EELV controversy on aviation and children's dreams (Mayor of Poitiers)

Transport and new transport: energy, pollution, engine innovations, concept car, hybrid vehicles, prototypes, pollution control, emission standards, tax. not individual transport modes: transport, organization, carsharing or carpooling. Transport without or with less oil.
User avatar
Flytox
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 14138
Registration: 13/02/07, 22:38
Location: Bayonne
x 839

Re: EELV controversy on aviation and children's dreams (Mayor of Poitiers)




by Flytox » 21/04/21, 11:44

Exnihiloest wrote:
Flytox wrote:
You have something to support this big stupid trial of intent ?????


You should know that we can imagine, create, produce something other than the existing "bad" model of "development" ...


Completely free affirmation from you.


Ha good? Because your answer is more argued. : roll:


What have environmentalists produced besides taxes, bans, guilt, and doomsday predictions ?!
Nothing at all. Nada de nada. Useless suits.

Yes, indeed it is much less interesting than those of your camp which allow themselves to ruin the ecosystem for the sole profit of a few profiteers without faith or law. Your camp prefers to blame those who could attack their profits, precisely the environmentalists and those who are able to use their brain by looking a little beyond the tip of their nose (apocalyptic predictions). For the "useless suits" I prefer them to the "dangerous parasites" of your camps.

Even the lighting LEDs, dividing the energy consumed by 7, it is not the ecologists but the electronics industry who invented and produced them, an industry which they nevertheless still qualify as "polluting". Useless wholesalers, spending their time slandering useful people, those who innovate and produce. The "existing model" does not need these parasites to produce better and less polluting.

Polluting less, yes that's good, we still have to tackle something other than the tree that hides the forest. Dividing by 7 or even 10 a small percentage of our electricity consumption (lighting) is not likely to change the face of the world. It is just a measure to numb public opinion by making it believe that we are actively concerned with improving our energy consumption. When we want tangible results, we tackle large energy consumers (transport, heating, industry, etc.). Even there a modest percentage of savings gives much more significant results. But here we are touching your wallet, you will not like it. : Mrgreen:
The "existing model" pays heavily for parasites, with force lobbies, to make believe that they take care of everything ... we see the result : Wink:
0 x
Reason is the madness of the strongest. The reason for the less strong it is madness.
[Eugène Ionesco]
http://www.editions-harmattan.fr/index. ... te&no=4132
User avatar
Exnihiloest
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5365
Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
x 660

Re: EELV controversy on aviation and children's dreams (Mayor of Poitiers)




by Exnihiloest » 21/04/21, 18:20

Flytox wrote:... Dividing by 7 or even 10 a small percentage of our electricity consumption (lighting) is not likely to change the face of the world. It's just a measure to numb public opinion ...

False, and even doubly false.
On the first point, small streams make big rivers. How can we seriously believe that everything will change overnight ?! Still waiting for a Grand Soir, green version?
On the second point, it is so absurd and unfounded, a complete invention, disconnected from all reality. LEDs are the result of research in physics, its progress, and its application by the electronics industry which today follows it very quickly (and even participates in it).
0 x
User avatar
Flytox
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 14138
Registration: 13/02/07, 22:38
Location: Bayonne
x 839

Re: EELV controversy on aviation and children's dreams (Mayor of Poitiers)




by Flytox » 21/04/21, 22:51

Exnihiloest wrote:
Flytox wrote:... Dividing by 7 or even 10 a small percentage of our electricity consumption (lighting) is not likely to change the face of the world. It's just a measure to numb public opinion ...

False, and even doubly false.
On the first point, small streams make great rivers.


Agree for, that it is essential that each one appropriates the real improvements to "pull together on the good side". But the biggest consumers of energy in our system are not called upon. They are rather formatted / wired to always want more of everything, again and again ... in excess / mismanagement instead of thinking resource saving / fair measure. For example, the cars promoted by the advertisement and sold are always more powerful, heavier for 10z years, thus with an always lousy overall efficiency (more than 7 liters per 100 km). It has been about 30 years that we know how to make cars that consume only 2 liters per hundred kilometer, but "good" research, that which leads to knowing how to make vehicles more suitable / less voracious that does not interest savage capitalism , it's a green thing. There the gain in consumption is more than 3 times the stake (go from about 2 to 7 liters per 100 km).

But the market is creating an illusion to make believe that these current cars are "monuments of modern technology" which allow to flourish, to go always further (towards the abyss in this case ) ... above all to avoid making people think about the consequences, to better anesthetize with immediate comfort any hint of criticism on the sustainability of the model. Efficient and useful transport could mean something other than overpowered tanks thirsty for fuel to go at 80 km / h making you believe that you are someone important even if you destroy your biosphere ...

For individual heating, it's the same, the consumer is not really informed / pushed towards insulation, the standards are far too lax, the aid far insufficient and the lobbies with contrary interests far too powerful. Yet it is by far the most important factor in limiting
energy consumption. There the gain could be considerable in ten%, but here we do not hear you, to believe that the lobby of the insulation must pay less than that of oil. : Mrgreen:

https://fr.statista.com/statistiques/48 ... re-france/
consumption.jpg
conso.jpg (335.25 KiB) Viewed 4082 times


How can we seriously believe that everything will change overnight ?! Still waiting for a Grand Soir, green version?

Seriously, sure that the big night is not ready to exist with scoops, version wild capitalism, by being satisfied with improvement of some small% in a marginal sector (lighting) without ever tackling the real problem (orgy energy in transport, heating and industry).

On the second point, it is so absurd and unfounded, a complete invention, disconnected from all reality. LEDs are the result of research in physics, its progress, and its application by the electronics industry which today follows it very quickly (and even participates in it).

What is disconnected from any reality is to believe that the "Led wave" responds to a primary concern of limiting pollution and energy consumption. It is rather the competition of opportunities going hand in hand with great advances in physics that allows to create new opportunities, new markets, so we sell "real" advantages of less pollution in the manufacturing process and a much better fuel efficiency. This is still completely marginal in the context of global energy consumption. You know the tree which must not hide the forest ...
0 x
Reason is the madness of the strongest. The reason for the less strong it is madness.

[Eugène Ionesco]

http://www.editions-harmattan.fr/index. ... te&no=4132
User avatar
GuyGadeboisTheBack
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 14823
Registration: 10/12/20, 20:52
Location: 04
x 4302

Re: EELV controversy on aviation and children's dreams (Mayor of Poitiers)




by GuyGadeboisTheBack » 22/04/21, 15:28

Flytox wrote:What is disconnected from any reality is to believe that the "Led wave" responds to a primary concern of limiting pollution and energy consumption.

What you call "the Led wave" was almost prevented (various surcharges, lobbying) by Philips and Osram who did everything to curb their importation into our markets whereas they were used in South-East Asia since the 80s for advertising, among others. I can no longer find these articles that I had read in those years and that an importer of induction lamps had confirmed to me.

Something else, but interesting:
https://www.segula.de/fr/linvention-de-la-led/
0 x

Back to "New transport: innovations, engines, pollution, technologies, policies, organization ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 181 guests