|
|
Post by EspadaIII on Sept 13, 2024 12:35:41 GMT
And then you have real academics who publish dodgy evidence because of the people who fund their research....
Especially those funded by the Chinese.
|
|
WDB
Full Member
Posts: 7,425 
|
Post by WDB on Sept 13, 2024 12:38:31 GMT
See Tim Harford on publication bias: ignoring or suppressing results that don’t show what you want.
|
|
bpg
Full Member
Posts: 2,809
|
Post by bpg on Sept 13, 2024 12:46:39 GMT
Prof Phil Jones at the University of East Anglia/Angular (one for the 'Colloquial Sayings' thread) and climategate was one that came to mind.
How a teams findings can be cherry picked resulting in death threats.
|
|
|
|
Post by Humph on Sept 13, 2024 13:06:47 GMT
When Frank Whittle patented the jet engine around 1930, his commanding officer in the RAF stymied its development because it didn’t suit his agenda. More than 10 years later the Germans used his research to develop their own version. Some would argue that if the British had pressed on with that technology in 1930, it could have led to a level of British air superiority that would have ended WW2 much sooner.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2024 13:09:55 GMT
I guess you'd better pop out and buy a Toyota Mirai then Humph, it might well bring the forthcoming war with Russia to a swifter conclusion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Humph on Sept 13, 2024 13:15:05 GMT
Who knows what there is still to discover, for good or bad, but it feels better to me to keep looking anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2024 13:24:41 GMT
Quite, I already agreed with that. However, I'm not one for banging my head against a brick wall at a dead end.
|
|
|
|
Post by Humph on Sept 13, 2024 13:39:44 GMT
Quite, I already agreed with that. However, I'm not one for banging my head against a brick wall at a dead end. Clearly there are people at fairly major motor companies who still feel it’s a road worth travelling. Perhaps they should be told that there’s some bloke on the internet who knows better? 😉 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2024 14:11:33 GMT
Faith in something because you want it to be true or because you think it serves your purpose is a fairly common human reaction, and even large car companies can act irrationally. Look how many have gone bust. Tesla led the way with BEV and charging infrastructure. Where is the Hydrogen equivalent?
It's an illusion clung to out of bloody mindedness. Whoever it is doing the clinging, including large motor corporations.
|
|
bpg
Full Member
Posts: 2,809
|
Post by bpg on Sept 13, 2024 15:40:36 GMT
By that logic BEV shouldn't exist. In the 1980s early attempts to develop rechargeable Li-ion batteries were ultimately abandoned due to safety concerns, as lithium metal is unstable and prone to dendrite formation, which can cause short-circuiting. Someone kept banging their head against that particular wall.
|
|
|
|
Post by Humph on Sept 13, 2024 15:55:24 GMT
You’d better tell ‘em then Al, it’ll save them a bloody fortune! 😂
|
|
Rob
Full Member
Posts: 2,778
|
Post by Rob on Sept 13, 2024 16:22:49 GMT
The flaw with using Hydrogen for powering cars and possibly use in part to heat homes as a mixture with natural gas is.... it is not readily available in large quantities. Then there's the talk of Green, Grey, etc. for how it's produced. If it's made from water then that is quite energy inefficient. If made from petrochemicals then again there's energy needed and what are the by products (I've not researched it).
I can see how producing hydrogen from water could be used as a way of 'storing' the energy from say a wind-farm and then use the hydrogen. That way wind farms might be used more than they are - and we're building lots more. You could of course store the 'energy' in big batteries, pump water up into a reservoir for later release like in Dinorwig.
I do think we still need to think outside the box and there should be multiple solutions. EVs seem to easiest for now.
|
|
WDB
Full Member
Posts: 7,425
|
Post by WDB on Sept 13, 2024 16:41:05 GMT
By that logic BEV shouldn't exist… rechargeable Li-ion batteries were ultimately abandoned … Someone kept banging their head against that particular wall. Technical walls are usually easier to crack — or circumvent — than economic ones. It’ll take more than a technological breakthrough to make it sensible to put electricity through all those energy-losing steps, rather than sticking it into a battery next to the motor that’s going to use it. Where you need a lot in one place — a steelworks, or a major construction site — it might make sense to have a permanent or semi-permanent hydrogen plant on site. But private hydrogen-fuelled vehicles make very little economic sense. And are the people who carp below every line on the internet about the price of BEVs suddenly going to change their tune at the sight of the first commercial HEV? More importantly, though, we need change now (well, needed it ten years ago) so imagining that we can wait until 2028 and happily continue visiting our beloved petrol stations (if we could fuel cars with compressed gas from a domestic main, wouldn’t we be doing it already?) means the problem just goes on getting worse. |
|
|
|
Post by Humph on Sept 13, 2024 17:01:01 GMT
Given that for example, electric HGVs are likely to continue to be a challenge to integrate, I’m pleased that alternatives continue to be sought. Whether that is hydrogen or synthetic fuels, or indeed some as yet to be developed technologies are the way forward.
BEV will continue to have a place, but I hope as part of a menu of future options. Stifling research and innovation just because it currently seems difficult feels like a retrograde position.
|
|
|
|
Post by dixinormus on Sept 14, 2024 8:33:36 GMT
I think we should launch the DIesel REnaissance club, or DIRE for short. Humph as President & bpg as President-Elect 🤣
|
|
