Global Warmists back off on prediction

[Aliantha]

The only thing you've demonstrated is your ability to argue semantics tw.

That's about all I have to say on this one.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by tw

Suppose we make hydrogen from a petroleum based energy source at $80 per MW-Hr. By the time those 10 units of energy to make, package, and transport that energy to a car, then only 2 units remain. So now the hydrogen is $400 per MW-Hr. And these numbers assume 100% perfect 'economies of scale'. What were those costs for Sydney? About $5500 per MW-Hr. OK. With economies of scale, then the price might decrease 10 times. Even with a price reduction of ten times due to mythical 'economies of scale', prices still remain multiple times higher.

The point is "petroleum based" is not going to be an option in the future. The future is going to be expensive, very expensive. What we feel are logical solutions from past experience, may not be in the future.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

The only thing you've demonstrated is your ability to argue semantics tw.

That's about all I have to say on this one.

To simplify it - 'economies of scale' only exist where innovation is possible. It is a symptom and not a solution. That is why GM threw money at problems like a grenade - and only made problems worst. They did not innovate. There solution was 'economies of scale' which only resulted in their higher costs.

Mass production does not automatically reduce costs. But then the numbers were even provided. Even with cost reductions, hydrogen is still massively more expensive. Aliantha has only done what I see often. As soon as I put forth numbers, then eyes glaze over. One common expression during that glazing is: "only thing you've demonstrated is your ability to argue semantics".

Hydrogen is not a fuel. And yet hydrogen is being promoted by some here as if it were a fuel. Hydrogen in those Sydney buses is only working - not working OK - as prices demonstrate.

Semantics? We will remain a petroleum based economy in everyone’s lifetime. Some technologies will supplement petroleum. But there is no way around petroleum due to its high energy per pound numbers and other fundamentally simple and irreversible facts. Time to grasp that reality and deal with it. Both global warming and energy problems require solutions that do more with less. There is no 'magic bullet'. There is no 'blue-steel'. "Mass production" (economies of scale)does not automatically make the impossible possible. But there are solutions.

[HungLikeJesus]

"Computers in the future may weigh no more than one and a half tons." —Popular Mechanics, Forecasting the Relentless March of Science, 1949

"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."
—Thomas Watson, Chairman of IBM, 1943

"I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won't last out the year."
—The Editor in Charge of Business Books for Prentice Hall, 1957

"But what . . . is it good for?"
—Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Divisions of IBM, commenting on the microchip, 1968

"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home."
—Ken Olson, President, Chairman, and Founder of Digital Equipment Corporation, 1977

"I watched his face (Samuel F.B. Morse) closely to see if he was not deranged, and was assured by other Senators as we left the room that they had no confidence in it either."
—Senator Oliver Smith of Indiana, 1842, after witnessing a first demonstration of the telegraph

"Well-informed people know it is impossible to transmit their voices over wires, and even if it were possible, the thing would not have practical value."
—Editorial in the Boston Post, 1865

"Radio has no future."
—Lord Kelvin, Physicist and President of the Royal Society, 1897

"The radio craze will die out in time."
—Thomas Edison, 1922

"There's a lunatic in the lobby who says he's invented a device for transmitting pictures over the air. Be careful, he may have a razor on him."
—Editor of the London Daily Express, commenting to a staffer on someone who had asked to see a reporter and was waiting downstairs

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by tw

But there is no way around petroleum due to its high energy per pound numbers and other fundamentally simple and irreversible facts.

The cost per mile, monetarily and socially, is the bottom line. Right now petroleum can't be beaten, but that's not an unassailable position. If cleaner technology is developed or the cost skyrockets, the picture could change drastically.

[bluesdave]

HLJ, back in the 70s I was heavily into Hi-Fi, and purchased a number of Hi-Fi magazines every month. I still remember an editorial in one, where the editor was dismissing digital music as being impossible to achieve, and that we would never see it in our life times. How funny is that? I cannot remember precisely, but I think he was reacting to Philips announcing the development of the CD.

[HungLikeJesus]

Originally Posted by bluesdave

HLJ, back in the 70s I was heavily into Hi-Fi, and purchased a number of Hi-Fi magazines every month. I still remember an editorial in one, where the editor was dismissing digital music as being impossible to achieve, and that we would never see it in our life times. How funny is that? I cannot remember precisely, but I think he was reacting to Philips announcing the development of the CD.

The interesting thing is that some of the people quoted (e.g. Ken Olson, Thomas Watson, Lord Kelvin) were in a position to really know what they were talking about, and would have had a strong influence on what others were doing in their field.

I think the biggest danger is to just say "It can't be done," and discourage others from trying.

Sometimes engineers think that they have all the answers. But it's necessary to be able to work with MBAs and politicians and mechanics and marketers and english majors, and all those other people who are necessary to run a successful enterprise.

Engineers and scientists sometimes forget that they are just one little link in a long chain.