General > General Technical Chat
the dark side of cobalt
<< < (18/40) > >>
vad:
It is scaremongering based on unreliable climate models. Are we all meant to be frightened by this climate change scare?

Weather and climate have always undergone changes, and one thing life has mastered is adaptation to these changes.

A 3-degree Celsius increase may sound significant, but the majority of the change would occur at high latitudes, such as an 8-degree Celsius rise in the Russian and Canadian tundra, Arctic, and Southern oceans. Temperature increases at the equator and tropics would be more modest compared to the average.

For instance, I lived on the equator in the remarkable concrete jungle of Singapore for about a decade. The weather there can shift within minutes - clear skies transform into torrential rain and back to sunshine all in an hour. While it might have been challenging for British colonists to survive there 200 years ago, modern infrastructure, including air conditioning powered predominantly by electricity generated from fossil fuels, allowed not only Russian expats like me but also a Polar Bear to live there comfortably. If people can adapt to rapid and extreme weather changes, they can certainly adapt to gradual climate change, unless Greta's followers destroy our economy and return us to a pre-Industrial Revolution reality.
Siwastaja:

--- Quote from: PlainName on July 12, 2023, 07:29:14 pm ---
--- Quote from: Siwastaja on July 12, 2023, 05:43:10 pm ---Car manufacturers work with li-ion cell manufacturers and get their own warranties, as manufacturers know their products better than the simple public datasheet says. Rest assured, we understand what we are doing even if you don't.

--- End quote ---

Suppose you're manufacturing, for the sake of illustration, a garden hose. Hoses wear out (just go with it) and most available hoses state that they will pass 10,000 gallons before requiring replacement. Your hose is nothing special, but you advertise it as going at least 50,000 gallons. Not only that, you guarantee - via lifetime free replacement - that it will. Naturally, any discerning gardener will buy your hose in preference to the competition that clearly sells an inferior product. But... your hose is exactly the same; the only difference is your warranty. You figure that most gardeners sprinkle at most a couple of gallons a day when they water the plants on the patio, and they will never come close to 10,000 gallons. The very few that use the hose to fill a swimming pool twice a year will just ask for a warranty replacement and you'll send them two, to keep them providing 5-star reviews for service and validation of your (known but you to be rubbish) guarantee.

Why wouldn't car manufacturers play that game too?

--- End quote ---

Your analogy is absolutely perfect because
A) hoses do not wear out based on the gallons of water that ran through them, but completely different factors - aging damage, UV exposure, kinking, freezing damage, etc.
B) hoses do not come with "gallons through the hose" ratings.

Exact same thing with li-ion. Manufacturers do not rate them for "this many kWh stored until warranty goes out", because the actual wear patterns are more complex than that.

The problem is people who have absolutely no idea what they are talking about, trying to discuss a subject, and come up with poor analogies. Battery science is weird and complex for laymen. For example, it is entirely possible certain type of microcycling to/from grid actually increases battery life. When regenerative braking was an interesting study subject, it was speculated it would wear out the battery prematurely (many small microcycles), but it was studied and found out it increases battery life.

As for the question, why would car/battery/cell manufacturers take extra work (all this analysis, and complicated battery management) and risk (that they still did something wrong and ended up shortening battery life) - they won't unless there is some kind of incentive. It can be legal requirement to do so, monetary compensation, or a monetary saving for the customer which is large enough so that people want that feature and will pay for it.
PlainName:

--- Quote ---Your analogy is absolutely perfect because
A) hoses do not wear out based on the gallons of water that ran through them, but completely different factors - aging damage, UV exposure, kinking, freezing damage, etc.
B) hoses do not come with "gallons through the hose" ratings
--- End quote ---

I asked you to pretend they did for the sake of illustrating the argument that would then become apparent. Perhaps that was too deep for you.
Siwastaja:
Oh, we can pretend that battery manufacturer comes with such condition. In this premise, I would of course agree. But because such condition does not exist I don't see the point. In the end, how hoses or batteries actually work in real world, matters for the manufacturers, not how they work in an imaginary scenario "for the sake of illustration". And cell/battery manufacturers really know their products so they don't need to play such games. This is just normal business.
tom66:

--- Quote from: vad on July 12, 2023, 11:54:49 pm ---It is scaremongering based on unreliable climate models. Are we all meant to be frightened by this climate change scare?
--- End quote ---

What if it is not scaremongering?  You can model the climate fairly accurately.  You know the thermal forcing of CO2 (this can be tested in a lab.)  You know what insolation is and how much it varies by.  We have a good idea of how much CO2 has been absorbed by the oceans by both measuring dissolved CO2 and also by proxy as atmospheric CO2 should have risen by x but instead has risen by some fraction less.  Sampling of atmospheric gases is easy.  So once that's all done you can build up a model of how insulated the atmosphere is, the change in that and the equivalent temperature rise.  This is almost something you could do "at home", but it's certainly something that could be checked by most.

As for whether to be scared about it - well I dunno.  It's kinda inevitable at this point so fear is probably the wrong response.  I'm pretty alarmed that people are still debating that it is happening when basically everyone in the field and in tangentially related fields is in agreement.  There's disagreement over the magnitude of the effect or how bad it will be, but no one is saying the outcome will be good.


--- Quote from: vad on July 12, 2023, 11:54:49 pm ---Weather and climate have always undergone changes, and one thing life has mastered is adaptation to these changes.
--- End quote ---

Yes, over tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of years.  Seriously, the rate of temperature change is a massive anomaly, it's comparable with an asteroid impact on a small scale.  There is no evidence for an anomaly on this scale in the last 1mil+ years.  I like this graph/comic: https://xkcd.com/1732/


--- Quote from: vad on July 12, 2023, 11:54:49 pm ---A 3-degree Celsius increase may sound significant, but the majority of the change would occur at high latitudes, such as an 8-degree Celsius rise in the Russian and Canadian tundra, Arctic, and Southern oceans. Temperature increases at the equator and tropics would be more modest compared to the average.
--- End quote ---

A significant increase in arctic tundra temperatures risks the release of methane from permafrost which would further trigger warming.  Given methane has a 100yr GWP of about 20, it doesn't take much methane released to cause further warming, which could cause further warming and so on.  Positive feedback loops like that are extremely concerning.

As for temperature increases in the equatorial region being modest:  if you have a look at models for the world in Koppen classification, the equatorial regions are likely to become much more arid and peak temperatures of 60C are regularly anticipated.  Peak temperatures in those regions have already been climbing and this is well correlated to human CO2 emissions.


--- Quote from: vad on July 12, 2023, 11:54:49 pm ---For instance, I lived on the equator in the remarkable concrete jungle of Singapore for about a decade. The weather there can shift within minutes - clear skies transform into torrential rain and back to sunshine all in an hour. While it might have been challenging for British colonists to survive there 200 years ago, modern infrastructure, including air conditioning powered predominantly by electricity generated from fossil fuels, allowed not only Russian expats like me but also a Polar Bear to live there comfortably. If people can adapt to rapid and extreme weather changes, they can certainly adapt to gradual climate change, unless Greta's followers destroy our economy and return us to a pre-Industrial Revolution reality.
--- End quote ---

Weather is not climate - but I'm sure you know that. 

No one sensible is saying humans can't adapt to climate change, it's just whether that adaptation is going to lead to a significant degradation in quality of life compared to making changes now to reduce the impact.  There are ways to adapt the economy and way of life without destroying what we know, the big problem with the green movement is it is full of nutters, but that doesn't mean they aren't acting for a good reason.
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod