll Ukraine in days. And he said this after the 50 km convoy had developed.

I was exposed to some of his stuff on post-grad at NPS. Best taken with a grain of salt. He loves to tell Americans what makes them feel good. Best example is his inconsistent view on immigration. He predicts it will completely destabilize Europe. But somehow, he argues that immigration is an American strength and will stave off demographic collapse in the US, which will be China's fate. And oh, Canada is apparently doomed to demographic collapse and destabilization from immigration at the same time.
 
Here's what legacy automakers should (and do) fear:

electrek.co

BYD's new EV, starting at less than $10,000, is stoking fear across the industry

Leading EV maker BYD shook the industry after unveiling the new Seagull (Dolphin Mini), with starting prices as low as...
electrek.co electrek.co

But you'll say, we'll never allow those in Canada or the US. Maybe. We'll see:

www.theglobeandmail.com

Chinese EV maker BYD tells Ottawa it plans to enter Canadian market

Ottawa is weighing trade action against made-in-China EVs, and the electric-vehicle manufacturer’s biggest potential obstacle may be tariffs
www.theglobeandmail.com www.theglobeandmail.com

But the Canadian market is not very significant globally. And that car would be 3x the price with tariffs and Canadian safety standards. But this isn't true in a lot of the developing world. This will cost the same as so many gas cars. But won't have the expensive fuel bill. EVs like this, in the developing world, have two impacts. First, they steal sales from legacy automakers, shrinking their revenue, manufacturing efficiency, etc. Next, they reduce demand for imported oil, improving the trade balance of those countries and further tying them to China. So much of the discussion is focused on Chinese EVs coming to Europe and North America. That misses the point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top