CygnusX-1

Members
  • Content

    499
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2
  • Feedback

    0%

Posts posted by CygnusX-1


  1. 3 hours ago, lippy said:

    How often you gotta replace them regenerative 'break' pads?  

     

     

    4 hours ago, brenthutch said:

    “The Journal was highlighting a study from 2022 that, naturally, was ignored by the mainstream press at the time. What the study found was that “brakes and tires on EVs release 1,850 times more particle pollution compared to modern tailpipes.”

    Why? Because EVs are as much as 30% heavier than gas-powered cars, which means more stress on their “regenerative” breaks...

     

    I mean seriously Brent, do you even read/comprehend what you write?

    I can only talk about myself here, but before I got an EV, I had a stick shift and I would down shift and use "engine braking" as much as I could. But even doing that it is in no comparison to what an EV does with regenerative braking. Typically, with my EV I do not even have to hit the brakes until I am at 5 MPH. Tesla Model 3/Y and maybe even new S/X can come to a complete stop without touching the brakes.

    By you posting that "study" shows you know nothing about the functionality of an electric vehicle. It also shows how little the author of the study knows. That is probably why it was ignored by the "media" except for those with an agenda.

    As far as tire wear goes, that has more to do with the way you drive than the weight of a car. My personal experience is that I can get the same wear on tires as my previous gas cars by taking it easy. But most of the time it is just too fun to take corners fast and accelerate fast so I accept the added tire wear. But even with that I'm averaging 40,000 mile tire replacement with summer "sport" tires.

    But that is just one data point. I have not done a study of hundreds of people to get any additional data - other than being part of the EV community and seeing their stated performance.


  2. On 3/6/2024 at 5:52 PM, ryoder said:

    I assume by "muscle car" they are referring to the likes of Mustangs, Camaros, etc, which is silly since all the muscle cars have come with a variety of engines from economy to high performance. Examples I have owned:

    1965 & 1966 Mustangs. 6 cylinders, 3-speeds. Not muscle cars.

    1967 Camaro. 327 2-barrel carb. 2-speed Powerglide. Not a muscle car.

    1970 Mustang Boss 302. 4-barrel carb, 4-speed. Muscle car.

    1970 Barracuda. 6 cylinder, 3-speed. Not a muscle car.

    I think they mean muscle car the same way as gun nuts/nazi/etc. talk about assault rifles. Does it "look" like one? It has nothing to do with the actual functionality.


  3. The problem with this is that even if Thomas leaves the court, since it is so close to an election, the republicans will block any attempt to seat a new judge until after the election because the people will not have a voice in who is elected to pick the next judge.


  4. On 1/9/2024 at 9:41 PM, Phil1111 said:

    "Think of it, magnets," Trump said. "Now all I know about magnets is this, give me a glass of water, let me drop it on the magnets, that's the end of the magnets." is the actual quote. His rambling nonsense is getting worse and worse during his campaign speeches.

    Well, you have to admit. Trump isn't wrong there. Given a sufficiently large enough glass of water, you could drop it onto a thin magnet and it could shatter the magnet into a bunch of tiny pieces therefore ending the usefulness of the magnet and "end[ing] the magnet". 

    You just have to understand the way people who are 'like a smart person' talk. This is all part of the genius that is Trump.


  5. 1 hour ago, tkhayes said:

    well at least you admit that under the Democrats and Biden, gas and oil expansion is not under ANY threat and is in fact, expanding.

    And so are renewable energy projects across the country.  You managed to find a tidbit to claim a 'disaster'.

    Not to be Mr. Obvious here but sometimes I wonder if it actually has to be said to get the point across. This (the OP narrative) isn't a D or R issue. It is a corruption issue and BOTH parties are corrupt. The loss of jobs probably has more to do with the changes in Net Metering than any outright subsidy given by the government/taxpayers.


  6. 1 hour ago, SkyDekker said:

    Best way to get there is kill off anybody over 65 who really isn't contributing to society anymore. You ready to go?

    Again Logan's Run had it right. Maybe not that actual age - that can be up for discussion. But the sentiment was correct. Need to start embedding those crystals.


  7. 17 hours ago, nigel99 said:

    I believe there is some truth to what Cygnus said. While they are not the same, I believe it is a legitimate concern having 2 candidates in their 80's. 

    I would think the Democrats would have a couple of strong candidates that are younger than Biden and by removing the legitimate concern of a president who would be mid 80's at the end of his 2nd term the likelihood of beating Trump would be increased. Trump is evil and it is worth doing whatever it takes to ensure that he is crushed at the polls.

    Not that I'm replying to nigel directly, it is just the last post that referenced my previous one.

    Of course Trump and Biden are not the same person with the same traits. That is not what I mean by "being the same". What is the same is both political parties. Both want their form of dictator. Just look what has happened here in Florida where we no longer will have a primary - only one choice on the ballot. It is not about Biden's age. Here is the problem with Biden:

    image.png.76a9c24ac57f94fd6ea08ad2c9a56172.png

    (How Popular Is Joe Biden? | FiveThirtyEight)

    You are telling me that the D party could not come up with anyone who could beat these numbers? The dems don't even what to find out apparently. Make Biden stand up, grab some balls, and shout out his accomplishments and stand behind them. But he won't do that in fear of offending his good close republican friends.


  8. 16 minutes ago, olofscience said:

    it's not a myth. Did you see the Guardian link?

    Oh, come on. The Guardian was talking about UK subsidies. Those people are not even part of this world. Don't you know that the earth ends at the borders of the continental US? Just remember his argument about F150 sales and only willing to look at US sales and not world-wide sales of vehicles.

    • Like 1

  9. 9 hours ago, jakee said:

    Visualizing-Net-Worth-by-Age-in-America_

    That just looks like a proper lifestyle to me. Although it really highlights the difference between average and median and really should be shown to those that do not comprehend the concept between those two terms.

    But overall, it makes sense. Younger than 35 you are just starting out in this world. You should have very little net worth. 35-44 is where you are starting to accumulate assets and make something of yourself. 45-54 is where you have gained some experience and you income reflecting that. This is where the biggest jump should be happening. 55-64 you are preparing for retirement. If you don't have that nest egg for retirement, you still have some time to invest (although it is really getting a little too late). 65-74 if you are a democrat you are thinking of retirement. If you are a republican and not of the elite, BACK TO THE MINES - otherwise let's party. 75 and older you are living off your retirement so yes your net worth is decreasing. That way you can end your life where you started it back at $76k.


  10. 19 minutes ago, kallend said:

    As a  professor for some 45 years, I could not care less what my students smoked or which deity (if any) they believed in,  so long as they could prove  that they could do science, math and engineering to the satisfaction of the accreditation agencies and their eventual employers.  Their personal lives were none of my business.

    And this is exactly why you would not make a good republican politician. Although you failed to mention if you are highly concerned what your students did "in the bedroom".


  11. On 8/4/2023 at 4:25 PM, johnhking1 said:

    If we stopped turning corn into ethanol that would help.

    You can blame the farm lobby (corn growers) for that mess. They were the ones to petition the government to use corn in ethanol verses other more appropriate vegetation. If I were you, I would go out and punch every farmer in the face for allowing that to happen.


  12. 3 hours ago, ryoder said:

    Stark found that two of the clips in the video came from stock footage.

    So, what are you complaining about? What is a poor singer/songwriter to do on a small budget? It is not like he could stage a multi-million dollar production with hundreds of extras, make-up, costumes, explosions, etc. He needs to get his racist, violent hate out there somehow and make it entertaining to watch. Give him a break.


  13. 3 hours ago, olofscience said:

    As usual, you haven't read the entire article in the link. Good effort making it past the title, though.

    Some of their conclusions: (at the bottom of the page, which brent didn't reach as expected)

     

    Oh, puhleeze. Even your quoted conclusion is full of uncertainty and doubt. Nothing is going to change here, and I quote:

    "climate may be upstaged" and "cannot say at present" and "are expected to be" and "This expectation" and finally "an anticipated"

    See all just speculation. Nothing is going to change. They even admit it. Let's do nothing until the phrases change to WILL happen or IS happening or better yet, HAS already occurred.


  14. 9 hours ago, lippy said:

    Even if you want to put your head in the sand about the realities of climate change, which you obviously do, I don't know what you think you're proving by getting all giddy about burning more coal rather than shoring up our long-term energy security.  I know what I think you're proving, but if I said so I might get a time out.

    Then I'll say it for you. Brent knows he will be long dead before renewables will 100% replace fossil fuels. Therefore for him it is a win and he will not have to change anything. He obviously does not care about humanity or the future of humanity. As long as he gets his, that is all that matters. The affects that we create today are someone else's problem and he doesn't care about them at all. He has no concept of the idea that a small change today can make a big difference in the future. If you study history, you see this behavior from people in the past. Look at all the people who thought we could never exterminate the American Bison. Brent cannot see the damage we do until the last one dies.

    • Like 1

  15. 4 hours ago, Phil1111 said:
    4 hours ago, brenthutch said:

    Ok folks I know you have been waiting….

    Wrong

    Actually, Phil, you are wrong and Brent is correct. I was waiting for this and even today before I opened the site said to myself, "I wonder when Brent will post his mid-year update."  I needed a good humorous post to read today.

     

    4 hours ago, brenthutch said:

    EV adaption: Demand slowing as inventories build up on dealer lots. Nowhere near to replacing IC vehicles-WIN

     

    1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

    A new report from Cox Automotive has revealed that the likes of General Motors, Ford, Hyundai, and Toyota currently have more than 90 days’ worth of unsold EVs at their stores.

    I wonder if that is mostly due to the fact that GM and Ford have already announced the plan to switch to NACS. Hyundai is considering to make the switch. And does Toyota even make an electric vehicle (no, the Prius doesn't count)? If I were in the market for an electric vehicle, I would not want one that uses CCS. NACS is now becoming the WORLD standard - since the world apparently ends at the US borders. That is just about as laughable as if I were to say that EV adoption rates are equivalent to what is happening in Norway. Which BTW, what is that now for this year? Fifty-four percent I do believe.


  16. On 6/6/2023 at 1:16 PM, brenthutch said:

    Don’t worry, I will be giving a mid-year update in a few weeks.  It will include the latest on CO2 levels and emissions, coal usage, EV adaptation, energy transition, temperature and weather records (or lack there of) polar ice conditions, and polar bear populations to name a few.

    Not sure you are going to wait for all the numbers to come out when you make the post. But in case you don't wait, be sure in your EV adoption to include that for Q1 of this year, the Tesla Model Y not only outsold the Ford F150 worldwide but also was the most popular sedan dethroning Toyota. (Tesla Model Y is the first EV to become the world’s bestselling car - The Verge)


  17. I would argue that the fundamental job of the government is to tax it's citizens. That is what separates it from an individual or corporation. An individual or corporation has to supply a service in order to take your money. The government can take your money without supplying a service.

    Now of course the government is SUPPOSED to take that money and provide a service like protecting corporations from undue competition or lawsuits. Maybe even start wars with other nations in order to line the pockets of its lobbyists or anyone who give campaign contributions.


  18. On 4/21/2023 at 1:15 PM, normiss said:

    This is why I bought an Ego self propelled electric mower. And chainsaw.

    Leaf blower is still a gas Stihl - because NC and the forest leaves we now have to deal with, but Skymama wants a handheld battery one for her. I'll pick up another Ego battery powered for her.

     

    I've been waiting for years for someone to release a battery handheld blower and mulcher to replace my Stihl. Everyone is replacing their blowers, but no one seems to want to replace the mulcher side of it. I don't understand why.


  19. The real question is why did China get to the point where it "controls" most of the Lithium mines? Could it be that China had more futuristic thinking then the American companies and government? Could it be that America is filled with people who only look backward and then complain when the future leaves them behind? If you refuse to see where the obvious trends are going and decide to do nothing, you are doomed to eventual failure. As far as I can tell, there is only one American auto company that has any thought to the future. The rest should be reduced to the size of Yugo.

    • Like 1

  20. This is why it really doesn't matter who is in power and why the R and D want to keep only a 2 party system. Corporate Ds and R are really all the same under their skin. They use projection, distraction, and misdirection to distract from the fact that nothing really changes between them. 


  21. Want to increase voter turnout? Let me download an app on my phone and vote that way. Why is it good enough for me to be able to purchase items from say Amazon and not get my order screwed up or have someone else buy stuff in my name? Why can Amazon do that and the US government not? And yes I know there probably are cases out there where identity theft occurs. Hell I can even access my financial information on line and I care WAY more about that then any politician.

    And as matter of record, I have never voted in my life and I'm now over 50. I have one very good and sound reason for that: There has never been an election/ballot/etc. where if I had voted, it would have made any difference in the outcome. NOT ONE! It wouldn't have mattered if I voted R or D or I or G. Never has an election come down to 1 vote in my district, state or even city. There has been "close" elections, but even in those elections whoever thinks they are ahead at a specific point in time will go to court and attempt to stop the count. Thereby invalidating my vote if my vote was not counted by that time.


  22. 1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

    Since it is The beginning of January, it seems a good time for my 2023 predictions.

    1 Despite trillions of dollars wasted on lowering CO2 emissions, I predict emissions will continue to rise this year.

    2. Despite ever rising levels of CO2 I predict weather related disasters will remain within the range of historical norms.

    3. Full sized pickup trucks will outsell all EVs combined in the US market

    4. Polar bear population will continue to remain stable 

    5. Arctic sea ice will continue to recover from its 2012 low

    6. Deployment of renewables will not only fail to replace fossil fuels, it won’t even be able to meet growing demand for electricity, resulting in yet another record year for coal consumption.

    7. I predict yet another year without record warming, I’ll even go out on a limb and say it won’t even make the top five.

    1. This is a measurable prediction - thank you. CO2 emissions will be higher than 2022 levels. Good start we have a measurable metric.

    2. "...will remain within the range of historical norms". Please define "within the range" we want actual numbers. And what are considered weather related disasters? Just hurricanes? Or droughts? Or floods? Or heat waves? Or cold waves? Earthquakes? Locusts? I swear it was not my fault! Sorry got sidetracked paraphrasing a movie quote. But please define either in actual numbers or percentages which type of disaster and what you consider to be within range.

    3. Please specify which pickup trucks you consider full size so we can track their sales. Also what do you consider an EV? Is it just BEV? Hybred? Plug-in Hybred? Do you include H2 - won't really add to the numbers but just want to be clear. Also are these only new sales or are you including the used market for both pickup trucks and EVs?

    4. What does remain stable mean? If they increase or decrease by 10%, is that stable? 2%? 15%?

    5. What does continue to recover mean? Does that mean that the sea ice level will be greater than 2022? About the same as 2012-2022? Decrease slightly form recent levels? Or are you going to claim success if the sea ice does not drop below 2012 levels?

    6. Ok I think we now all  understand that what you are looking for in order to be wrong about this prediction is that renewables in 2023 will replace ALL forms of fossil fuel usage. We will no longer use coal, gas, oil and transition to 100% renewables in the next year. Congratulations! I think we all will predict that. Now you have two separate predictions. Do you mean that renewable generation will not cover the additional demand for electricity in 2023? Or are you saying that new renewable power generation "plants" will not be designed, built, and put into service in 2023 to cover the additional  electricity demand. Finally will you except defeat if coal consumption (world-wide?? only in the US? Canada only? UK only? Europe only? Greenland?) is not at an all-time high? Meaning that no year in recorded history has there been more coal consumed? Or is it just another "high" year, and if it is just the latter please specify a number so we have a measurable metric.

    7. Almost got this one. Please define top five. Which top five? Who's list are you going to use? And what geographical region if not implicit to the study.