What, no noise from piston engines in the future you say?? And I hear that autonomous driving cars and driverless vehicles are being touted as the next big thing. I shall have to play the sound files of a BRM 16 cylinder racing engine very loud on the car hi-fi then, to make people aware of my presence. Seriously though, the day I can't drive a car I'll give up automobiles. Being in charge is the thing that is interesting me with regards to driving. If all I wanted was transportation I'd jump into a Zippy, which is my word for the autonomous, ownership-not required box that will get me from a to b. And with regards to electric racing cars and even driverless robo-racers, I'm also compeletly out of interest. It needs to be smelly, noisy and with people in charge of the vehicles, otherwise it's just Robowars. It may be the thing for the 21st Century person, but I'm a 20th Century man.
The headlines proclaiming Volvo to become electric driven needs to be qualified a bit by what Volvo has really said: By 2019, all new models will have an electric or hybrid element to them. They'll abandon diesel engines, but as I understand the plan, there will still be a piston engine involved. This is what I think we know, the rest is now my speculation and conjecture: The piston engine will probably be smaller in capacity than we are used to and the electric/hybrid element used to provide extra mileage or extra horsepower. That way CO2 emissions will be further reduced thus complying with EU, US and Chinese regulation demanding a further lowering of CO2 emissions. Volvo is owned by the Chinese.
According to some people, CO2 is the cause for all evil in the world and at the roots of "Climate Change", whatever that might be. Well, I always enjoy a debate where positions expressed in one Unique Selling Point are broadened from the simple to the complex and more pertaining information is brought forward. CO2 is only deadly in massive concentrations, as in exchange the air in the room with only CO2 and you die. That applies to O2 as well, by the way. Breathe only O2, and you die. CO2 is appreciated by plants and the basis for photosynthesis.Some people claim, that replanting the huge areas of forrest that have been, and are being cut down, would absorb 30% of the current CO2. In terms of greenhouse gasses, Methane is far worse than CO2, and every time we, 7.000.000.000 inhabitants or our livestock fart, Methane is released. Almost nobody put forward these facts in the public debate. It is always the CO2 emitted which is named the culprit.
Rarely anybody mentions the environmental consequences of producing batteries and very complicated cars with lots of exotic materials, and the consequences and costs of scrapping them and reusing and getting rid of waste parts. Perhaps a simple Jeep that you keep for 30 years is more environmentally friendly than the three or more high tech hybrid/electrics you'll have to buy to keep you going for the same amount of years?
I wouldn't be surprised at all, if the masses think they can run their electric or hybrid cars more than a gasoline or diesel powered vehicle because they think of these EV/Hybrids as being "clean". But all they do is require their energy form the socket and where and how is that energy produced? So imagine many more people wanting to own and drive (or be driven) in a vehicle because these vehicles are thought of as environmentally clean. More vehicles, more miles more energy required which leads to a need for more energy to be produced.
This is why I think that the future belongs not to the electric car or hybrid vehicle, but to fuel cells as the means for propulsion. Apollo 13 proved it, if under somewhat uncontrolled circumstances: Mix O2 and H and you get a big bang. Waste product is O2; Water.
In a previous post OG or Fittop raised the question; are we, as a species getting dumber? I would say we base our ideas and beliefs on what we are told and what we know or learn. If we are told that CO2 emissions are the sole biggest cause for Climate change, some choose to believe that.
Giving another example, yet in an entirely different area and and area that finally, yes finally, bears some resemblance to the core matter of this HWH thread, I have just been taken quite by surprise by the fact that Winston Churchill was violently opposed to operation Overlord. I don't think that this position has been given enough consideration. Perhaps the reason why it has not been discussed much is the fact that Overlord succeeded and the Allies won the war, so there rests the case. after all, why would the Allies choose to mount a vastly amphibious invasion force across the Channel opposing the might of the Nazi forces in mainland, Fortress Europe, if that was not militarily the most sensible thing to do?
Well, the Allies were well in swing on the real second front; Italy, having fought their way through heavy opposition and up to Rome, with the promise of an incursion to Europe and the Balkans from the South but suddenly they diverted men and material to the Invasion of France. They had defeated the Italian fascist regime and forced Nazi Germany to send troops to Italy to fight there, so why oh why did they give up on the Italian front and go for a sea landing into France?
Apparently, it was all to appease Stalin. Bloody Joe who demanded a second front in France due to his aspirations to conquer Eastern Europe and the Balkans. Had the Allies pressed on form Italy, the war might have ended sooner. No need for the bloody landings in Normandy, no need for operations such as Market Garden, and the relationship with the Soviets quite possibly damaged to the effect that the Western Allies might have gone with the rest of the Wehrmacht and fought the red Army?
I think that these tales imply that if we accept someone else's argumentation with no healthy scepticism, if we stop asking questions, sometimes "inappropriate" questions, we are fools and will be played for fools. If we seek out new information, new insight, we are on the right track.
Long rambling post over (for now). Weather you agree or disagree, I hope you enjoyed these musings.
Roger; Thank you so much for the sunny weather you sent. It arrived well and shiny and the day was thus applied to what is sometimes referred to as gardening chores but they were not really chores at all. Mowing the lawn and cutting some shrubbery was a nice way to get some additional groups of muscles going, that cutter for the shrubs sure is heavy! I've just zipped and emailed to you, our last night which in the coldest parts at 5 a.m. saw a temperature of 2.8 degrees C! Coldest July morning in two years, no less! I do have my doubts that it will keep cold en route to you as you report such high temps and humidity at 97%. According to my calculations, you are located in what equates to a very big bucket of water my friend!
