Edited 1 January, 20251 yr by Ootohere

13 hours ago, EnterName said:

Happy New Year @wyx087! 🍻

So it's a numbers game, eh? "The more of something, the bigger it is a target for reduction."

Hmmm. That's a somewhat inconsistent position to adopt, given that I've already pointed out the negligible contribution the UK makes to to global CO2 in comparison to countries like China & India. You've previously taken the "Every little helps!" approach.

 

At least the CO2 output of cars is incidental, not the whole purpose of the machine.

If CO2 really IS a problem, it would be trivially easy to ban the sale of CO2 generators.

However CO2 generation is a growing market. It seems people just can't get enough CO2 to meet their needs.

https://www.cognitivemarketresearch.com/co2-generator-market-report?srsltid=AfmBOor4xqL5qQDWpdVl3_2hkMaCMGX4UXDWeR-kelpCyICY2c99fBfh

 

Can I get even a twitch of cognitive dissonance from you on this issue? 😉

Let's be honest here, you know exactly why CO2 generator market isn't going to be a problem for climate change, it was explained clearly in the post you qoted. You are being difficult because you've spotted something to score internet points.

 

As you rightly pointed out, CO2 output of cars are incidental, it is not a necessary by-product of the transport sector.

We are all well aware that each and every nation have a net zero goal. Continue sales of ICE vehicle will never get anywhere near the goal.

 

Speaking of China, they are already selling more plug-in cars than ICE powered vehicles 6 months ago:

https://electrek.co/2024/08/08/evs-and-phevs-outsell-gas-cars-in-china-for-the-first-time/

Latest analysis shows "EV" (I'm not sure whether it includes PHEV) sales will out pace ICE cars this year:

https://www.carscoops.com/2024/12/evs-on-track-to-outsell-ice-cars-in-china-in-2025-10-years-ahead-of-schedule/

Meanwhile UK are struggling with 22%.

 

Can I get even a twitch of cognitive dissonance from you on this? Think whether we (humanity) should regulate a sector that produces CO2 as by product? Or we should regulate a sector that requires CO2 for producing useful products?

11 hours ago, wyx087 said:

Think whether we (humanity) should regulate a sector that produces CO2 as by product? Or we should regulate a sector that requires CO2 for producing useful products?

We should regulate BOTH sectors with a view to incentivising them to reduce their release of CO2 and make their processes more efficient.

 

But since methane is shown to be far more environmentally damaging surely that should have a higher profile and priority to be reduced?

7 minutes ago, PetrolDave said:

We should regulate BOTH sectors with a view to incentivising them to reduce their release of CO2 and make their processes more efficient.

 

But since methane is shown to be far more environmentally damaging surely that should have a higher profile and priority to be reduced?

Absolutely the processes that use CO2 should be made more efficient or switch to new processes to not use CO2. I totally agree.

 

I have zero knowledge of this topic, so I can only speculate by looking at numbers instead of do a knee jerk reaction just based on the name.

CO2 sales revenue 2024: 24 billion USD (link earlier)

Car sales volume prediction for 2024: 94 million

Assuming each vehicle is cheaply 30k USD, that's 2,820 billion USD sales revenue for cars for comparison. Most of those car that will be outputting CO2 incidentally (thus unnecessarily) for next 10+ years.

 

Let's not forget CO2 generator revenue growth may also due to CO2 gas shortage driving up cost of the machines, rather than directly reflected in more sales volume, hence generation capability may not have increase as much as sales revenue. In summary, @EnterName have posted a curved ball.

 

 

For methane, artificial meat is a huge research and growth sector. We are beginning to use it in our dishes. But food is difficult to replace and even more difficult to make people change.

Also domestic gas supply contains mostly methane. So the move to heat pump makes a lot of sense. There are challenges with space for fitting heat pump + water cylinder for many households, including mine. But ultimately decommissioning of gas network will be required.

5 minutes ago, wyx087 said:

For methane, artificial meat is a huge research and growth sector. We are beginning to use it in our dishes. But food is difficult to replace and even more difficult to make people change.

Also domestic gas supply contains mostly methane. So the move to heat pump makes a lot of sense. There are challenges with space for fitting heat pump + water cylinder for many households, including mine. But ultimately decommissioning of gas network will be required.

Not just artificial meat, cattle feed and breeding cows that emit less methane are starting to show encouraging results.

 

For me the challenges with heat pumps are worse in properties with combi boilers and hence do not have hot water storage so as well as the cost and noise of the external unit and the possible cost of larger radiators there is also the complication of additional plumbing and finding space for a hot water storage tank. My new build had a "cupboard" where a tank could be fitted but no plumbing anywhere near it, but my GF has had her "airing cupboard" deleted to make way for a shower so there is no obvious place for a hot water storage tank.

"Roughly 37% of methane emissions come from highly concentrated sources at relatively few sites. Therefore, methane capture devices installed on a small number of sites could have a huge impact. Implementing existing technology to capture and use or burn methane at 3000-6000 sites worldwide could have the equivalent greenhouse gas impact of taking 100 million cars off the road"

 

https://overshoot.footprintnetwork.org/portfolio/burning-methane/

 

"Methane is a potent greenhouse gas — 28 times more potent than CO2 over 100 years. It can be turned into CO2 by simply burning it, reducing its global warming potential by 96.4%."

27 minutes ago, PetrolDave said:

For me the challenges with heat pumps are worse in properties with combi boilers and hence do not have hot water storage so as well as the cost and noise of the external unit and the possible cost of larger radiators there is also the complication of additional plumbing and finding space for a hot water storage tank. My new build had a "cupboard" where a tank could be fitted but no plumbing anywhere near it, but my GF has had her "airing cupboard" deleted to make way for a shower so there is no obvious place for a hot water storage tank.

Yep, combi-boiler is also my lack of space reason. The water tank space is now an integrated wardrobe, we do not want to loose this space by putting water tank back in.

 

I'm keeping my eye closely on the heat geek mini, the water heat storage is similar size to a combi boiler. theory is Just need to find space for heat pump outside.

https://newarkcylinders.co.uk/heatgeekministore/

 

Not sure about the noise, gas boiler are quite noisy by itself. The unit outside doesn't seem to make much noise, unlike early AC units.

59 minutes ago, wyx087 said:

Not sure about the noise, gas boiler are quite noisy by itself. The unit outside doesn't seem to make much noise, unlike early AC units.

When you live on the edge of a quiet country town (not in London) at night the only noise is boilers and heat pumps so their noise is a significant factor in neigbourhood discussions!

4 hours ago, PetrolDave said:

We should regulate BOTH sectors with a view to incentivising them to reduce their release of CO2 and make their processes more efficient.

 

But since methane is shown to be far more environmentally damaging surely that should have a higher profile and priority to be reduced?

Exactly, this reinforces my belief that the car is being wrongly targeted and blamed for both Global warming and air quality. This is partly what I have saying when I was referencing Air Pollution in World: Real-time Air Quality Index Visual Map which to my very clearly demonstrated this when zooming in onto the various air quality monitoring sites in the London at street level and then cross-referencing that with Google Earth street level photos, there are high readings in areas that are predominantly residential and or very close to fast food outlets, or near to London Underground station entrances or ventilation shafts for the underground and yet right on the North Circular at Wembley, which is always extremely busy with heaver traffic 3 or 4 lanes of it and loads of jams, the readings are much lower and in the green safe zones? This area is also less residential and more commercial, with lots of retail (Tesco and Ikea etc) yet many firmly believe the false line of TFL and the London Mayor are telling them about air quality is all down to ICE, it is not, it is more about raising revenue and other undisclosed things.

22 hours ago, Graham Butcher said:

Exactly, this reinforces my belief that the car is being wrongly targeted and blamed for both Global warming and air quality. This is partly what I have saying when I was referencing Air Pollution in World: Real-time Air Quality Index Visual Map which to my very clearly demonstrated this when zooming in onto the various air quality monitoring sites in the London at street level and then cross-referencing that with Google Earth street level photos, there are high readings in areas that are predominantly residential and or very close to fast food outlets, or near to London Underground station entrances or ventilation shafts for the underground and yet right on the North Circular at Wembley, which is always extremely busy with heaver traffic 3 or 4 lanes of it and loads of jams, the readings are much lower and in the green safe zones? This area is also less residential and more commercial, with lots of retail (Tesco and Ikea etc) yet many firmly believe the false line of TFL and the London Mayor are telling them about air quality is all down to ICE, it is not, it is more about raising revenue and other undisclosed things.

 

The term global warming is obsolete.

 

The steady rise in CO2 and methane is more appropriately called climate change as this change in the worlds atmosphere is causing more violent weather and is actually looking like it will put Northern Europe in to a much colder sub climate rather warmer due to the diminishing Gulf (Mexican) decline.

 

On 02/01/2025 at 10:19, PetrolDave said:

Not just artificial meat, cattle feed and breeding cows that emit less methane are starting to show encouraging results.

 

 

 

I now have an image in my mind of cows, with mini scaffold towers fitted to their bums, burning off the methane like a mobile bovine oil rigs!!

 

This is interesting from CAR mag. Taxing cars by weight (and other metrics)

 

1 hour ago, Lady Elanore said:

This is interesting from CAR mag. Taxing cars by weight (and other metrics)

This would be a great starting point in the tax reform.

 

Cars, not just EV's, are becoming unnecessarily heavier and heavier.

2 hours ago, wyx087 said:

This would be a great starting point in the tax reform.

 

Cars, not just EV's, are becoming unnecessarily heavier and heavier.

 

Like the sound of that as Renaults are particularly light.

 

TESLAs pretty light too.

 

German cars, including SEAT and Skoda are heavy like VAG, Mercedes and BMWs.

 

3 hours ago, Lady Elanore said:

 

 

The haircut of the left cow reminds me of someone. Likewise the distended front of the one on the right. 

I can't think of who right now.

 

40 minutes ago, Lee01 said:

 

The haircut of the left cow reminds me of someone. Likewise the distended front of the one on the right. 

I can't think of who right now.

 

OMG, I hadn't noticed the hair  

On 01/01/2025 at 22:03, wyx087 said:

Can I get even a twitch of cognitive dissonance from you on this? Think whether we (humanity) should regulate a sector that produces CO2 as by product? Or we should regulate a sector that requires CO2 for producing useful products?

No, and here's why.

CO2 is not a bad gas, it's a good gas that is essential for life on this planet. That is why there is a market for CO2 generators.

The whole "CO2 is bad!" campaign is dishonest and as you revealed earlier, more about "redistributing" wealth.

 

On 02/01/2025 at 10:04, wyx087 said:

For methane, artificial meat is a huge research and growth sector. We are beginning to use it in our dishes. But food is difficult to replace and even more difficult to make people change.

I've pointed this out before @wyx087, you really need to curb your urge to tell people to live their lives according to ways you've recently decided are how things ought to be done.

People don't like being told what they may or may not drive or eat, and they will push back increasingly assertively in resisting having their lives run by unelected, self-appointed, well-intentioned do-gooders determined to "save the planet" no matter what the cost to Europeans, but invariably without inconveniencing "developing" countries.

No! Bad Wyx!

1 hour ago, EnterName said:

I've pointed this out before @wyx087, you really need to curb your urge to tell people to live their lives according to ways you've recently decided are how things ought to be done.

People don't like being told what they may or may not drive or eat, and they will push back increasingly assertively in resisting having their lives run by unelected, self-appointed, well-intentioned do-gooders determined to "save the planet" no matter what the cost to Europeans, but invariably without inconveniencing "developing" countries.

No! Bad Wyx!

 

But we all suffer the effects of climate change that scientists believe is largely down to pollution from burning hydrocarbons.

We all breath the same air that is being polluted by diesel and petrol cars in urban areas.

Governments around the world are moving in a cleaner direction. The program of phasing out ICE vehicles is happening, my company is doing so for cars, vans, ships etc as are most civilised companies and countries and then there is the strong economic argument with lower running cost. You would think no brainer but apparently some still elect to burn stuff at great expense and damage to the environment.

 

Freedom is great but not when it extends to poisoning your fellow citizen and putting them further in danger of climate change risk it is not personal freedom but collective responsibility that trumps.  Let's hit that 28% electric sales or even go over 30%. We are falling further behind countries like China, Norway etc.

 

Edited 4 January, 20251 yr by lol-lol

55 minutes ago, lol-lol said:

 

But we all suffer the effects of climate change that scientists believe is largely down to pollution from burning hydrocarbons.

We all breath the same air that is being polluted by diesel and petrol cars in urban areas.

Governments around the world are moving in a cleaner direction. The program of phasing out ICE vehicles is happening, my company is doing so for cars, vans, ships etc as are most civilised companies and countries and then there is the strong economic argument with lower running cost. You would think no brainer but apparently some still elect to burn stuff at great expense and damage to the environment.

 

Freedom is great but not when it extends to poisoning your fellow citizen and putting them further in danger of climate change risk it is not personal freedom but collective responsibility that trumps.  Let's hit that 28% electric sales or even go over 30%. We are falling further behind countries like China, Norway etc.

 

This is just BS, using the https://aqicn.org/map/world/ it is clearly not the case at all, the bad air is mostly coming from the burning of gas used in heating, cooking and industrial processes etc. Targeting the car is just a convenient tool, as it serves another purpose as well, raising revenue. Pollution from ICE has fallen dramatically in just the last 30 years and will continue to fall as ICE get ever more efficient.

5 hours ago, Graham Butcher said:

This is just BS, using the https://aqicn.org/map/world/ it is clearly not the case at all, the bad air is mostly coming from the burning of gas used in heating, cooking and industrial processes etc. Targeting the car is just a convenient tool, as it serves another purpose as well, raising revenue. Pollution from ICE has fallen dramatically in just the last 30 years and will continue to fall as ICE get ever more efficient.

 

But the UK us not just targeting cars, trucks, vans but is using collected taxes to heavily subsidize heat pumps to the tune of thousands of pounds per install so it is this key area as well. Also having shut down the last dirty coal power station and with massive wind farms coming on line to reduce and soon eliminate the need to gas power stations also.

The decarbonisation is going on across the piste including of the ships which bring EVs and goods from China that the UK no longer makes.

 

Edited 4 January, 20251 yr by lol-lol

1 hour ago, lol-lol said:

 

But the UK us not just targeting cars, trucks, vans but is using collected taxes to heavily subsidize heat pumps to the tune of thousands of pounds per install so it is this key area as well. Also having shut down the last dirty coal power station and with massive wind farms coming on line to reduce and soon eliminate the need to gas power stations also.

The decarbonisation is going on across tge piste including of the ships which bring EVs and goods from China that the UK no longer makes.

 

Are they?? But CO2 is a good gas as well and essential for lots of things in the plant and also aquatic life and the more we chop down forests, burn them and give up the land to becoming large slabs of concrete and tarmac etc, the worse we will be as a result of an increase in CO2 as more plants which thrive on it and give us back oxygen, will be lost.

3 hours ago, Graham Butcher said:

Are they?? But CO2 is a good gas as well and essential for lots of things in the plant and also aquatic life and the more we chop down forests, burn them and give up the land to becoming large slabs of concrete and tarmac etc, the worse we will be as a result of an increase in CO2 as more plants which thrive on it and give us back oxygen, will be lost.

 

The problem is with CO2 is the levels we have never seen and not what those are doing with the ambient temperatures ie globally, and especially where the earth stores its frozen water on land ie Antartica and Greenland, it is now running off these land areas in to the sea.

 

42 minutes ago, lol-lol said:

 

The problem is with CO2 is the levels we have never seen and not what those are doing with the ambient temperatures ie globally, and especially where the earth stores its frozen water on land ie Antartica and Greenland, it is now running off these land areas in to the sea.

I'm still calling BS, it's an old ploy produce graphs etc to convey whatever story line they want us to believe, knowing full well that the average person will go along with it, they know the average person in the street has no way of testing things for themselves. We've been there in modern history, in most peoples lifetime with the diesel scandal and the pip etc.