Electric cars are a pipe dream

[adoucette]

Billy they are only show stoppers if they happen, but they haven't, and they aren't likely to be show stoppers either.

Iraq is expected to bring 10 million more barrels of oil per day within the decade, and as the price of oil goes up, more oil becomes recoverable and alternatives to oil become more viable and people's usage patterns change.

http://stocks.investopedia.com/stoc...o-Move-Higher-XOM-OXY-E-RDS-A-BP-PTR0105.aspx

You think you have the ability to predict the future but you don't.

Face it Billy, you are a pessimist and that prevents you from seeing solutions, you only see problems, and because of that you think they are insurmountable.

The good news is the pessimists have always been wrong, even though they trumpet their success on each short downturn.

"We cannot prove that those are in error who tell us that society has reached a turning point; that we have seen our best days. But so said all before us, and with just as much apparent reason. On what principle is it that, when we see nothing but improvement behind us, we are to expect nothing but deterioration before us?"

Arthur

 

[adoucette]

When California's environmentalists learn this, "more than 1000 times a power plants radioactive release", it could be decades in the courts before MolyCorp's mine in CA is operating on a large scale.

Instead we find:

Molycorp, Inc. (NYSE: MCP), ..., announced that it has secured the last of several environmental permits necessary to begin construction of its new, state-of-the-art rare earth manufacturing facility at Mountain Pass, California. Securing the permits is a major milestone in Molycorp’s $531 million project to construct a complete rare earth mine-to-magnets manufacturing supply chain in the U.S.


http://www.businesswire.com/news/ho...Secures-Permits-Needed-Construction-Start-531

Arthur

 

[quadraphonics]

Any information as to where the batteries will come from and what type?

My understanding is that the electric Focus will use lithium-ion batteries.

Also, now that China has reduced by 70% the export of the rare Earths and this has caused frantic hoarding, that has sent the price of some up by a factor of three, where will Ford get the strong light weight magnets for the motors?

This is a short-term effect. There are tons of proven reserves of these things all over the world - the reason they aren't mined is that China has been systematically underpricing competitors for years now (including by allowing absolutely horrendous pollution). The new export restrictions will simply cause the rare earth market to return to a more distributed equilibrium within a few years. For example, the massiveMountain Pass mine in CA is scheduled to resume full mining operations about 6 months from now, and full refinery production in 2012. Likewise, exploration of potential rare-earth mine sites is intense the world over (demand was expected to outstrip supply long before China announced any new restrictions, so that's just more incentive to bring that stuff online even faster).

It seems likely to me that by the start of 2012, the US militray will be the only one in US allowed access to some of these very critical elements (essential, for example, for the tiny motors that drive the steering fins on "smart bombs")

Nah, the US will have massive domestic production coming online right around that time, and within a few years after that there will be considerable production in a slew of other countries. China has a very short window in which to leverage its rare earth production, after which point they will lose their current clout (likely, permanently).

China is being a very smart capitalist. They will dribble out 30% of recent exports of critical rare Earths and get 4 or 5 times more payment for the limited supply.

Only for a very short time - a year or two, maybe.

The reason China is doing this is not to make big bucks on rare earths as such, but to move their related production up the value chain. I.e., they'll produce motors themselves, rather than sell the elements to others so they can do so. I.e., even if Ford can't get metals for motors (and doesn't want to use an alternative design that doesn't rely on such elements), they will still be able to buy such motors from China. This stuff doesn't threaten global production of finished consumer products, it just creates incentives for more of the value chain to be located in China.

But, again, only in the short run. In the medium term, the result will be the end of China's dominance at rare earth production in the first place. The story would be different if China accounted for a comparable share of reserves as it does production, but such is far from the case. Expect to see lot of production coming online in the USA, Canada, Brazil, South Africa, Greenland and Australia in the next few years. The only question is to what extent China will be able to leverage its position to climb up the manufacturing chain between now and then.

 

[quadraphonics]

Instead we find:

Molycorp, Inc. (NYSE: MCP), ..., announced that it has secured the last of several environmental permits necessary to begin construction of its new, state-of-the-art rare earth manufacturing facility at Mountain Pass, California. Securing the permits is a major milestone in Molycorp’s $531 million project to construct a complete rare earth mine-to-magnets manufacturing supply chain in the U.S.


http://www.businesswire.com/news/ho...Secures-Permits-Needed-Construction-Start-531

Arthur

Yeah, the doom-and-gloom pessimism about the impossibility of resuming US production is pretty misplaced. This mine was still operating as recently as 2 years ago, after all. CA may well care about the environment, but the fact of the matter is that this mine is way out in the middle of the desert, far from where anyone (except the miners) lives, and so doesn't arouse much in the way of political resistance on those grounds. It would have to actually be in someone's back yard for the NIMBYs to get riled up.

Supposedly the more difficult aspect is reconstituting the whole chain of refinement and processing, and the associated specialized expertise. But it seems we'll find out soon enough how difficult that really is - MolyCorp is claiming they'll be running full steam from mining to processing by the end of 2012.

 

[Billy T]

... {court delays on US Rare Earth producion}
Only for a very short time - a year or two, maybe. ...

... Molycorp, Inc. (NYSE: MCP), ..., announced that it has secured the last of several environmental permits necessary to begin construction of its new, state-of-the-art rare earth manufacturing facility at Mountain Pass, California. Securing the permits is a major milestone in Molycorp’s $531 million project to construct a complete rare earth mine-to-magnets manufacturing supply chain in the U.S. ... Arthur

I am not impressed by granted approvals because it is rare that environmentalists take miners to court before they are granted.

For example, Revertt, a silver and copper miner, which has very responsible environmental record operating its Troy mine wants to open a new approach to the same ore body in Montana to be called the Rock Creek mine.

There is no concern about radioactive releases – only about some sub species of trout* and Montana has less than 1% of the environmentalists that California does, I would guess. Revertt got their final environmental impact approval back in 2001 BUT:

“US District Court has issued an order pending a full opinion on the legal status of the Rock Creek project” "The Forest Service's decision to approve is vacated, and the 2003 Record of Decision and 2001 Final Environmental Impact Statement are set aside and remanded to the Forest Service for further action consistent with the Court's forthcoming opinion". {Judge quoted by} John Shanahan, President & CEO: “{We are} still optimistic the Rock Creek project will advance in an environmentally and economically responsibly. While the company won a ruling in May 10, {2010} the plaintiffs have petitioned to take the case to the next appeals court.” - CEO Shanahan.

I also remind you that for more than three decades the site selected and approved for nuclear power plant waste was held up in the courts. As I understand it Rare Earth mining releases much more radioactive uranium and thorium than 100, probably than a 1000 nuclear plants or storage facility would.

SUMMARY: If the past is any guide, CA’s environmentalists have not yet even started to fight in court to reverse these just made approvals and can cause a decade of delay as the Rock Crek project (and many others) have already experienced, still without resolution. I am not predicting they will as they surely also want electric cars to be used, but some have very irrational concerns about any radioactive release and it only takes a small percentage of CA's environmentalists going to court to delay large scale Rare Earth mining in the US for a decade or more.

I think actual court histories trumps quadraphonics and adoucette OPINIONS.

*

Are old enough you may remember the "Snail Darter" - a tiny fish smaller than your little finger - that blocked FOR EVER a large hydro-electic plant. The case went all the way to the Supreme Court and the Snail Darter won: Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote for the majority: Regardless of the fact that over $100 million had been spent by 1978, and the dam was substantially finished, the court could not allow the TVA to finish the project. ONE activists, a University of Tennessee biologist and professor, David Etnier, crashed the whole TVA project.

 

[Billy T]

Unlike Revertt mining company, (see post 1087) MolyCorp's mine does NOT have a honorable environmental record and will be easy for environmentalist to take to court:

"... The mine closed in 2002, in response to both environmental restrictions and lower prices for REEs. The mine has been mostly inactive since 2002, though processing of previously mined ore continues at the site. ...

In 1998, chemical processing at the mine was stopped after a series of wastewater leaks. Hundreds of thousands of gallons of water carrying radioactive waste spilled into and around Ivanpah Dry Lake....

In the 1980s, the company began piping wastewater as far as 14 miles to evaporation ponds on or near Ivanpah Dry Lake, east of Interstate 15 near Nevada. This pipeline repeatedly ruptured during cleaning operations to remove mineral deposits called scale. The scale is radioactive because of the presence of thorium and radium, which occur naturally in the rare earth ore.

A federal investigation later found that some 60 spills—some unreported {another type of violation}—occurred between 1984 and 1998, when the pipeline was shut down. In all, about 600,000 gallons of radioactive and other hazardous waste flowed onto the desert floor, according to federal authorities. ..."

From Quadraphonics link post 1085 link, Mountain Pass mine: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_Pass_rare_earth_mine

As that link notes, the mine was closed in 2002 for environmental problems as well as the decreasing price of Rare Earth metals. Many environmentalist, I think, will argue that these unavoidable radioactive waste should be China's problem, not dumped in the US.

 

[adoucette]

Again Billy, your gloom and doom approach to problems means nothing to me, which is why you probably left this little tidbit out of your previous post:

After preparing a cleanup plan and completing an extensive environmental study, Unocal in 2004 won approval of a county permit that allowed the mine to operate for another 30 years. The mine also passed a key county inspection in 2007.[5]

The fact is Moly corp does have the environmental permits.
WHEN that get's blocked, THEN you can say I told you so, but not until then.

As to the radiation, typical boogie man approach.

Tell us how much more radiation is released than a NPP, but fail to mention that NPPs are designed to release almost no radiation at all.

Arthur

 

[adoucette]

Billy,

What is it with all these pessimistic posts?

Why do you only focus on potential problems and never consider the possible solutions?

Why do so many of your post seem to have a goal to create fear about the value of the US Dollar.

Why I can't be sure, but considering one way to depress the value of the dollar is to CREATE fear and that is the drum that you seem to beat 24/7

So while I can't ascertain your motives, I'm begining to fear that they are not altruistic.

Arthur

 

[spidergoat]

That's just it, the only solutions that exist now are just "possible", theoretical, prototypes, pipe dreams. Not even hybrid cars have made much of an impact on one country's energy consumption. And political pressure on the conservative side (the same side that denies the problem and legislates in favor of the oil industry) prevents any substantial re-investment or change in the status quo.

It's altruistic to point out the rough road we are heading towards, we wouldn't be doing anyone any favors to sugar-coat it.

 

[adoucette]

That's just it, the only solutions that exist now are just "possible", theoretical, prototypes, pipe dreams. Not even hybrid cars have made much of an impact on one country's energy consumption. And political pressure on the conservative side (the same side that denies the problem and legislates in favor of the oil industry) prevents any substantial re-investment or change in the status quo.

It's altruistic to point out the rough road we are heading towards, we wouldn't be doing anyone any favors to sugar-coat it.

Absolutely false.
As I pointed out to you before, the US gets 70% of the amount of energy we get from oil, from Renewables, so clearly they aren't just possible, theoretical or prototypes.
Indeed Wind Turbines are into their 5th or 6th generation, PV panels are into their 3rd, Solar Thermal into their third generation etc etc. In everycase their cost per kWh drops and their reliability goes up. Then there is MASSIVE amounts of investment, deployment, subsidies, research and development of alternative energy going on all over the world funded by all the major industrialized countries of the world.

In contrast there are virtually no subsidies for the oil, gas or coal industries, except for studies on how to burn coal cleaner (which we will be able to do in about a decade from now).

In 2009, $162 billion was invested in
clean energy globally, with more than 90
percent of that investment occurring in G-20
member nations. And the future of the clean
energy sector is bright. Worldwide, clean
energy investments are forecast to grow by
as much as 25 percent by in 2010 over the
previous year’s investments.

http://www.pewglobalwarming.org/cleanenergyeconomy/pdf/G20II_report.pdf

Arthur

 

[Billy T]

Billy, What is it with all these pessimistic posts?

Why do you only focus on potential problems and never consider the possible solutions? ...

I am not “pessimistic” – the current problems of the US are very serious. I don’t know any solutions. I have repeated asked you for ways out of the "China problem" - China financially strong with rapidly growing oil demand driving the cost of oil up as China out bids the US for it. When I see both problems and possible solutions I offer them. For example, my 3Jan06* post (from: http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=942044&postcount=10):

... what would be wrong with requiring almost all new electric motors to use more copper to reduce the I^2R loses to half the current levels? (And many other "end use efficiency" improvements?) If these savings are backed up to the coal saved in generation, they grow about 10 fold. See Amory Loving's article in Sept 05 Scientific American for more details. For example, see specific example of companies that have save millions of dollars, retained their competitive positions only by improved end use efficiency - some investments with one-year pay-back periods. (That whole issue would be good for you to read.)

I think oil is in limited supply, and much too valuable as a chemical, to be burnt for its heat content. Why not convert all mobile use of oil (cars/ trucks /trains /airplanes /etc.) to alcohol produced from tropical grown sugar cane? Replace coal fired plants (and the radioactivity they discharge) with well-regulated nuclear ones, (Not ones like US installed 30 years ago, but "safety first" ones, like the French get 80+ percentage of their electricity from.) It is ridiculous to let power company CEOs specify unique control rooms, unique designs etc. Designs should be limited to a few, all developed by government agency concerned with safety, as in France, not profit motivated CEOs, who for example, put three mile island “on line” 31 December to make sure it was in the base the PSC used to calculate their rate of return for the next year, even though some of the safety pumps were not yet installed, etc.) ...

*I did not search for this but stumbled on it when looking for old post that told why I wrote book “Dark Visitor” a physically possible story of a cosmic disaster that would turn the Northern Hemisphere into a permanent new type of ice age (Earth’ orbit made slightly more elliptical by small black hole passing 12 AU from Earth) I was bothered by (1) fact the US had already lost technology leadership to Asia (For example they were on generation 4 of flat screen displays and US could not even make generation 1.) and (2) that many of the brightest students were not interested in taking the harder courses of Science as they were planning to become rich in law firms or on Wall Street, etc. Book is really a disguised physic text - Story is told with straight face as factual pending disaster. - No one can see the approaching D.V. but story’s astronomer has deduced a rough trajectory for it from small perturbation of Pluto’s orbit, which can now only be observed well from the Southern Hemisphere. I wanted to scare these bright, money hungry students into at least looking to see if what book told was possible – it is – and perhaps become more interested in physic – helping US not lose scientific leadership as well to Asia.

I joined Sciforums for the same reason when book was done. An effort trying to help the US become aware of its problems while there was still time to avoid US losing its dominate world leadership position. It is not a disservice to try to do that, but I fear it is now too late for my feeble efforts to do anything. I now fear the dollar collapse is inevitable with the “Greatest Depression” to quickly follow in US & EU. Of course, I hope I am wrong, but the trend of dollar’ decline, last three years with greater than trillion dollar deficits, Asia growing stronger IN ALL AREAS, and US student’s continuing decline in math and sciences abilities / test scores / even interest / etc. give me little reason for that hope.

PS: My old post mentioned control room design as the experts called in to help with the Three Mile Island accident did not understand the controls and actually for a day made the problem worse, created the "hydrogen bubble fear" etc. In France all have the same control rooms and their "safety first" "profits second" policy has never had a problem, but if one should occur the experts called in could be controlling it minutes, not days.

 

[adoucette]

I am not “pessimistic” – the current problems of the US are very serious. I don’t know any solutions.

That doesn't mean there aren't any.
Just because someone on a friggin forum doesn't trot out a solution to the problem you think WILL (but hasn't yet) happen, doesn't mean that the problem will even occur, or if it does, a solution won't be found.

Like I said in a previous post, the world is spending over 160 BILLION dollars per year on renewable energy and that is accelerating at a brisk pace. There indeed is no shortage of energy, and the means we have of capturing it are not that expensive even today, and those prices are falling each year.

As for students, averages mean nothing, we graduate MILLIONS of exceptionally smart people each year from top colleges with advanced degrees. We have no shortage of talent.

Arthur

 

[Billy T]

... As for students, averages mean nothing, we graduate MILLIONS of exceptionally smart people each year from top colleges with advanced degrees. We have no shortage of talent. Arthur

Then why is Asia increasingly "eating our lunch" We were the unquestioned leaders in almost everything, but no longer.

I am sure there are solutions to the liquid fuel problem - I have been posting one for more than 5 years and the natural gas powered cars for a few. Solution are not the problem. The problem is getting people to understand how serious it is and act in more than a token way. We only have a few years to change the US energy system or the cost of the current one will kill the US economy as China is rich and buys up the oil we need for the current system to function.

 

[adoucette]

Billy,
No one can be the leader in everything, just doesn't work that way, but the interesting thing is that as a nation like China industrializes it doesn't make the rest of the world POOR because Industrialization is NOT a zero sum game, indeed, the more industrialized the world becomes the more stable it becomes and the better/longer people live.

In 2007, the United States' manufacturing output was $1,831 Billion (USD). This was followed by:
China ($1,106 billion USD)
Japan ($926 billion USD)
Germany ($670 billion USD)
Russian Federation ($362 billion USD)
Italy ($345 billion USD)
United Kingdom ($342 billion USD)
France ($296 billion USD)
South Korea ($241 billion USD)
Canada ($218 billion USD)
Spain ($208 billion USD)
Brazil ($206 billion USD).

Arthur

 

[Billy T]

... the interesting thing is that as a nation like China industrializes it doesn't make the rest of the world POOR because Industrialization is NOT a zero sum game, indeed, the more industrialized the world becomes the more stable it becomes and the better/longer people live.

Absolutely true, when there was cheap oil available for all who could use it, but now or in the near future, I don't think it is.

Many have already suggested that the Iraq war was for cheap oil.* Certainly there were worse Dictators than Saddam**, but they were not attacked as they were fortunate to not have cheap oil.
---------------
*France's Total had almost all the oil contracts that Chenny wanted. Why France was so against the US invasion. Americans were whipped up into such an anit-France mood that well publisized photos of French wine being poured in to NYC gutters went allover the world. After the war, France was not even allowed to bid on the contract to restore Baghdad's telephone system they had built - US had no compatible spare parts so restoration took about two years longer than it needed to. - That was back when cheap oil was available for all - wait till there is not enough to meet the demand.

** For at least a decade after Iran took US hostages, Saddam was supported by the US - even given satellite photos of Iranian troop concentrations for his poison gas attacks. There is a famous photo of Saddam and Cheney shaking hands during this era - search and I am sure you can find it.

 

[adoucette]

Absolutely true, when there was cheap oil available for all who could use it, but now or in the near future, I don't think it is.

Again, just your usual pessimistic view.

Arthur

 

[Billy T]

Again, just your usual pessimistic view. Arthur

And that (a character attack) is your usual reply to the FACTS I just presented about wars for cheap oil, even when there was plenty for all.

Respond to my facts. Or at least tell why you think when China is driving up the price of oil with it surging demand* that will be good for the US?

*2011 will be the third year in a row that China sells more cars than the US does.

 

[adoucette]

It's NOT a character attack Billy, all you do post is DOOM and GLOOM.

Do you not?

Are you not predicting a MASSIVE depression?

Have you not talked about armed men in the streets going house to house for food in the US?

Sheesh, at least admit what you post here day after day after day.



The Iraq was was not about oil, cheap or otherwise, and you have made no convincing argument that it was.

China has over ONE BILLION more people than we do, so selling more cars than we do is not that big of surprise in a rapidly industrializing nation.

Arthur

 

[spidergoat]

Absolutely false.
As I pointed out to you before, the US gets 70% of the amount of energy we get from oil, from Renewables, so clearly they aren't just possible, theoretical or prototypes.
Indeed Wind Turbines are into their 5th or 6th generation, PV panels are into their 3rd, Solar Thermal into their third generation etc etc. In everycase their cost per kWh drops and their reliability goes up. Then there is MASSIVE amounts of investment, deployment, subsidies, research and development of alternative energy going on all over the world funded by all the major industrialized countries of the world.

In contrast there are virtually no subsidies for the oil, gas or coal industries, except for studies on how to burn coal cleaner (which we will be able to do in about a decade from now).



http://www.pewglobalwarming.org/cleanenergyeconomy/pdf/G20II_report.pdf

Arthur

You are only off by one order of magnitude. The actual figure is 7% of total US energy consumption is renewable:

 

[adoucette]

NOPE

You are comparing renewables to all other forms of energy and that's not what I said.

I said it was 70% of the energy we get from Crude Oil:

And it is.

From the EIA in Billion BTUs, for 2009:

Crude Oil: 11,241,142
Renewables: 7,760,850 which equals 70% of the BTUs we get from Oil

http://www.eia.gov/aer/overview.html

Go to Primary Energy Production by Source, 1949-2009 - STB0102.XLS for confirmation.

Arthur