Bah Humbug - Clarkson

[DaBeeeenster]

interesting thread, the point about the oil economy/global warming is interesting, but the point about the car which DID look like a the blue invalid car was a bit of light hearted ammusment, it wasn't offensive or rude, it was a off cuff bit of tounge in cheek

nothing wrong with it. the world is too PC as it is at the moment.

What does it have to do with political correctness?

[DaBeeeenster]

You keep banging on about man made global warming and that its happening, yet have provided no evidence that its caused by man. In fact you have just ignored any questions that might challenge your beliefs.
So I bring to your attention again, in case you missed the questions the first time, can you answer this/answer my request?
http://forums.hexus.net/showpost.php...4&postcount=27
and do you have any comments on the following?
http://forums.hexus.net/showpost.php...5&postcount=28

I'm basing most of my opinions on the The IPCC reports - http://www.ipcc.ch/.

I seriously doubt you have ever seen any proper unbaised evidence either for or against it.

Dont make assumptions about what evidence I have or have not read. It's extremely rude.

Plus it seems you are exactily the kind of person Jeremy Clarkson likes to wind up

Clarkson is an offensive Luddite.

[DaBeeeenster]

It depends what you mean by limitless. The only limit on available oil is economics. There are huge untapped reserves around the world. Africa is largely untapped, Alaska, Siberia, etc, all have vast tracts of oil. The reason we aren't tapping them is that it's not economically viable. Even in CONUS, with the current gas pricing, oil fields are being closed off as uneconomical. But, as demand increases and prices increase, it becomes more economical to explore and tap those fields. It also becomes more economical to develop alternative transport methods like invalid cars. It will reach the point where economics, not shortage, make invalid cars the mode of transport of choice in the western world. But there will still be loads of oil out there.

I agree with you to a certain extent, but I am afraid you are badly misinformed. The quality and availability of carbon based fuels is becoming increasingly harder to extract, to the point where price points in the hundreds of dollars per barrel will be routine. I'm basing my statements on the book by Deffeyes (Link), one of the most well respected petro-geologists alive today. There is no solution to the problem. Yes, as prices increase more expensive methods of extraction will become viable, but this is exactly what hubberts peak explains; the fact that output will continue to decline and consequently prices will continue to rise.

Peak Oil? Garbage. We reached peak oil in the 1960's.

What do you mean by that? The US peaked around 40 years ago? Is that what you mean?

[herulach]

Clarkson is an offensive Luddite.

Do you even know what a luddite is? I hardly think being against speed cameras and frankly poor alternatives to petrol power is in the spirit of general ludd do you? Maybe if he was a proponent of destroyiong automated car factories you might have a point.

Electric cars atm are poor substitutes to petrol driven ones, and not even just in the speed/range stakes, im not convinced the environmental impact is that much less, its just moved to wherever your power plant is, not to mention the tremendous amount of oil used in making the damn thing (plastics, and as coolant for machine tools etc), plus the tremendous amount of electricity used in making aluminum.

To be honest, i hope we never see the end of petrol driven cars, plugging stuff in will never have the appeal of getting your hands dirty under the bonnet of a car, and the dodgy whiney sound wont ever come close to the sound of a nice american V8 or a big v12.

Not to say im not for alternatives, but electric isnt a good one. proper mass transit systems are the only real solution to polluion (wow, good rhyming) and people dont use stuff like that, because people have the perception that buses rains etc are for the peasantry. I bet youd cu fuel consumption inhalf if we moved back to using the railways for freight and eveyone that could commuted either by bike or public transport.

Thats quite a long reply tosuch a short quote, but it does prety definitively outline my ideas on it, and its also remarkable ot.

[DaBeeeenster]

Do you even know what a luddite is? I hardly think being against speed cameras and frankly poor alternatives to petrol power is in the spirit of general ludd do you? Maybe if he was a proponent of destroyiong automated car factories you might have a point.

A luddite: someone who is someone who is opposed to technical change. Clarkson seems impervious to the concept that oil is a finite resource.

Electric cars atm are poor substitutes to petrol driven ones, and not even just in the speed/range stakes, im not convinced the environmental impact is that much less, its just moved to wherever your power plant is, not to mention the tremendous amount of oil used in making the damn thing (plastics, and as coolant for machine tools etc), plus the tremendous amount of electricity used in making aluminum.

To be honest, i hope we never see the end of petrol driven cars, plugging stuff in will never have the appeal of getting your hands dirty under the bonnet of a car, and the dodgy whiney sound wont ever come close to the sound of a nice american V8 or a big v12.

Not to say im not for alternatives, but electric isnt a good one. proper mass transit systems are the only real solution to polluion (wow, good rhyming) and people dont use stuff like that, because people have the perception that buses rains etc are for the peasantry. I bet youd cu fuel consumption inhalf if we moved back to using the railways for freight and eveyone that could commuted either by bike or public transport.

Thats quite a long reply tosuch a short quote, but it does prety definitively outline my ideas on it, and its also remarkable ot.

Arguing for petrol on account of "the sound of a nice american v8"?!?!? Are you joking?

[YorkieBen]

To call Clarkson a luddite is surprising when you note his love, affection and promotion for industrialisation, engineering and ingenuity.

Just because he opposes electrical cars and the environmental lobby does not make him a luddite.

Clarkson seems impervious to the concept that oil is a finite resource.

I doubt that is true. I think a major reason why he is so 'anti-environmentalist' if you will is because like me he dislikes the patronising liberals who use illogical actions and arguments to forward the issue.

Plus the fact that he is a petrolhead, he hates diesels as well, and thats not because they are good for the environment. Its because they arent as good to drive and dont sound as good as a petrol engine.

Could you imagine a DB9 with a diesel or even an electric engine????

A major draw of cars such as those is not just the speed and the looks but the fact that when you hear it is makes the hairs on the back of your neck etc

[DaBeeeenster]

To call Clarkson a luddite is surprising when you note his love, affection and promotion for industrialisation, engineering and ingenuity.

Just because he opposes electrical cars and the environmental lobby does not make him a luddite.

We are about to depart the industrialised age. Without oil there is no industrialisation. That's the very concept of a luddite; someone unable to see a future that they are scared of staring them in the face.

[YorkieBen]

of course without oil there will be industrialisation.

are you saying that once oil runs out society will regress back to a pre-industrial economy and society? if so then you are a fruit loop imo

[DaBeeeenster]

of course without oil there will be industrialisation.

are you saying that once oil runs out society will regress back to a pre-industrial economy and society? if so then you are a fruit loop imo

It certainly wont be industrialised in the classic sense of the word. The industrialised economy is based entirely on carbon-based fuels.

[herulach]

A luddite: someone who is someone who is opposed to technical change. Clarkson seems impervious to the concept that oil is a finite resource.

Oil is a finite resource, i dont claim to know everything hes said, but i certainly dont think ive ever seen/read him say that, and to do so would just be stupid. The point being against daft environmentalism, not technological advancement

Arguing for petrol on account of "the sound of a nice american v8"?!?!? Are you joking?

Way to ignore the rest of the comment, that wasnt an argument for petrol cars, but against electric ones, theres a difference.

It certainly wont be industrialised in the classic sense of the word. The industrialised economy is based entirely on carbon-based fuels.

wtf? you go into any modern manufacturing facility, i bet you cant find one petrol/diesel/coal powered device in there. Modern technology is run by electricity and the electric motor, electricity is easily made without fossil fuel, modern industry wouldnt collapse without fossil fuel QED.

As ive said before fuels are easily sourced otherwise, hell, if we were really desperate you could make a lead acid battery by hand. Modern reliance on plastics is another matter entirely, and one which seems to be ignored by so called green campaigners, and its a much bigger issue. Try and go a week without using anything plastic, its impossible in modern society.

[SilentDeath]

I think duel powered cars would work best.

Charge batterys when you slow down, for example, would give quite a few extra/double mpg if they bolted the required bits onto the side of a normal car.. well new gearbox would be needed... if a car was specially designed for it, it would work a lot better.. however it would cost a lot as its new. In 10-20 years it will be cheaper than petrol engines becuase it would be simpler.


For electric only cars, the power has to come from somewhere still. You could have a much smaller 100-200cc 4 stroke (so not noisy) engine to recharge the battery. Small engines produce more than enough power to keep the car going at resonable speed and remember much of the energy wasted from acceleration can be reclaimed when you decelerate by sticking motor in reverse... this would be ideal for driving in cities and might do 100-150mpg+ maybe although slower acceleration..

petrol/diesel store energy at a *lot* higher denisitys than todays batterys. lead acid/nimh being the most reliable for this sort of thing. Li-on/super capacitors being the most dense but also much more expensive/shorter life.

hydrogen fuel cells are probably the future. Along with massive off shore hydrogen plants powered by wave and wind energy...

[TeePee]

We reached peak oil in the 1960's because oil supplies were running out and the available oil would last us less than ten years. But ten years later we'd found more, enough for another ten years. And ten years after that... etc.

Oil is not like a finite resource like a pile of bricks. The ONLY limit on supply is an economic one, which is why peak oil is such garbage.

[DaBeeeenster]

electricity is easily made without fossil fuel, modern industry wouldnt collapse without fossil fuel QED.

That's entirely false. Sorry.

[dangel]

I dont find jokes about "invalids" very funny. Sorry. Do you?

Ah well, point in case folks..

And yes you can joke about the disabled, or even _with_ them about it - I consider myself very fortunate to know a friend who's been wheelchair bound for at least 15 years - he's a top chap. Funnily enough I went to see him in hospital last night (he had a stroke 3 weeks back) and we were talking about top gear (he watched it as an avid fan) and how funny it was. Apparently, if you're not carrying some car-sized chip on your shoulder about being disabled you _can_ smile or even smirk occasionally at such things..

[herulach]

That's entirely false. Sorry.

Youre getting good at ignoring vast chunks of the post arent you? What exactly is false about that statement? Name one industry that uses fossil fuels for anything other than transport? The only thing you might have a point with is a steel works, but i cant think of anything else.

Or were you saying that it isnt possible to generate electricity without fossil fuels? In which case, youre just being bloody minded.

[dangel]

Industry is pretty darn reliant on fossil fuels - for example:

"The Basics of Plastic Manufacturing

The term "plastics" encompasses organic materials, such as the elements carbon (C), hydrogen (H), nitrogen (N), chlorine (Cl) and sulfur (S), which have properties similar to those naturally grown in organic materials such as wood, horn and rosin. Organic materials are based on polymers, which are produced by the conversion of natural products or by syththesis from primary chemicals coming from oil, natural gas or coal."

BUT - I hasten to add - it's perfectly possible to generate electricity itself from many other sources, and many of them are already in use to some degree. So, depending on which part of the sentence he was ignoring he's right and so are you.
I think it's true to say we're massively reliant on fossil fuels right now - but that's ok since they're not going to suddenly cease to be in 10 years time (even with China's expected growth) and there's a massive push to look for alternatives now which I think will lead to other fuel sources becoming dominant before fossil fuels are depleted (as the technology and processes fall into place to make it efficient to extract them [e.g. hydrogen]).

Crap I just went back and read your own post and not his select quote - sorry - I agree with you m8