Really? Please give an example of "negative entropy". Just wishing that something was true does not make it so.
And as to the OP, yes electric vehicles are not perfect. They will have a negative impact on the ecology. The problem is that fossil fuels appear to have a larger negative impact. They are far greener than gasoline or diesel powered vehicles just as they are greener than coal powered vehicles.
Or, just maybe, it could have been pure hokum for the ignorant.I can't find the article anymore but it concerns an invention that turns ambient or latent heat of air or water or any liquid into other forms of energy and also dropping the temperature of the air or water at the same time.
The device operates on the basic principle of "Quantum Tunneling" using a special semiconductor barrier. Molecules bouncing around air or water would hit the surface of this barrier, transferring kinetic energy to an electron which causes the electron to "tunnel" across the barrier. Molecules that loses kinetic energy to electrons also loses heat and thus, becomes colder in temperature. The barrier emits infra red radiation at the other end but can also be tweaked to generate electricity.
The process is negative entropy because "chaos" in the random movement of air or water molecules in the form of ambient heat becomes more "ordered" by losing heat at the semiconductor barrier without any form of energy input.
The inventors never makes any claim their device can be used to generate energy but did claim their device makes chilled water without energy input. It's essentially the same thing! Normally, you can't chill water without energy input but with negative entropy, you can. It has dramatic implication for energy use.
We can have many great potential inventions from the field of quantum physics but they usually end up being used in much less spectacular and benign applications like secured transmission of electronic data or like the example above, to chill water.
Unfortunately, humans tend to fear big changes even if they can be quite positive.
And develop an engine that works on "negative entropy". Scientists, especially quantum physicists knows its possible
The device operates on the basic principle of "Quantum Tunneling" using a special semiconductor barrier. Molecules bouncing around air or water would hit the surface of this barrier, transferring kinetic energy to an electron which causes the electron to "tunnel" across the barrier. Molecules that loses kinetic energy to electrons also loses heat and thus, becomes colder in temperature. The barrier emits infra red radiation at the other end but can also be tweaked to generate electricity.
This isn't new though. The production of products are also part and parcel of their environmental credentials. I had heard this argument before, specifically to do with platinum and hydrogen cars. Also, the electricity needs to be generated somewhere, so introducing electric cars to countries with largely fossil fuel based grids will worsen the car-based emmissions - and likely require expansion of those grids with their concomittent extra environmental effect.
The real way to decrease emmissions is austerity, which is essentially what you are doing when you rather walk or take a bike. You can't expect that you can just continue our current lifestyle and just substituting one thing for another that it will magically solve the issue. Alternately you could actively do geo-engineering with whatever unforseen consequences those will have.
EV batteries are sealed units. When they lose efficiency they are still good for other uses and they still contain the same amount of lithium. The metal will ultimately be recycled into new EV batteries. In any case the main metal used in EVs is iron. It too is straightforward to recycle.
???? I was not responding to a claim on batteries. I was responding to the quantum woo that you just responded to.
This isn't new though. The production of products are also part and parcel of their environmental credentials. I had heard this argument before, specifically to do with platinum and hydrogen cars. Also, the electricity needs to be generated somewhere, so introducing electric cars to countries with largely fossil fuel based grids will worsen the car-based emmissions - and likely require expansion of those grids with their concomittent extra environmental effect.
The real way to decrease emmissions is austerity, which is essentially what you are doing when you rather walk or take a bike. You can't expect that you can just continue our current lifestyle and just substituting one thing for another that it will magically solve the issue. Alternately you could actively do geo-engineering with whatever unforseen consequences those will have.
Which is still better than powering it with gasoline. A centralized fossil fuel electric generator is much more efficient than an ICE.
Yes a bicycle.
It healthy and fun. And quite viable for many kinds of trips, tho in the USA we've dug ourselves a deep hole by designing every single thing around the automobile.
I often wonder what it would have been like if horses were still the main mode of transportation. In some California cities, like Compton, it's not uncommon to see people riding horses in the city.
View attachment 309173
View attachment 309174
To my knowledge it's STILL more efficient & cleaner (in almost the entire world, there's some areas with very dirty energy production).Not when you take into consideration the energy loss through all those long power lines, which is what you have with a centralized source
To my knowledge it's STILL more efficient.
We've had EVs for years now - we have a good idea of their lifespan. To my knowledge, if anythin, we're underestimating battery lifespan. Yes, cold weather can reduce range, but that's an issue of convenience. Everything we've seen thus far is they are the cleaner, more efficient option over the life of the vehicle.There are other things to take into consideration when it comes to efficiency. Batteries don't work so well in cold weather. Where I am right now, the highest temperature of the day is 10F. Batteries don't hold a charge so well, and discharge at a faster rate, and charging them when cold shortens their lifespan.
Not really sure what that has to do with anything. Personally, I say we should be using nuclear as the primary electricity source.Relying on solar for electricity generation in Winter isn't so good either since Winter is cloudier and has a lower sun angle.
Take all this together with increasing energy prices due to natural resources being regulated more by the government, and the price goes up even more, just as Obama promised.
Not really sure what that has to do with anything. Personally, I say we should be using nuclear as the primary electricity source.
And? Cost of fuel goes up for ICE too. But can an ICE take advantage of non-fossil fuel energy?
You link says the EV batteries weigh 440kg. They don’t they weigh about 10kg.Just as the environmentalists and government people really start ramping up their efforts to make us switch from gasoline engined vehicles to electric, it's now revealed that they're bad for the planet as well.
"The EU is pumping billions into promoting electric vehicles (EVs) – 200 million are expected to be on the road by 2028. But EVs are not as green as they are portrayed: their production consumes vast amounts of cobalt, nickel, manganese and rare earths that are mined in the rainforests of Africa, Southeast Asia and South America."
Electric vehicles are stealth rainforest killers!
Maybe individual cells weigh that much, but there's no way an EV batter weighs only 10KG.
ETA: The battery of a long range Tesla Model 3 weighs 480KG