Column: Enthusiastic Idiocy Vs. Infrastructure Optimization – Two Strategies For An Energy Transition

Reposted from BOE REPORT

November 16, 20216:30 AM Terry Etam

Last week, buried in the flow of weird crap that fills the mailbox these days, was a small treat – the Lee Valley catalogue. It is a booklet of wonder, even if delivery apparently might take a year…not sure how I’m going to survive without the $80 “Discover Whittling Set” or the $135 Camera Lucida. 

Beyond those staples a German tool caught my eye – the Eierschalensollbruchstellenverursacher (wow did spell checker ever get mad at that). It is pretty much what it sounds like; a metal egg cup with a long rod sticking out the top with a weight on the rod that drops down and ‘drives the rim cleanly through the shell’ allowing users to access the yolk of soft-boiled eggs without shell shards. 

It warms one’s heart to see such a precise bit of engineering that so precisely and purposely solves an issue. Bless those Germans. 

I pondered this Germanic engineering precision when contemplating a car racing series called ElectricGT (born 2017, died 2018). The series’ idiotic flop made me think there couldn’t possibly have been a German engineer involved. (Although, Germany’s current energy policy is working about as well as WWII…the egg crackers and cars are exquisite but maybe the really macro stuff isn’t their strong suit.)

The tale of ElectricGT is worth dissecting, as it is a perfect metaphor for the utter failure that a too-rushed energy transition will create. In a hundred years of eierschalensollbruchstellenverursacher-ing, I couldn’t have come up with a better analogy.

Developing an international racing series is a formidable undertaking. It must be sanctioned by the world racing regulator, the same Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile that governs Formula 1. Multiple deep-pocketed sponsors are a must. Tracks must to be rented far in advance, and Formula 1 tracks do not presumably come cheap. Cars, teams, team crews, and drivers must be found, hired, and organized. Cars were purchased and modified with roll cages, etc. Some serious promotion ensued to get the world’s attention.

Organizers did all of that, and did it well. The professional website shows the whole sh*teree – a ten-race initial season. Races across Europe. Tracks booked. A five-year development plan. Each race a ‘weekend festival’ with a structured practice/race schedule: “Rounds will consist of a 20-minute practice session, 60-minute qualifying heat, a day race (60km) and a dusk race (60km).” The series was officially launched in Ibiza, Euro-party headquarters. All systems go!

But then, dead silence for four years. Not a peep, until a few weeks ago.

Some news about the series surfaced in an article on the website The Verge. The story wasn’t news, it was more like one of those “I’m finally ready to talk about it’  emotional belches people emit when enough time has passed. The story: The racer/writer reported how, in 2017, he had shown up in the south of France to film a promo video at the first race. Strapped into the seat, he headed out for the first practice session of the first race. The practice time had been reduced to ten minutes, but no matter. First lap impressions were that the car felt great – lots of grip thanks to the racing slicks, and it was fast.

Second lap impressions never materialized – the car packed it in before he could begin. The battery overheated at the end of Lap 1, the car went into half-power limp mode, and that was that – for the practice session, for the race, for the whole racing series. The car, despite all the external foliage of a race car, was not just ill-suited – it was an impossibility. Any one of the people involved could have taken the car to a track for 30 minutes to see what would happen. Not only did they not do that, they spent millions only to find out the dog didn’t hunt.

And there we have the perfect metaphor for the too-rushed energy transition that the flamboyantly elite ignoramuses at COP26 envisioned. When you look at that cast of attendees, the global who’s who of do as I say but not as I do, the not-yet-dead colonialists lecturing Africa/India/China to take emissions seriously from the steps of private jets, you might think that it is impossible that such a powerhouse dream-team of 30,000 globe-trotting superiors could get an energy transition so wrong, so completely.

That’s why the ElectricGT lesson is so valuable, because it shows the process of failure. Let your project be guided by a moral ‘imperative’ rather than the laws of reality, and that’s what you get. And it keeps happening, at a larger scale, because even COP26 global kingpins make the same mistake.

COP26 supremos pushed agendas onto developing nations, who pointed out that the metaphorical car would not work. India was asked to put forth a plan to stop using coal, and they said no thanks. China would not support it either, nor even would the US. Even the EU – the EU! – threw up their own roadblocks by refusing to place nuclear power in its green energy category (nuclear is the only zero-emission mid-term hope to dramatically reduce hydrocarbon consumption). In the ultimate irony, as the EU-led COP26 forum made progress on the elimination of fossil fuel subsidies, some EU member states were creating brand new fossil fuel subsidies (in the form of capped energy bills for citizens) to help their populations deal with hydrocarbon shortages/soaring prices.

It’s the exact same pattern – start with their vision, build grandiose plans, spend a fortune, then realize the whole thing (Europe’s insistence on renewables as a solution) doesn’t work. To underscore the point, global consumption of hydrocarbons, the fuel squarely in the crosshairs at COP26, is now being consumed at all-time high levels, with global consumption still growing. Hydrocarbons remain stuck firmly as source for about 80% of the world’s energy needs for decades now, despite a trillion or two thrown at renewables.

None of the above is to trash the idea of an energy transition, of course. One will happen. One is happening. What is key about the one that is happening though is that it is progressing because it is dovetailing with the existing hydrocarbon system, not trying to dance on its grave.29dk2902lhttps://boereport.com/29dk2902l.html

Here’s what transition success looks like. The other week, TC Energy announced a partnership with Hyzon Motors, a supplier of hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles. Under the partnership, the pair will “collaborate on development, construction, operation, and ownership of hydrogen production facilities (hubs) across North America.”

TC Energy will operate the hubs, supply power/gas, and provide asset development, management services, and power and gas sales marketing. Hyzon will get an enormous leg up on its plans for widespread adoption of its fuel-cell commercial vehicles. The venture will market hydrogen to other industrial customers, which will help establish a hydrogen network. 

Note the key distinction here between these concrete plans and the ephemeral wishlist of COP26 jetsetters. The Hyzon/TC Energy plan will utilize and leverage the existing hydrocarbon-based system – TC Energy’s vast network of pipelines and associated infrastructure. COP26 visions refuse to talk about hydrocarbons at all, other than to disparage them.

Every now and then, as quick green illusions get shattered, some commentators get snarky: Of course it won’t happen quickly, it’s a transition, everyone knows it will be hard. If such critics really understood that though, they would not be so quick to pile on to the anti-hydrocarbon movement, or to stand by silently and be complicit. There are indeed intelligent commentators that emphasize the need for a healthy hydrocarbon industry for upcoming decades, but they are few and far between – many are like the Pembina Institute, cloaking an anti-hydrocarbon bias in guise of endless studies of how rapidly the sector will disappear. And the unchallenged leaders of the mobs are crystal clear, such as George Monbiot in The Guardian: “What we needed at the Cop26 climate conference was a decision to burn no more fossil fuels after 2030…positive feedbacks will rapidly drive fossil fuels to extinction…The plummeting prices of solar electricity and offshore wind – already cheaper than hydrocarbons in many countries – are making fossil fuel plants look like a filthy extravagance.” Tell me again, dear noveau-energy-transitionists, how that unchallenged nonsense is constructive, and why it goes unchallenged by those who claim to want progress. 

The Hyzon/TC model will be the blueprint for the energy transition. It will succeed because it is a planned step-out of known equipment, processes, and technologies. The COP26 model will fail as spectacularly as ElectricGT, because it is built on a normative vision of ‘what ought to be’ that is untethered to reality.

The hydrocarbon sector must remain healthy to ensure the infrastructure remains healthy, as it is key to any successful transition. Hate-mongering and ‘divest fossil fuels’ campaigns are gradually decimating the industry, at least in Europe and NA. It is being starved of capital. Excess cash flow is being returned to shareholders. Fewer young people are willing to join the industry because who needs the hassle. 

(By the way, there is as of yet no energy transition at all – globally, the growth in renewable energy supply is lower than the rise in global energy demand. According to an analyst at Platts, the global supply of renewables will grow by 35 gigawatts from 2021 to 2022, but global power demand growth will increase by 100 gigawatts over the same period.)

The energy transition is going to be exciting, creative, profitable, and rewarding, because it is going to leverage all the skill and expertise (and product) of the hydrocarbon industry – the industry that works rather well at keeping 7.7 billion people alive. It can be helped by proper government support, in productive ways, as long as those governments know where to start. 

The COP26 model, the one built around a future temperature, is going nowhere, as was proven these past few weeks. Neither enthusiasm nor perceived need will, in fact, move mountains. Anyone that has any doubt about that, this winter’s looming energy shortage will provide all the proof anyone will need.

Quick! Distribute some copies while the thought police are all at COP26. Pick up “The End of Fossil Fuel Insanity” at Amazon.caIndigo.ca, or Amazon.com. Thanks for the support.

Read more insightful analysis from Terry Etam here, or email Terry here. PS: Dear email correspondents, the email flow is wonderful and welcome, however I am having trouble keeping up. In past I replied to everything but am getting stretched. Apologies if comments/questions go unanswered; they are not ignored.

4.7 11 votes
Article Rating
70 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mike Lowe
November 17, 2021 10:36 pm

That all sounds practicable, except for the detailed recent explanation of why hydrogen involves such massive technical problems that it is unlikely to attain everyday use. With diesel and petrol having been developed over decades into a practicable safe fuel, there is actually no point in looking to hydrogen, nor a massive extension of the electrical hi-amp grid for no ultimate gain. Surely this must become general knowledge soon, despite the efforts of the non-technical “experts” to confuse the uneducated.

Ron Long
Reply to  Mike Lowe
November 18, 2021 2:39 am

Nukem!

Spetzer86
Reply to  Mike Lowe
November 18, 2021 5:31 am

Can you imagine a nation that is so anti-pipeline they won’t put in needed new natural gas lines to heat homes considering the massively more difficult task of piping and using hydrogen?

MarkW
Reply to  Spetzer86
November 18, 2021 6:34 am

Unfortunately, I can.
Beyond that, I don’t have to imagine them, such imbecilic countries already exist.

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  MarkW
November 18, 2021 9:34 pm

“ such imbecilic countries already exist.”

Slowly, the canadian raises his hand

Reply to  Spetzer86
November 18, 2021 7:47 am

The reason the idiots are anti-pipeline is because they have been coerced by a politically driven and dishonest media to accept the fake science.claiming that CO2 emissions will destroy the planet.

Given the susceptibility of these idiots to repeated emotional manipulation, playing the Hindenburg disaster over and over will probably turn them against H2 pipelines as well.

The only long term use for H2 is to use inexpensive nuclear generated electricity to combine it with the carbon from coal and turn it into usable and transportable liquid and gaseous fuels. This is the only energy transformation the world will need and only after we run out of oil and natural gas.

The transformation that can repair the current ‘crisis’, is to transform the media from one that repeats lies supported by confirmation bias alone into one that actually performs non partisan due diligence before they report anything about controversial, partisan issues.

michel
Reply to  Mike Lowe
November 18, 2021 7:01 am

If you are the UK Government, you press on with hydrogen regardless, because you are planning simultaneously to convert all residential users of gas to electricity, in the form of heat pumps.

So you promote hydrogen till you froth at the mouth, knowing that if your plans are implemented, there will be no need for it, no buyers for it.

But it sounds a lot better than admitting that your real plan is to totally close down the gas industry and put the retail suppliers out of business.

And the field owners for that matter. If there is no-one to buy the hydrogen, no-one will buy the gas to turn into it….

DHR
November 17, 2021 11:12 pm

Mr. Lowe mentions “massive technical problems” with use of hydrogen for everyday use. A report titled “The Future of the Hydrogen Economy: Bright or Bleak?” from ABB identifies these problems in detail and they are massive as he says. A web search on the title will bring it up. For example, it would require over 20 large semi-tractor trailer loads of compressed hydrogen at 3,000 psi to deliver to a “gas” station the same amount of energy delivered now by one gasoline tanker. Plus there must be a compressor on the truck or at the station to unload and some means to power that compressor. Considering the just thermodynamic properties of hydrogen, a hydrogen economy makes no sense.

StephenP
Reply to  DHR
November 17, 2021 11:23 pm

Just the facts to counter acquaintances who keep spouting that hydrogen will be the future for transport.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  StephenP
November 18, 2021 5:01 am

Rud had a good comment in recent days outlining the problems with usng hydrogen.

Alan the Brit
Reply to  DHR
November 18, 2021 12:29 am

Is it not the case that Hydrogen is the most common element in the Universe, as well as being the most volatile & explosive??? Wouldn’t feel too easy driving on top of a tank of it!!!

Spetzer86
Reply to  Alan the Brit
November 18, 2021 5:33 am

If it’s a comfort, you won’t have to worry about seeing the flames when it goes…

Barnes Moore
Reply to  DHR
November 18, 2021 6:16 am

Question. Other commenters mention the explosive nature of hydrogen. What would it take to trigger an explosion in one of the semis or of the underground tank? And, if an explosion were to occur, how big an area would be consumed?

MarkW
Reply to  Barnes Moore
November 18, 2021 6:38 am

A chemical explosion can’t occur in the semi or underground tank. You need to mix the hydrogen with oxygen before that can occur.
On the other hand, if the gas collects anywhere after leaking, it can easily explode.
There’s also the problem with the hydrogen having to be stored at 3000 psi. It doesn’t take much to rupture a tank when it’s trying to contain those kinds of pressures, and when it does rupture, all that hydrogen is instantly mixed with the available oxygen.

Barnes Moore
Reply to  MarkW
November 18, 2021 7:43 am

Thanks for the explanation.

Mcgee
Reply to  Barnes Moore
November 18, 2021 7:00 am

Explosion is not the biggest concern. Stored at 3000psig, there really is no chance to achieve an explosive (LEL) mixture in the tank. It’s the leak of 3,000 psig hydrogen with it’s very low AIT (auto ignition temperature) and colorless flame that presents the biggest problems. Also the molecule (H2) is incredible small and will leak out of ever fitting that is not “hydrogen tight”. Meaning every connection has to be a welded fitting, no compression or threaded fittings allowed. It’s also incredibly expensive (power) to compress because it is the lightest molecule.

Barnes Moore
Reply to  Mcgee
November 18, 2021 7:45 am

And thanks to you as well. I’ve read on these pages about the size of the molecule and how difficult it is to contain. It is incomprehensible why non-solutions like Hydrogen keep popping up.

MarkW
Reply to  Barnes Moore
November 18, 2021 7:57 am

In my opinion, it’s mostly an attempt to find a way around the failure of electric cars.

Last edited 2 months ago by MarkW
D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  Mcgee
November 18, 2021 12:12 pm

Swagelok VCR fittings are capable of routinely sealing to less than 10^-9 cc/sec of helium. That’s about 1,900 years to leak 1 cc. They aren’t cheap, but they are out there.

oeman 50
Reply to  DHR
November 18, 2021 7:25 am

All it will take is one large accident with a large H2 explosion or flames to make people less enamored of it.

MarkW
Reply to  oeman 50
November 18, 2021 8:00 am

Will this do?
comment image

Dave Fair
Reply to  MarkW
November 18, 2021 9:56 am

Oh, the humanity!

Dave Fair
Reply to  oeman 50
November 18, 2021 9:55 am

The same for an uncontrollable EV battery fire in one’s garage. How about the Powerball mounted on one’s house wall?

c1ue
Reply to  DHR
November 18, 2021 1:30 pm

It’s worse than that.
H2 as an energy source also means a significant increase in the escape of Hydrogen into space.
If it were truly ubiquitous, I wonder if this amount of escape would significantly increase that which happens naturally. Less H2 = Less water…

StephenP
November 17, 2021 11:14 pm

On the subject of enthusiastic idiocy, Field Marshall Montgomery in WW2 categorised his staff into:

Clever
Idiotic
Lazy
Enthusiastic.

The resulting combinations were:

Clever and enthusiastic
Clever and lazy
Idiotic and lazy
Idiotic and enthusiastic

The first two could be useful, the third didn’t do too much damage.
He regarded the last category as the most dangerous.

Alan the Brit
Reply to  StephenP
November 18, 2021 12:37 am

Surely he was talking about politicians, wasn’t he??? ;-))

StephenP
Reply to  Alan the Brit
November 18, 2021 4:47 am

At the time he was referring to his staff officers, but as you say it has since proved to apply universally.

MarkW
Reply to  StephenP
November 18, 2021 6:41 am

By the time you reach that high in any organization, most of those involved will be politicians. Regardless of what their actual job title may be.

Reply to  StephenP
November 18, 2021 12:50 pm

This is to misquote the views of, I think, Moltke, with regard to German General Staff officers: intelligent and energetic, intelligent and lazy, stupid and energetic, stupid and lazy.

Of these the most dangerous were the intelligent and energetic and the most valuable the intelligent and lazy – stupid officers have no value.

Someone put us right on this!

It must have been the intelligent and lazy officers who frightened the Allies into banning the German General Staff after WWI – along with their attempts to emulate it – producing Montgomery – who was both intelligent and well, … certainly not lazy…

Old Cocky
Reply to  Mr and Mrs David Hume
November 19, 2021 2:17 pm

To paraphrase:
Intelligent and energetic go on staff, because they organise things competently.
Stupid and lazy are the bulk; essentially troops who just do what they’re told – as long as somebody is watching.
Stupid and energetic just stuff things up
Intelligent and lazy make leaders, because they don’t make more work for themselves to get things done

Julian Flood
November 17, 2021 11:28 pm

Hydrogen looks like a duck.

JF

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Julian Flood
November 18, 2021 12:55 am

Quack!

Alexy Scherbakoff
Reply to  Julian Flood
November 18, 2021 2:03 am

But will it float on water? If it does then burn it as a witch.

Graham
November 17, 2021 11:34 pm

Why is there so much opposition to the building of new nuclear power stations through out the world?
If the world was really facing a problem caused by rising levels of CO2 any sane climate conference would focus on replacing coal and gas power plants with nuclear as quickly as possible to provide cheap reliable energy.Solar and wind are unreliable and they also require expensive backup.
This goes to show that there is a hidden agenda behind all the pomp and talk at GOP 26 Globull warming is being pushed to try and change the world towards socialism and populations have to wake up before to much damage is done to the worlds energy infrastructure.
There seems to be a plan to push up the price of energy to discourage use .
Expensive energy affects everything that populations require , food, housing and clothing which are basics to every thing else that makes up modern living.
Energy poverty will lead to widespread poverty( except for the elite).

griff
Reply to  Graham
November 18, 2021 12:29 am

There isn’t in the UK… it is just nobody can finance them and produce a return on investment which doesn’t price their electricity too high for consumers.

BTW I see Bill Gates has financed a sodium reactor…

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  griff
November 18, 2021 12:58 am

nobody can finance them and produce a return on investment which doesn’t price their electricity too high for consumers.

Because of the ridiculous constraints enforced by idiotic green fantasists, and only because of these constraints.

If you want to know what kind of useful idiots promoted these constraints, look in the mirror.

You keep being told this, you never refute it, and you keep spouting the same lies.

Last edited 2 months ago by Zig Zag Wanderer
MarkW
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
November 18, 2021 6:44 am

This has been pointed out to the griffs many times. But like all of his other lies, reality is not permitted to inform any of it’s opinions.

LdB
Reply to  griff
November 18, 2021 1:43 am

Yeah but the UK has clearly killed off all engineering skills currently. I mean you discharges raw sewage into rivers and oceans which even most 3rd world nations manage not to do. If you can’t do sewage treatment right what hope have you got with Nukes.

I do admire that water board executives get bonuses for treatment cost savings by simply dumping it rather than treating it .. I got to get me one of those jobs. Anyone for £61billion in dividends over 30 years for sucking at your job?

Last edited 2 months ago by LdB
MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 18, 2021 6:43 am

The only reason why they are expensive to build, is because that is what you greens want. Create an impossible regulatory environment, and you can kill any technology.

Graham
Reply to  griff
November 18, 2021 11:44 am

Reply to Grief
If there was the will to provide non fossil fueled electricity to the world these problems would have been worked through and the place to talk about these problems would be a climate shindig that tells us that this is the last chance for mankind .
How is it that a lot of nuclear power plants were built last century and a lot are still operating ?
My take on it is that the delegates to Cop Out 21 do not want the western countries to prosper and all heavy manufacturing will relocate to countries using large amounts of coal who will not be pushed around by the UN.
A few inconvenient facts are that coal use has soared from a steady 4.7 billion tonnes in 2008 to over 8 billion tones at present .
Wind and solar are expensive forms of electricity but they can be managed in countries with ample hydro resources as these plants can be switched on and off as required .Just try and get a hydro dam built today with all the green nuts or even a pumped storage scheme’

griff
November 18, 2021 12:28 am

Well electric Formula One seems to be still going strong…

The Official Home of Formula E | FIA Formula E

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  griff
November 18, 2021 1:03 am

A whole lot of talk. No walk at all. Livery seems the most important subject. Typical ‘woke’ practicality.

Wake me when they get a race together.

Last edited 2 months ago by Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
November 18, 2021 1:11 am

Formula E has been racing for several years. They let the engineers dictate the race format. You get two cars and only drive a limited number of laps.. Its boring as hell.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Leo Smith
November 18, 2021 1:21 am

Haha! Was that non-starter running on solar power?

LdB
Reply to  Leo Smith
November 18, 2021 1:40 am

WTF they hunger games it up, if a driver is popular enough you get help from the crowd with fanboost. That is so lame.

Formula E is the only sport in the world that lets fans impact the

outcome of the race. Vote for your favourite driver to give them a

chance to win an extra performance boost during the race.

Last edited 2 months ago by LdB
MarkW
Reply to  LdB
November 18, 2021 8:02 am

I’m surprised that they didn’t charge the fans to vote for their favorite driver.

Fraizer
Reply to  MarkW
November 18, 2021 9:49 am

And most of them would happily pay.

MarkW
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
November 18, 2021 6:46 am

I remember a few years ago when GM announced that there would be an electric version of each of it’s car lines.
For several years, griff proclaimed that GM had committed to abandoning ICE vehicles.

Beyond that the griffs still believes that a press release about future plans, is proof that this something is already happening.

LdB
Reply to  griff
November 18, 2021 1:36 am

WOW been running 7 years and few have ever heard of it … really setting the world on fire 🙂

Whats the pressure part of a pit stop getting a shower and a knap before the battery is recharged?

observa
Reply to  LdB
November 18, 2021 6:11 am

The missus drives a Kia and I’ll have you know Kia wins with only 7 hours 10 minutes worth of showers and naps-
Kia EV6 Sets Guinness World Record For The Least Hours Of Charging While Driving Across The USA | Carscoops
Why she’s got a petrol one as she spends quite enough time under the shower as it is so she doesn’t need to break anymore records.

Reply to  griff
November 18, 2021 2:20 am

Planning, trying, later failing, end of the story.

Scissor
Reply to  Krishna Gans
November 18, 2021 4:48 am

I remember the fanfare of the coming hydrogen economy from the 1970’s.

It’s always some decades out. Perhaps bets on Randell Mills’ and Andrea Rossi’s are better because their products are always only six months or a year out.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 18, 2021 6:48 am

There will always be people who can be paid to do dumb things.

And once again, the griffs proclaim that a press release is proof of success.

Last edited 2 months ago by MarkW
Joao Martins
Reply to  griff
November 18, 2021 7:28 am

Before scientific knowledge, there is “trial and error”.

When there is scientific knowledge and you keep on trying to contradict it, there is ignorance. Or stupidity. Or malevolence.

Ignorance, because you did not study enough.

Stupidity, if you decided not to study, or to reject what you have studied and hold on to your “feelings” and superstitions.

Malevolence, if you use unscientific ideas to promote “investments”, make their “value” increase artificially, and grab the money and go away before the financial bubble explodes.

Ignorance, stupidity, or malevolence: your choice, griff.

Dean
Reply to  griff
November 18, 2021 4:58 pm

Concept

Pilot Plant

Refine process

Scale

Very very difficult process which you seem totally unaware Griff

Alasdair Fairbairn
November 18, 2021 2:38 am

The whole thing is driven by the Communist mantra: “That the end justifies the means”. With that under your belt the ‘Means’ do not have to work do they? All they have to do is to establish a control mechanism, which is the objective of the Communist Party.

Javier
November 18, 2021 2:58 am

This article smelled fishy from the beginning. Why not put a link to The Verge article? Why not say the date of the article? Why not give the name of the reporter that had the “emotional belch”?

The story has been distorted to fit the narrative, as it is done so often by climate alarmists.

Reasoning has evolved not to help us find the truth but to help us engage in arguments, persuasion, and manipulation in the context of discussions with other people … This explains why the confirmation bias is so powerful and so ineradicable … it is a feature, … not a bug. Jonathan Haidt. The Righteous Mind (2012).

The Wikipedia page on the defunct Electric Production Car Series shows that the test at the Circuit Pau-Arnos in rural southwestern France took place in January 2017 and the series earned official FIA sanctioning in February 2018, and had a launch ceremony in Barcelona in June 2018.

It is clear that Terry Etam is lying when he says that the January 2017 test killed the EPCS. It didn’t.

I looked for the “emotional belch” article at The Verge and couldn’t find it. I doubt it exists. I could find however an article by Tesla enthusiast reporter Sean O’Kane from February 2018 “All-Tesla racing series gets the green light” where he says:
“I got to drive the prototype version of the EPCS’s Tesla racecar in November. It’s heavy as hell, but was fast and fun. And yet, it wasn’t able to run at full speed for more than a few laps at a time.”

The problem, according to O’Kane, was in Tesla’s battery management software, that is for a road car, not a race car. It is clear, however, that O’Kane is the reporter that Etam talks about, except that his test took place in November 2017, not at the January 2017 Pau-Arnaud test. No “emotional belch,” by the way.

No wonder Terry Etam didn’t want us to read The Verge article, as his lies get exposed. Clearly not a source to be trusted.

The reason given by most for the death of the EPCS is lack of a major sponsor willing to put a lot of dough into the venture, perhaps the commonest reason for startup failure.

It is the people saying what you want to hear the ones you should distrust the most.

Felix
November 18, 2021 4:06 am

“Hate-mongering and ‘divest fossil fuels’ campaigns are gradually decimating the industry, at least in Europe and NA.”

This kind of hyperbole makes me doubt everything else you write. The idea that fossil fuel companies are dying doesn’t pass the smell test — people simply will not, can not, put up with dark unheated houses, no fuel for cars or cooking, or warm refrigerators, no matter how much lip service they grudgingly pay in dubious polls. Industry cronies may pay similar lip service publicly, but they too will not, can not, put up with idle factories, mines, offices, or research laboratories.

These AGW clowns can steal a lot of money and make a helluva mess, but they cannot destroy civilization no matter how fervently they believe in Malthusian end games.

Gregory Woods
Reply to  Felix
November 18, 2021 4:25 am

That doesn’t mean they won’t try…

Tom Abbott
November 18, 2021 4:59 am

From the article: “It’s the exact same pattern – start with their vision, build grandiose plans, spend a fortune, then realize the whole thing (Europe’s insistence on renewables as a solution) doesn’t work.”

A perfect summary of the future of regulating CO2.

One of these days, reality will intrude on the Believers.

John Bell
November 18, 2021 5:21 am

I have a buddy who works at HYZON near Detroit. How is HYZON funded? Is it a grant farm?

M Courtney
November 18, 2021 6:10 am

George Monbiot is a left-wing shock-jock.
 
He may believe it. He may not. It makes no difference. The important thing is to
create sound and fury to entertain.
He has no interest in the truth or in enlightening his readers.
 
There are many like him on the right as well.

MarkW
Reply to  M Courtney
November 18, 2021 8:04 am

Your right, or the world’s right?

MarkW
November 18, 2021 6:31 am

I see they are still trying to push the lie that renewable energy is cheaper than fossil fuel.
That’s only true if you ignore:
1) The subsidies for renewables.
2) The taxes on fossil fuels.
3) The construction costs of renewables vs. fossil fuels.
4) The maintenance and replacement costs of renewables vs. fossil fuels.
5) The cost of the needed backups for when the sun doesn’t shine and or the wind doesn’t blow.

Last edited 2 months ago by MarkW
Kevin kilty
November 18, 2021 6:59 am

Around 1960 Rogers published his classic study of the “Diffusion of Innovation”. Among the many lessons outlined in that study was one pertinent to this essay and to the coming reimagining of all of civilization — the early innovators are actually too early and they are usually bankrupted by their zeal. Real innovations are not only not quite ready themselves, but they also depend on markets, infrastructure, and even social structures that aren’t ready either. Those who benefit most from innovation are in the second wave; those who jump in after the initial bugs are worked out.

As Charles Koch said in his book “The Science of Success” Koch Industries recognizes that innovation is really just experimentation to learn what works, and they limit their bets accordingly. Kock Industries grew 1,200 times over a 50 year period.

By the way, one other interesting finding from Rogers’s book is that the worst laggards in adopting innovations view themselves as innovators. We could have guessed as much.

Last edited 2 months ago by Kevin kilty
observa
Reply to  Kevin kilty
November 18, 2021 3:53 pm

Yes on that score I note the BEV fan club are perpetually pissed off at the likes of Toyota with their hybrid strategy. They’re not real EVs so it will serve them right getting left behind and going broke not getting with the program when you might think they’d take comfort that at least they’re pinching full ICE sales and contributing to less FF use and the dreaded plant food.

The reality is Toyota have a large queue for their half way house product that they can’t meet at present so why wouldn’t they continue to make good profits with their world’s best product? With their expertise in electric drive trains and hybrid battery integration as well as putting the car around them they can roll a BEV off their production lines any time they choose.

Instead they continue to make top profits where the demand is and can set aside some of that for research into solid state battery and hydrogen options or whatever. All the while keeping an eye on the best lithium battery tech rather than making mistakes like Hyundai and Chevy Bolt with expensive battery recalls. Where are all the profits with BEV production at present they may well ask? If lithium battery resources are on the rise for the first time in the gigafactory battery era and heading blue sky to call forth more supply then they’re sitting pretty as the fantasy collapses.

Kevin kilty
Reply to  observa
November 19, 2021 7:27 am

As I have mentioned here before the hybrid auto has/had the potential for a huge reduction in fuel usage and pollution, but as you say it doesn’t go far enough as an “innovation” in the minds of zealots.

November 18, 2021 3:44 pm

If hydrogen could be produced *economically* from intermittent sources, then it could be very useful *without* building an infrastructure of hydrogen pipelines, hydrogen tanker trucks, etc: just store the H2 near the point of production, and turn it into electricity–via turbine or via fuel cell–at or near that same location.

But if hydrogen cannot be economically produced from intermittent sources, then in what way is it superior to natural gas? I’ve never seen a real answer to this question.

Pat from kerbob
November 18, 2021 9:38 pm

I see this more as TC making a smart virtue signaling move allowing them to maintain and even increase the natural gas distribution system and get accolades from the scientologists to do it

And probably government money too

And when the hydrogen farrago flies apart the NG system is still there functioning as before.

Smart
Keep my gas flowing, I want some more please

%d bloggers like this: