Products > Dodgy Technology

Ecology vs Disposable Electronic Cigarette

<< < (13/14) > >>

Zero999:

--- Quote from: NiHaoMike on March 28, 2024, 12:41:56 pm ---
--- Quote from: Zero999 on March 28, 2024, 08:14:22 am ---I doubt junk food taxes would work. There's already a sugar tax on soft drinks over a certain percentage of sugar, but the manufactures simply replaced some of the sugar with artificial sweeteners, which aren't proven to be any more healthy or result in weight loss. Food is already processed enough. I doubt anyone wants it to become more artificial to circumvent taxes.
--- End quote ---
Then just ban or massively tax the artificial sweeteners and other problematic additives as well.
--- End quote ---
Great. More laws.

The problem is there isn't a scientific consensus on what's harmful and what isn't. For example aspartame is generally considered safe. It might be carcinogenic in large quantities, but the same is true for other chemicals which are present in food, or develop during cooking.

Quite often it's the food as a whole which is healthy or not so healthy, rather than the individual ingredients. For example, whole oranges are high in sugar, yet don't result in the same sugar spikes as orange juice, which is similar to a fizzy drink. What law can deal with that?


--- Quote from: Andy Chee on March 30, 2024, 02:45:27 pm ---
--- Quote from: Zero999 on March 28, 2024, 10:51:15 am ---I don't smoke myself, but am biased towards libertarianism and as fewer laws as possible.

--- End quote ---

In jurisdictions with socialised healthcare e.g. UK, it is incumbent upon the government to reduce the cost of treating smoking related diseases. So in that circumstance it makes rational sense for governments to do all they can to reduce smoking rates in the community.

--- End quote ---
The same is true of other vices such as alcohol.

--- Quote from: NiHaoMike on March 31, 2024, 03:42:41 am ---
--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on March 30, 2024, 10:11:49 pm ---That is a good point, and a very problematic one leading to a "green" paradox: you're mentioning the ICE -> EV transition, but of course you realize the same will apply from one generation of EV to the next. The next gen will probably be much more "environmentally friendly" in isolation, for instance the batteries, and that will trigger the replacement of the whole EV park in the same way. That's unreasonable.

The solution to this is quite simple though: do the maths, and do them honestly. Check what is worse, over the lifetime of the vehicles, between keeping a vehicle that runs perfectly fine but is a bit more polluting, vs. one that is less polluting but will have to be manufactured from scratch, and the associated cost of dismantling the old ones.

--- End quote ---
Isn't it that modern EVs are already pretty close to the theoretical maximum efficiency? In that case, there wouldn't be a whole lot of improvement replacing an EV with a newer one.

--- End quote ---
That's not true. A much lighter, energy dense battery would greatly increase the efficiency, as well as causing less air pollution from brake and rubber dust.

tszaboo:

--- Quote from: NiHaoMike on March 31, 2024, 03:42:41 am ---
--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on March 30, 2024, 10:11:49 pm ---That is a good point, and a very problematic one leading to a "green" paradox: you're mentioning the ICE -> EV transition, but of course you realize the same will apply from one generation of EV to the next. The next gen will probably be much more "environmentally friendly" in isolation, for instance the batteries, and that will trigger the replacement of the whole EV park in the same way. That's unreasonable.

The solution to this is quite simple though: do the maths, and do them honestly. Check what is worse, over the lifetime of the vehicles, between keeping a vehicle that runs perfectly fine but is a bit more polluting, vs. one that is less polluting but will have to be manufactured from scratch, and the associated cost of dismantling the old ones.

--- End quote ---
Isn't it that modern EVs are already pretty close to the theoretical maximum efficiency? In that case, there wouldn't be a whole lot of improvement replacing an EV with a newer one.

--- End quote ---
Solid state lithium batteries will be half the size (and safer). Axial Flux motors can save several kilograms of copper windings. Charging losses can be greatly reduced if the car manufacturers would spend a little more effort on software, because the charger itself is efficient but the car wastes a bunch of energy needlessly running everything else.

SiliconWizard:

--- Quote from: NiHaoMike on March 31, 2024, 03:42:41 am ---
--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on March 30, 2024, 10:11:49 pm ---That is a good point, and a very problematic one leading to a "green" paradox: you're mentioning the ICE -> EV transition, but of course you realize the same will apply from one generation of EV to the next. The next gen will probably be much more "environmentally friendly" in isolation, for instance the batteries, and that will trigger the replacement of the whole EV park in the same way. That's unreasonable.

The solution to this is quite simple though: do the maths, and do them honestly. Check what is worse, over the lifetime of the vehicles, between keeping a vehicle that runs perfectly fine but is a bit more polluting, vs. one that is less polluting but will have to be manufactured from scratch, and the associated cost of dismantling the old ones.

--- End quote ---
Isn't it that modern EVs are already pretty close to the theoretical maximum efficiency? In that case, there wouldn't be a whole lot of improvement replacing an EV with a newer one.

--- End quote ---

Far from it, and and it's not just about raw efficiency either: I explicitely mentioned the batteries, which currently still suck and are certainly not the end of the story.
But even the rest is far from having ideal efficiency if you look closely at the whole chain.

Again, my point is: do the maths, don't act with emotion and beliefs.

NiHaoMike:

--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on March 31, 2024, 09:06:42 pm ---Far from it, and and it's not just about raw efficiency either: I explicitely mentioned the batteries, which currently still suck and are certainly not the end of the story.
But even the rest is far from having ideal efficiency if you look closely at the whole chain.

Again, my point is: do the maths, don't act with emotion and beliefs.

--- End quote ---
Aren't EVs something like 80-90% efficient, as opposed to state of the art gas engines that top out around 40% before considering other losses? I'm sure a lot can be improved on the resources needed to manufacture a new car, but that's irrelevant for a car that's already been in use for many years.

AVGresponding:

--- Quote from: NiHaoMike on April 02, 2024, 02:41:51 am ---
--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on March 31, 2024, 09:06:42 pm ---Far from it, and and it's not just about raw efficiency either: I explicitely mentioned the batteries, which currently still suck and are certainly not the end of the story.
But even the rest is far from having ideal efficiency if you look closely at the whole chain.

Again, my point is: do the maths, don't act with emotion and beliefs.

--- End quote ---
Aren't EVs something like 80-90% efficient, as opposed to state of the art gas engines that top out around 40% before considering other losses? I'm sure a lot can be improved on the resources needed to manufacture a new car, but that's irrelevant for a car that's already been in use for many years.

--- End quote ---

The motor and battery system may well be, but when you take the system as a whole, ie the whole car, that drops off dramatically

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod