New Ford Product Investments

[Rick73]

43 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

I guess the point is that people will be turning up in the middle of nowhere in electric vehicles just expecting a charge point because their phone say so…

Instead of a diesel generator in the outback, would you feel better if it came from a coal power plant connected to grid?  ? 

 

[jpd80]

12 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Instead of a diesel generator in the outback, would you feel better if it came from a coal power plant connected to grid?  ? 

 

Well there’s two things wrong with that

Last month during several days, 71% of the entire Australian grid was supplied by green energy.
We haven’t begun to use batteries in a big way yet but it is coming in the next few years.

So yeah, that would be a lot greener than the diesel generator…

 

https://reneweconomy.com.au/australias-main-grid-hits-new-renewable-energy-record-on-another-weekday/

 

 Erindundah is about is 200km south of Alice Springs, looking on a map, nowhere near any main line grid power…..

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rthM-JX8LEg&t=1507s

Edited November 10, 2023 by jpd80

[Bob Rosadini]

21 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Instead of a diesel generator in the outback, would you feel better if it came from a coal power plant connected to grid?  ? 

 

 

Well Rick how about this from a friend who lives in the Granite State....

 

"That was something to watch. l laugh at the EVs recharging in Hooksett NH at the welcome center on 93. Some of the locals have found out they can reach over the guard rail from Rt 3A. They back up to the rail and pull the cord around to plug it in. The BEST part of it is the way they have to park! Sitting there plugged in looking straight at Merrimack Station. The coal fired PSNH plant a mile away making the electricity!!  LMAO! Can't make it up Bob."................    

 

[jpd80]

The irony is not lost on me that for the time being, supporting EV with charging in the middle of nowhere

is going to require diesel generators to be the hero, promotion of a solar power roof and back up battery

are just the green fig leaves being promoted to hide the main power source.

 

unlike America, Australia has vast areas of f***ing nothing for hundreds of miles.

diesel is common but petrol is not always available off the main through routes.

I could well imagine a convoy of enlightened BEVs travelling along and fronting

up to this and wondering how to spend the next few hours waiting for a full charge….

 

 

Edited November 10, 2023 by jpd80

[ausrutherford]

2 hours ago, jpd80 said:

The irony is not lost on me that for the time being, supporting EV with charging in the middle of nowhere

is going to require diesel generators to be the hero, promotion of a solar power roof and back up battery

are just the green fig leaves being promoted to hide the main power source.

 

unlike America, Australia has vast areas of f***ing nothing for hundreds of miles.

diesel is common but petrol is not always available off the main through routes.

I could well imagine a convoy of enlightened BEVs travelling along and fronting

up to this and wondering how to spend the next few hours waiting for a full charge….

 

 

 

Correct, while Australia is large, its population is mostly on the narrow strip on the east coast. 

 

US is much more spread out, outside of Alaska and some parts of the plains/Rockys. Not to mention the population difference of roughly 27 million compared to 335 million.

 

It will be easy and more financially feasible than oil to use renewable in Hawaii, PR, Guam, Marinas, etc, but the mainland US is a tougher nut to crack. 

 

Solar is easy in the southwest, but impossible in the northwest and Alaska. Wind is a hard sell due to the visual nuisance and migratory bird concerns. Hydro-electric creates other social benefits such as greater access to recreation, but is environmental invasive. 

 

Nuclear is the best bet nation wide for electric by in-large. 

[jpd80]

21 minutes ago, ausrutherford said:

 

Correct, while Australia is large, its population is mostly on the narrow strip on the east coast. 

 

US is much more spread out, outside of Alaska and some parts of the plains/Rockys. Not to mention the population difference of roughly 27 million compared to 335 million.

 

It will be easy and more financially feasible than oil to use renewable in Hawaii, PR, Guam, Marinas, etc, but the mainland US is a tougher nut to crack. 

 

Solar is easy in the southwest, but impossible in the northwest and Alaska. Wind is a hard sell due to the visual nuisance and migratory bird concerns. Hydro-electric creates other social benefits such as greater access to recreation, but is environmental invasive. 

 

Nuclear is the best bet nation wide for electric by in-large. 

The whole nuclear power didn’t advance was because coal was so cheap but now that changing, maybe newer kinds of nuclear power become more viable even as a stopgap to give the planet an immediate “rest” from rising CO2, I can imagine China doing this in the next few years too. The French did it years ago and proclaimed themselves low CO2 leaders…

Edited November 10, 2023 by jpd80

[Deanh]

28 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

The whole nuclear power didn’t advance was because coal was so cheap but now that changing, maybe newer kinds of nuclear power become more viable even as a stopgap to give the planet an immediate “rest” from rising CO2, I can imagine China doing this in the next few years too. The French did it years ago and proclaimed themselves low CO2 leaders…

only issue I have with Nuclear...is in wartime that potentially makes one a target...and we know how highly some of of the Nations of questionable purpose think of the US.

[jpd80]

15 minutes ago, Deanh said:

only issue I have with Nuclear...is in wartime that potentially makes one a target...and we know how highly some of of the Nations of questionable purpose think of the US.

Most of the fights are over energy and trade so if everyone has enough electric power, I think the heat will go out of the rhetoric.

Sounds like XI might be pulling his head in -he’s been noticeably quiet lately and I suspect he wants an “exit plan” for the way

china has been behaving in past years. If Australia and US can convince him to settle down, we might see some stability. Trade negotiations will be key to influencing the direction of economics, it’s in,our best interests to deal but not cave in for expedience and appeasement.

 

Not getting into domestic politics here, just hoping that calmer heads take charge and there’s stability, that all anyone can hope for..

 

Edited November 10, 2023 by jpd80

[pffan1990]

Not to throw this thread off topic, but for those previously talking about inline-6 engines, here's an interesting article from FA. Take it with a grain of salt since the author tends to make numerous mistakes from his 'sources'. Apparently Ford was working on a new EcoBoost inline-6, based on the 1.5L EcoBoost I3. This would have been the 3.0L EB I6 engine. It appears that it was just the one inline-6 engine rather than a family of them. While an inline-6 or family of inline-6s would be nice, I really don't see a need for it since the current EcoBoost I3, I4, and V6 engines are already good enough with the occasional necessary updates to last through this decade.

 

https://fordauthority.com/2023/11/straight-six-ford-ecoboost-engine-cancelled-exclusive/

[silvrsvt]

15 minutes ago, pffan1990 said:

Not to throw this thread off topic, but for those previously talking about inline-6 engines, here's an interesting article from FA. Take it with a grain of salt since the author tends to make numerous mistakes from his 'sources'. Apparently Ford was working on a new EcoBoost inline-6, based on the 1.5L EcoBoost I3. This would have been the 3.0L EB I6 engine. It appears that it was just the one inline-6 engine rather than a family of them. While an inline-6 or family of inline-6s would be nice, I really don't see a need for it since the current EcoBoost I3, I4, and V6 engines are already good enough with the occasional necessary updates to last through this decade.

 

https://fordauthority.com/2023/11/straight-six-ford-ecoboost-engine-cancelled-exclusive/

 

Prob saw the conversations here as his source LOL

[silvrsvt]

Speaking about nuke power-there was some work being done on small scale nuke power and the plug was pulled recently-one of the things cited was cheap renewables making it economically unviable for them to continue. 

[Rick73]

58 minutes ago, pffan1990 said:

Not to throw this thread off topic, but for those previously talking about inline-6 engines, here's an interesting article from FA. Take it with a grain of salt since the author tends to make numerous mistakes from his 'sources'. Apparently Ford was working on a new EcoBoost inline-6, based on the 1.5L EcoBoost I3. This would have been the 3.0L EB I6 engine. It appears that it was just the one inline-6 engine rather than a family of them. While an inline-6 or family of inline-6s would be nice, I really don't see a need for it since the current EcoBoost I3, I4, and V6 engines are already good enough with the occasional necessary updates to last through this decade.

 

https://fordauthority.com/2023/11/straight-six-ford-ecoboost-engine-cancelled-exclusive/

As previously mentioned, I don’t believe a 3.0L to 3.4L EcoBoost inline-6 makes much sense because it would be replacing a “similar” V-6 EcoBoost.  By similar I mean with similar capabilities.  There would not be as much to gain over a V-6.

 

The FA article said an inline-6 EcoBoost engine was cancelled, but that doesn’t necessarily mean there won’t be an I-6 new engine.  I still believe a 3.4L inline-6 Atkinson new engine could have great value to Ford.

[jpd80]

59 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

Speaking about nuke power-there was some work being done on small scale nuke power and the plug was pulled recently-one of the things cited was cheap renewables making it economically unviable for them to continue. 

Probably renewables combined with battery storage replacing a lot of base load power plants, green power being available well into the evenings after peak load ends.

[Bob Rosadini]

1 hour ago, silvrsvt said:

Speaking about nuke power-there was some work being done on small scale nuke power and the plug was pulled recently-one of the things cited was cheap renewables making it economically unviable for them to continue. 

Thx- I was about to comment on these "small package" units..not quite sure of proper name but I thought the key benefit was these were not a long lead time project vs the time it would take to bring a large scale nuke on line.

[jpd80]

13 minutes ago, Bob Rosadini said:

Thx- I was about to comment on these "small package" units..not quite sure of proper name but I thought the key benefit was these were not a long lead time project vs the time it would take to bring a large scale nuke on line.

Also think about America’s vast coastline and the availability of continuous tidal and current energy that’s basically untapped. People haven’t even begun to seriously consider it.

[Rick73]

12 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Probably renewables combined with battery storage replacing a lot of base load power plants, green power being available well into the evenings after peak load ends.

That applies in summer where I live, but in winter it’s almost the opposite.  And in winter solar makes even less power and energy, so it requires more investment to replace base power plants.
 

I don’t see renewables “replacing a lot of base load power plants” for a very long time.

[jpd80]

22 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

That applies in summer where I live, but in winter it’s almost the opposite.  And in winter solar makes even less power and energy, so it requires more investment to replace base power plants.
 

I don’t see renewables “replacing a lot of base load power plants” for a very long time.

I get what you’re saying but there are advantages in connecting up grids to se sure power can be shared with northern locations. Also solar cells still work in winter even with shorter days, the objective is to reduce coal fired base load stations, that is already happening in most locations. It’s a work in progress…

 

 

Dispelling The Myth About Solar Panels Inefficiency In Colder Climate

https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesbusinesscouncil/2022/01/10/dispelling-the-myth-about-solar-panels-inefficiency-in-colder-climate/?sh=4891b9fe26bc

 

A widespread misconception is that solar panels are hardly effective during winter (for those in the northern hemisphere). Although solar panels' energy results are at their pinnacle when presented to direct sunlight and UV beams, the impact of hot weather should not be confused with reducing energy generation from solar panels during colder seasons.

 

It’s no secret that the measure of sunshine on a given day throughout the winter may be more limited than during the summertime. But when the sun is shining on a solar panel, the panel will then generate electricity, no matter the temperature outside.
 

Nonetheless, the overall summer output generation produced is higher than in winter, yet the results during shorter days of sun can still be adequate. In addition, because the system grid can back up the extra energy from the summer output, the loss of daylight in the wintertime is often not critical because of the excess power generated.

From another perspective, the winter months can also be the best time to invest in solar panels for building owners from an economic standpoint. Like with industries like HVAC, the demand for solar panel installation is often at its lowest point during the winter. 

 

 

Edited November 11, 2023 by jpd80

[ausrutherford]

4 hours ago, Deanh said:

only issue I have with Nuclear...is in wartime that potentially makes one a target...and we know how highly some of of the Nations of questionable purpose think of the US.

 

Nuclear stations can not be turned into de facto bombs by terrorists, etc. Movies may try to portray that, but not really. 

 

Most of the station built at least during the Cold War were made to withstand most conventional weapons as well to prevent radiation leakage. 

 

The biggest issue you would have is through detonating a nuclear bomb on a plant, for the bomb for extend the fallout area from the radiation of the plant.

 

But, if you are talking about a nuclear war at that point...nobody is winning anyway. 

 

As long as you put station is stable areas with the right safeguards, they are about as good as it gets. 

[Bob Rosadini]

15 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Also think about America’s vast coastline and the availability of continuous tidal and current energy that’s basically untapped. People haven’t even begun to seriously consider it.

 

Google Blenheim- Gilboa Power Station.   This is a power plant in upstate NY that has two large water reservoirs high above the power plant.  During low demand periods water is pum ped up to these reservoirs.  During high demand periods, water gravity feeds the turbines below generating power.

[akirby]

10 minutes ago, Bob Rosadini said:

 

Google Blenheim- Gilboa Power Station.   This is a power plant in upstate NY that has two large water reservoirs high above the power plant.  During low demand periods water is pum ped up to these reservoirs.  During high demand periods, water gravity feeds the turbines below generating power.

Other versions raise heavy weights to the top of a tall tower.  Storing kinetic energy rather than electrons.

[ausrutherford]

4 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:

 

Google Blenheim- Gilboa Power Station.   This is a power plant in upstate NY that has two large water reservoirs high above the power plant.  During low demand periods water is pum ped up to these reservoirs.  During high demand periods, water gravity feeds the turbines below generating power.

 

Most of the hydro stations along the Savannah River system between SC and Georgia are pump storage as well. 

[jpd80]

4 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:

 

Google Blenheim- Gilboa Power Station.   This is a power plant in upstate NY that has two large water reservoirs high above the power plant.  During low demand periods water is pum ped up to these reservoirs.  During high demand periods, water gravity feeds the turbines below generating power.

That’s how quite a few  hydroelectric systems work, they pump the water back up hill during off peak times, storing the energy until released as needed. Some of these systems also serve a second purpose as flood mitigation.

 

What I was talking about was a continuous supply of wave/tidal/ ocean current energy that’s not as dependent on weather or seasons, something that could supply major population centres along the eastern and western coast.

 

I just saw a YouTube with Musk saying that a solar panel 100 miles x 100miles in size with enough batteries could meet the entire US energy needs - if cyber Jesus says it then it must be true….

Edited November 11, 2023 by jpd80

[Bob Rosadini]

18 hours ago, jpd80 said:

That’s how quite a few  hydroelectric systems work, they pump the water back up hill during off peak times, storing the energy until released as needed. Some of these systems also serve a second purpose as flood mitigation.

 

What I was talking about was a continuous supply of wave/tidal/ ocean current energy that’s not as dependent on weather or seasons, something that could supply major population centres along the eastern and western coast.

 

I just saw a YouTube with Musk saying that a solar panel 100 miles x 100miles in size with enough batteries could meet the entire US energy needs - if cyber Jesus says it then it must be true….

Guess I wasn't aware that we had other pumped storage  systems in US.

Anyone aware of any current study on harnessing tidal flow??..Bay of Fundy was a hot spot at one time.

[Rangers09]

2 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:

Guess I wasn't aware that we had other pumped storage  systems in US.

Anyone aware of any current study on harnessing tidal flow??..Bay of Fundy was a hot spot at one time.

 

Don't know about the US, but tidal flow generating has been tested and/or in place in both UK and Canada. South Korea and France also have active projects. Prior to leaving UK in the 80's they were also testing wave energy generating, in addition to tidal action, but I haven't followed up on progress, so don't know if they have any active projects.

[LSchicago]

On 11/10/2023 at 8:25 PM, Rick73 said:

That applies in summer where I live, but in winter it’s almost the opposite.  And in winter solar makes even less power and energy, so it requires more investment to replace base power plants.
 

I don’t see renewables “replacing a lot of base load power plants” for a very long time.

Illinois is trying to reach 40% renewables by 2030 and 50% by 2050. Illinois Legislation Outlines 100% Clean Energy Goal by 2050 (natlawreview.com)