I also an Australian engineer and although Simon's basic analysis of the resources needed is 100% RIGHT and very few people want to address that, he also keeps telling a couple of monstrous LIES. 1) If Hydrogen is not a fuel and just an energy carrier then so is every other molecule that can react exothermically. This just a stupid claim he makes all the time because he has some personal bias. 2) Hydrocarbons are NOT the most calorific fuels we have discovered. There's quite a few other compounds that react with more calories. Further to that nothing in molecular chemistry comes close to Nuclear fission in terms of energy per gram. Yet again this is just another misdirection from Simon to backup his bias towards Hydrogen. 3) Simon keeps emphasizing "efficiency" and he like every engineer needs to be a lot mor mindful of what people mean when they talk about efficiency. Just recently I heard a physicist call this out on another podcast and he said we are lucky if any process in the end is better than about 5% in the end. For starters things like nuclear and coal are around 36% in the generating part of the process and that's because they both boil water. So even before you start there's parts of the energy process where almost 2/3rds is just lost as waste heat and most processes only get worse from then on. Things like the computer your on lose staggering amounts of the input energy as heat. Cooking food - most of the energy input is lost as heat. Then think of all the processes that make noise. Yes that noise is energy lost as noise. I don't mind that Simon has some biases because we all have those, but he NEEDS TO STOP telling LIES that he knows are lies. *ONE THING he says in this video which I wish he'd and others would say a lot more often is that no one technology will save the human race form its current state. THAT IS 100% TRUE*
Dear Simon: Another huge problem , is the time frame, our civilization have to accomplished this goals and curb the global climate crisis all we are facing . I think At this level is almost impossible to reverse the course currently is going on . Firstly we required a mainstream change in thinking . And that is really very unpredictable.-
The proposals discussed herein are the rational way forward. Problem is, neither our society nor our government is able to decide and act rationally. We can’t even take the smallest step in the right direction. Our congress is paralized. US democracy is failing. Our pride prevents adoption of Chinese decision making.
Thank you Simon. Excellent talk again today. I listen to all your interviews/talks and always learn something new. Love that you went back in history to put in context the great transition we have ahead of us. I think your assessment on the current world situation re we have been in a world war since 2003, and why the US is trying damn hard to escalate it, is spot on. Thanks for all your ideas and the work you put into showing how there is a way forward.
Why do I keep hearing different time frames on how long it takes to build a nuclear power plant depending on the person who is telling the story and their vested interests in certain Technologies? I hear everything from 8, 12, 15, 20, 30 years?
I'm only up to 40 mins but he's just been talking about small thorium salt reactors (also called molten salt reactors) if that's what you mean? They can be small and relatively quick to make. Check yt vids on them.
It firstly depends on the policy support and outsight. What is the size of the reactor and type pwr or bwr, pressure water reactor, boiling.... The meantime in Japan was 3,8 years over more then 30 reactors. The recent ver large 1400 MW 4x build in the UAE by the Koreans was in 12 years, about 8-9 years per reactor. This is in a country that had no regulator etc etc.
The method of using human sewage has been used in European cities for a long time. In German the "reactors" were called "Faultuerme". The produced methane was used to fire boilers that supplied the city core with steam to be fed into commercial and residential buildings for heating and hot water production.
In the first 11 mins Simon has seriously misrepresented the ev situation although it looked like a promising interview. Batteries just don't have to be replaced every 4-5 years and most evs are charged at home so thd infrastructure is already there. As for grid expansion, most charging is done at night when a lot of available generstion capacity is switched off. Just keep more running tpo supply vehicles. Not being an analyst I can't give figures but these are important facts . They can't be ignored. Having said that some was worthwhile watching. The point about voltage current frequency accuracy was nonsense. They change all the time. Electronics runs on dc and you can easily rectify dirty ac into dc
He seems to be about 10 years behind in his knowledge of batteries. I imagine you have an electric vehicle, Having one and experiencing it for awhile changes your whole view of what it's like. When someone says with certainty something I know isn't true I have to wonder about the other they say even though they sound quite true.😅n
@@ChimpJacobman Fortunately the majority of people in the UK can charge at home. You will be surprised . Google "number of homes with off street parking". I have a suggestion to help those without. Commercially there is a technique called "sleeving" where a company may have a solar farm some miles from the factory. The company can pay the grid to transport that energy from solar farm to factory for a a fee. The electricity isn't physical sent it is just calculated using metering, communications and databases. The smart technology required is all over the place, in chargers, domestic meters etc. The likes of Octopus have the aim of supporting EV s and the ability to do big stuff. I can see a time when I can plug my car in any domestic charger or charger provided by local councils, The charger will know the car ID and therefore my electricity account. It will then deduct the cost of electricity from my account and then credit that sum to the account of the person who owns the charger. Somebody takes a small fee for facilitating it. Not as good as parking in your garden but would help getting access to the cheap charging tariffs
@@ChimpJacobmanthis is just one of many of the challenges. And those of us that do make the change definitely feel the hate and anger from those that can't. as the price of gas goes up this will get even worse. I would not be surprised if EVs were the most vandalized cars. Taking the lead out of the gasoline had the same effect 50 years , lots of hate and miss information, took 10 years of fighting, most today agree no lead in gas,paint, plumbing.
Thanks very much for this conversation. Hadn’t heard of Simon before but will follow. Have heard of the Venus Project, there is a doco on it from when Jacques Fresco was alive. Interesting ideas and intrigued to find out more with Simon’s input too. Thanks again.
I am all for lowering emissions but frankly EVs don't seem to be that cost effective, and they are very expensive for most people. I'd rather put regulations on combustion engines vehicles weights, drag indexes and engine power. Cars are a lot more powerful and heavy than 40 years ago, it is completely useless. When we have more electric energy available in the future with fusion and whatnot we may go for EVs.
New cars are expensive, period. EVs cause decline in the necessity of fossil investments, there a partial need. And there are lower priced EVs, 15-20.000€. Where the most direct use is, are the commercial worker cars and busses. Banning diesel busses is very effective.
I commented too fast! Now, I see this guy is orders of magnitude beyond any net zero bullshit (whoooeee). Great interview and share to all. The only problem I see is with that "we don't have enough resources" in the description. He's rightfully saying to conserve and somehow recycle all the resources, (that we can't recycle 100%, though) and to even use molten salt reactors, if need be, in order to ACTUALLY transition from the eventually declining fossil fuels.
Thanks for the breakdown! Just a quick off-topic question: My OKX wallet holds some USDT, and I have the seed phrase. (alarm fetch churn bridge exercise tape speak race clerk couch crater letter). Could you explain how to move them to Binance?
the notes had "Building a realistic path forward" that sounds good but there is a difference between realistic and necessary. if you pigeon hold your ideas to keeping as many billion people alive at all cost and a way of life as we know as "modern or civilised". then you get a realistic approach that might be much better than we have now but still fall short of what could be done if we do radical changes abruptly. you save more lives that way, longer we spend going slow the faster and more will die. assuming we have a future we want to live in over the next hundreds years.
New combustion tech will be 75% efficient in combined cycle mode (below 50% of torque), and 55% to 60% with 50% to 100% of torque/peak power. Making fuel with RE/nuclear OFF grid will be 10 to 30 times LESS costs than making grid electricity to charge an EV. 3 to 6 cents/kwh for fuel. 60 to 90 cents/kwh for 100% RE grid. 10 to 30... The CO2 for a 100% RE grid is ~ = gasoline due to 4x overbuild and 3.5x in battery costs. The EV battery is also ~ = gasoline. Total is around 600 gCO2/kwh, and at the wheel it is over 800. New combustion tech with RE fuels is 3 gCO2/kwh in the tank, and 4 at the wheel (3/0.75=4). On gasoline it is 400. That means an EV at 800 and Combustion at 4 is a 200x ratio in CO2. 800/4=200. On gasoline 2x factor. (800/400=2) There is NO point to an EV when we have RE/nuclear fuels. NONE. These three factors make EVs obsolete. Efficiency, fuel costs and CO2. Game over. Also, new combustion tech does NOT have mining issues.
The top-down greed of those few who are at the tip of the food chain are spear-heading the future of humanity. Far-thinking wisdom has been subsumed by human greed. The evidence surrounds us yet, we as a species, naively and childishly refuse to acknowledge that stark reality. It is good to be an old man. I weep for the future,
Great work grounded in data. However, I believe you will be eating your words about a declining America. I recently attended a conference in Texas and that state is rapidly growing modular nuclear startups in a highly receptive regulatory environment to accommodate new AI data centers. Each data center is predicted to require as much power as a city of 1 million people. There will be an acceleration, not a slow down in US techno economic growth; as there will be in China also. Today's Arms Race is a tech race that is moving much faster than Internet economy speed. The power required for the AI revolution will gobble up 1 million times the savings of your visionary cities of the future.
Average electric car battery when charging is done correctly last between 500k - 800k miles. When he says electric car lasts between 5 to 7 years! What kind of driver puts that much mileage?
@@alanj9978First you need to find someone who is willing and capable of fixing it and one you can trust to charge only services actually rendered. Then you pay almost as much as for a new one without getting any warranty.
Intellectual Property Laws like the DMCA which makes it illegal for third parties to repair anything with a computer chip in it. This makes it very hard for aftermarket parts to be developed, since anyone who tries that can get sued into oblivion. "Right to repair" is a useful keyword to find more information about this This reason we throw things out more than the past is simply because companies who makes stuff try to keep ownership of some parts of a machine after it's sold, and its illegal to modify things you don't own, even if it's a repair. Law needs to change so you also own the software which your hardware requires to function when you buy it.
@@alanj9978 rubbish. Our local guy fixed mine for $50. My iPhone battery also ran down and instead of buying a new phone for $2k I got a replacement battery put in for $65. Repair and learning how to repair is a massive part of the future, and having laws about producing stuff that is repairable as they do in England. Just throwing shit away is lazy and expensive to you and the planet.
One thing that was not discussed here is that electricity is much more efficient at moving stuff than fossil fuels, so it is not a 1 to 1 comparison. I’m not saying this is the answer, but just as food for thought, if you stopped using electricity to dig up oil, transport it, and refine it, you could use that energy saved to convert all cars and trucks to EV’s.
Luke, the ball park figure for the efficency of electrcity is 33%, i.e. three times the energy is used to generate and distribute it befor e it reaches the consumer. If you are American, I don't know if you are talking about gasoline or gas as in natural gas.
It was always a scam. When I hear green anything or transition, I first look for what mechanism will reduce or control energy production/consumption and there is never anything. If they shut down a coal plant in the US, China will build 10 and move all the manufacturing. They will celebrate progress and sell windmill contracts. Total energy consumption only ever grows
depends on the scale you're trying to make it work in. Easily works in small scale (people doing it off-grid all over the world), not a chance in large.
Thanks for the breakdown! Could you help me with something unrelated: My OKX wallet holds some USDT, and I have the seed phrase. (alarm fetch churn bridge exercise tape speak race clerk couch crater letter). Could you explain how to move them to Binance?
My hair on my arms went straight up when hearing this, utter bs. It is not because a car manufacturer immediately writes off a full battery pack when the bms fails, that the batteries are dead. My vw ev is still going strong 10 years in...
It depends how you use it. An ev on a jobsite will see a more vigorous pattern of use. A better example would be your plumber’s drill. How long does his battery last?
Gen 2 Nissan Leafs driver. 7yo battery 85% soh. Very usable. Today's battery management far better so should last longer. Unless manufacturers have built in obsolescence already. I agree EVs are only a transition, but this misinformation does your case no good.
Oh, was sounding good at first, with EROEI, and all, but then took a turn for the worse... "We've all gotta change" (hence the term "climate change", instead of something a little more"problemy solving sounding" such as "the excess CO2 problem", right 🤔 Then, I read the description. It says "we don't have enough resources, bla, bla, bla" and I now have to ask myself "is this guy just pretending to be a mining expert, just to muster up a little credibility, in order to push that UN net zero crap? To be fair, although Elon says there's enough resources to do solar and battery thing, for like 10x today's population, he does not mention the overall EROEI for both the energy needed to mine, refine, make, and recycle solar... And ditto for the LFP or other best batteries. Now, I've flown in a big ole jetliner and I do realize just how big this largest of rocky planets really is... That's plenty of fucking resources (duh).
Interesting, but this guy doesn't understand the logistics of running an EV. The reality is most EV owners only occasionally need to use a commercial charging station. The vast majority of charging is done at home. Most EVs only require recharging once per week, this can easily be done using a 3KW outlet same as for an electric clothes dryer. In my case I do a full charge once every Sunday, the power comes mainly from the 10KW rooftop household solar array. Others simply top up overnight. The reality is the logistics associated with charging EVs is vastly different from what many believe. It will be nothing like the logistics of providing petroleum fuels. Most of that will disappear not to be replaced.
@@JimSmith-d9t The millions that live in high rises don't have cars though. Nowhere to put them and driving in big cities harder than public transport, bike or scooter.
@@d.Cog420 I live in Edinburgh, a city of half a million, and where it is very difficult to park because it is full of cars. Public transport here is good, but people still need cars for some journeys - this is not going to change for a long while yet.
we need to be more efficiant and less polluting in everything we do! and the only way to do that, in a capitalistic society, is to make the activity/source of energy to be priced at its TRUE cost ! and the cheapest energy is to use no energy other than food.
You wouldn't be able to afford food though, or water, power, anything made with or transported by fossil fuel. If the cost of extraction and also pollution were factored in there would be riots. This is one of the big reasons a transition is so difficult, we don't know how good we have it or how badly our ignorance is fucking things up.
There really isn’t even a regulatory mechanism that can reduce production/consumption of hydrocarbons. Making solar panels just reduces the cost of energy and increases overall energy consumption
@@MrBallynally2 , we have postponed any real solutions for many decades now under the guise of there being enough time, or under the guise of making sure, or under the guise of money problems, or anything. Meanwhile, the problems have become even bigger as we are emitting more CO2 than ever. At the same time, these delaying tactics have been planned by the oil industry all along. So putting off things is really not desirable. We do not really know what the solution is, but while working on the problems, we will slowly and sometimes quickly find breakthroughs that make solar 3 times as efficient as 20 years ago. And yes, mistakes will be made. Without making mistakes, it is impossible to succeed. And 'the losing side' is society in 100 years as we keep using fossil fuels. It is important to dare to think a little further than your own lifetime. A project like the US was not set up with one generation in mind. Why limit ourselves now?
Rob, CO2 is not the source of climate change. I know how the grid could be run without emitting CO2 and it does not involve one watt of renewable generation. That is a dead end and no amount of 'advancements' will overcome the inherrent fact that it is uncontrollable (technically known a asynchronous generation) supplying a system that has to be finely controlled on an instantaneous basis. They have a few more technical and practical deficincies. Unless there is scope for more hydro generation, then nuclear is Hobson's Choice. No alternative!
Simon Michaux annoys me massively. He speaks in this pompous way like Lord Monkton. He also says a lot of stuff that is totally wrong. Most EVs will not need a battery replacements after 5-6 years. The batteries wil in most cases last longer than the rest of the car. I don't know why anyone bothers to listen to him at all.
@thunderstorm6630 I believe that his message is to give a distorted presentation of reality and to purport offer some kind of solution to this. The EV batteries just lasting 5-6 years is an example. Another thing that annoys me is that the "Green transition" is presented as some sort of agreed agenda. The green transition simply is the idea that we should use less fossil fuels. There is not anything revolutionary about his "Purple revolution." All his suggestions are already part of the green revolution. It will be good if he can move things in a positive way, but basically, I mostly think he only likes to be in the lime light and to hear his own voice.
@iareid8255 I have a little 12 year old EV. I have not spent more than 170 USD on it, excluding wiper fluid and electricity. I expect it will be ok yhe next 12 years too.
Oh dear, lots of fossil propaganda, batteries only last 6-7 years, but warranties are actually 8-10 years. I think you are living in 2010 mate. LFP batteries last for 1 million miles. No-one was suggesting would wouldn't need mining, of course we cannot get new needs from recycling when material requirements are changing. Grids already has the capacity for EVs charging overnight in off-peak. You wasted your time, wrong assumptions and you don't understand electricity or batteries.
Simon knows there is an efficiency problem and it is extremely difficult to solve. Great discussion. Love hearing from Simon
I also an Australian engineer and although Simon's basic analysis of the resources needed is 100% RIGHT and very few people want to address that, he also keeps telling a couple of monstrous LIES.
1) If Hydrogen is not a fuel and just an energy carrier then so is every other molecule that can react exothermically.
This just a stupid claim he makes all the time because he has some personal bias.
2) Hydrocarbons are NOT the most calorific fuels we have discovered. There's quite a few other compounds that react with more calories. Further to that nothing in molecular chemistry comes close to Nuclear fission in terms of energy per gram. Yet again this is just another misdirection from Simon to backup his bias towards Hydrogen.
3) Simon keeps emphasizing "efficiency" and he like every engineer needs to be a lot mor mindful of what people mean when they talk about efficiency. Just recently I heard a physicist call this out on another podcast and he said we are lucky if any process in the end is better than about 5% in the end. For starters things like nuclear and coal are around 36% in the generating part of the process and that's because they both boil water. So even before you start there's parts of the energy process where almost 2/3rds is just lost as waste heat and most processes only get worse from then on. Things like the computer your on lose staggering amounts of the input energy as heat. Cooking food - most of the energy input is lost as heat. Then think of all the processes that make noise. Yes that noise is energy lost as noise.
I don't mind that Simon has some biases because we all have those, but he NEEDS TO STOP telling LIES that he knows are lies. *ONE THING he says in this video which I wish he'd and others would say a lot more often is that no one technology will save the human race form its current state. THAT IS 100% TRUE*
Dear Simon:
Another huge problem , is the time frame, our civilization have to accomplished this goals and curb the global climate crisis all we are facing .
I think At this level is almost impossible to reverse the course currently is going on .
Firstly we required a mainstream change in thinking . And that is really very unpredictable.-
The proposals discussed herein are the rational way forward. Problem is, neither our society nor our government is able to decide and act rationally. We can’t even take the smallest step in the right direction. Our congress is paralized. US democracy is failing. Our pride prevents adoption of Chinese decision making.
Thank you Simon. Excellent talk again today. I listen to all your interviews/talks and always learn something new. Love that you went back in history to put in context the great transition we have ahead of us.
I think your assessment on the current world situation re we have been in a world war since 2003, and why the US is trying damn hard to escalate it, is spot on.
Thanks for all your ideas and the work you put into showing how there is a way forward.
I have become a fan of their peak oil chats with Andrii
Why do I keep hearing different time frames on how long it takes to build a nuclear power plant depending on the person who is telling the story and their vested interests in certain Technologies? I hear everything from 8, 12, 15, 20, 30 years?
For a stupid person it will take an infinite amount of time
I'm only up to 40 mins but he's just been talking about small thorium salt reactors (also called molten salt reactors) if that's what you mean? They can be small and relatively quick to make. Check yt vids on them.
It firstly depends on the policy support and outsight.
What is the size of the reactor and type pwr or bwr, pressure water reactor, boiling....
The meantime in Japan was 3,8 years over more then 30 reactors.
The recent ver large 1400 MW 4x build in the UAE by the Koreans was in 12 years, about 8-9 years per reactor.
This is in a country that had no regulator etc etc.
@@ferkeap He says at 1:07:40 a factory in Copenhagen he went to is geared up to make one SMR every day. Have you heard of this?
The method of using human sewage has been used in European cities for a long time. In German the "reactors" were called "Faultuerme". The produced methane was used to fire boilers that supplied the city core with steam to be fed into commercial and residential buildings for heating and hot water production.
In the first 11 mins Simon has seriously misrepresented the ev situation although it looked like a promising interview.
Batteries just don't have to be replaced every 4-5 years and most evs are charged at home so thd infrastructure is already there.
As for grid expansion, most charging is done at night when a lot of available generstion capacity is switched off. Just keep more running tpo supply vehicles.
Not being an analyst I can't give figures but these are important facts . They can't be ignored.
Having said that some was worthwhile watching. The point about voltage current frequency accuracy was nonsense. They change all the time. Electronics runs on dc and you can easily rectify dirty ac into dc
He seems to be about 10 years behind in his knowledge of batteries. I imagine you have an electric vehicle, Having one and experiencing it for awhile changes your whole view of what it's like. When someone says with certainty something I know isn't true I have to wonder about the other they say even though they sound quite true.😅n
EV's have come a long way in the last few years.
How about people that can't charge at home? Ya know, like, the majority of the planet?
@@ChimpJacobman Fortunately the majority of people in the UK can charge at home. You will be surprised . Google "number of homes with off street parking".
I have a suggestion to help those without. Commercially there is a technique called "sleeving" where a company may have a solar farm some miles from the factory. The company can pay the grid to transport that energy from solar farm to factory for a a fee. The electricity isn't physical sent it is just calculated using metering, communications and databases.
The smart technology required is all over the place, in chargers, domestic meters etc. The likes of Octopus have the aim of supporting EV s and the ability to do big stuff.
I can see a time when I can plug my car in any domestic charger or charger provided by local councils, The charger will know the car ID and therefore my electricity account. It will then deduct the cost of electricity from my account and then credit that sum to the account of the person who owns the charger. Somebody takes a small fee for facilitating it.
Not as good as parking in your garden but would help getting access to the cheap charging tariffs
@@ChimpJacobmanthis is just one of many of the challenges. And those of us that do make the change definitely feel the hate and anger from those that can't. as the price of gas goes up this will get even worse. I would not be surprised if EVs were the most vandalized cars. Taking the lead out of the gasoline had the same effect 50 years , lots of hate and miss information, took 10 years of fighting, most today agree no lead in gas,paint, plumbing.
Simon is always 5 steps ahead!
Thanks very much for this conversation. Hadn’t heard of Simon before but will follow. Have heard of the Venus Project, there is a doco on it from when Jacques Fresco was alive. Interesting ideas and intrigued to find out more with Simon’s input too. Thanks again.
I am all for lowering emissions but frankly EVs don't seem to be that cost effective, and they are very expensive for most people. I'd rather put regulations on combustion engines vehicles weights, drag indexes and engine power. Cars are a lot more powerful and heavy than 40 years ago, it is completely useless. When we have more electric energy available in the future with fusion and whatnot we may go for EVs.
New cars are expensive, period.
EVs cause decline in the necessity of fossil investments, there a partial need.
And there are lower priced EVs, 15-20.000€.
Where the most direct use is, are the commercial worker cars and busses.
Banning diesel busses is very effective.
I commented too fast! Now, I see this guy is orders of magnitude beyond any net zero bullshit (whoooeee).
Great interview and share to all.
The only problem I see is with that "we don't have enough resources" in the description.
He's rightfully saying to conserve and somehow recycle all the resources, (that we can't recycle 100%, though) and to even use molten salt reactors, if need be, in order to ACTUALLY transition from the eventually declining fossil fuels.
Thanks for the breakdown! Just a quick off-topic question: My OKX wallet holds some USDT, and I have the seed phrase. (alarm fetch churn bridge exercise tape speak race clerk couch crater letter). Could you explain how to move them to Binance?
the notes had "Building a realistic path forward"
that sounds good but there is a difference between realistic and necessary.
if you pigeon hold your ideas to keeping as many billion people alive at all cost and a way of life as we know as "modern or civilised". then you get a realistic approach that might be much better than we have now but still fall short of what could be done if we do radical changes abruptly.
you save more lives that way, longer we spend going slow the faster and more will die. assuming we have a future we want to live in over the next hundreds years.
Haha, I love Simon... 'where's my guilloutine' 😂
New combustion tech will be 75% efficient in combined cycle mode (below 50% of torque), and 55% to 60% with 50% to 100% of torque/peak power.
Making fuel with RE/nuclear OFF grid will be 10 to 30 times LESS costs than making grid electricity to charge an EV. 3 to 6 cents/kwh for fuel. 60 to 90 cents/kwh for 100% RE grid. 10 to 30...
The CO2 for a 100% RE grid is ~ = gasoline due to 4x overbuild and 3.5x in battery costs. The EV battery is also ~ = gasoline. Total is around 600 gCO2/kwh, and at the wheel it is over 800.
New combustion tech with RE fuels is 3 gCO2/kwh in the tank, and 4 at the wheel (3/0.75=4). On gasoline it is 400.
That means an EV at 800 and Combustion at 4 is a 200x ratio in CO2. 800/4=200. On gasoline 2x factor. (800/400=2) There is NO point to an EV when we have RE/nuclear fuels. NONE.
These three factors make EVs obsolete. Efficiency, fuel costs and CO2. Game over. Also, new combustion tech does NOT have mining issues.
The top-down greed of those few who are at the tip of the food chain are spear-heading the future of humanity. Far-thinking wisdom has been subsumed by human greed. The evidence surrounds us yet, we as a species, naively and childishly refuse to acknowledge that stark reality. It is good to be an old man. I weep for the future,
Great work grounded in data. However, I believe you will be eating your words about a declining America. I recently attended a conference in Texas and that state is rapidly growing modular nuclear startups in a highly receptive regulatory environment to accommodate new AI data centers. Each data center is predicted to require as much power as a city of 1 million people. There will be an acceleration, not a slow down in US techno economic growth; as there will be in China also. Today's Arms Race is a tech race that is moving much faster than Internet economy speed. The power required for the AI revolution will gobble up 1 million times the savings of your visionary cities of the future.
Interesting. Have you got any back up texts for this or can you point us to a website?
Frugalize.. word of the day
We need to build new nuclear today and constantly with the same build in variants small and standard (large).
So he’s saying stuff renewables, just go for small modular nukes.Problem solved 👏👏👏
EV batteries typically last MUCH longer than 4 to 5 years!!!
10 to 15 is more reasonable.
Average electric car battery when charging is done correctly last between 500k - 800k miles. When he says electric car lasts between 5 to 7 years! What kind of driver puts that much mileage?
Why keep throwing out stuff that can be fixed?
Most TV and computer monitor repairs cost $5 in parts to fix
And $300 minimum in labour. And shipping cost to send them to someone who can fix them. With no guarantees regarding the repair.
@@alanj9978First you need to find someone who is willing and capable of fixing it and one you can trust to charge only services actually rendered.
Then you pay almost as much as for a new one without getting any warranty.
the stuff uses power and created distractions and addictions.
Intellectual Property Laws like the DMCA which makes it illegal for third parties to repair anything with a computer chip in it.
This makes it very hard for aftermarket parts to be developed, since anyone who tries that can get sued into oblivion.
"Right to repair" is a useful keyword to find more information about this
This reason we throw things out more than the past is simply because companies who makes stuff try to keep ownership of some parts of a machine after it's sold, and its illegal to modify things you don't own, even if it's a repair.
Law needs to change so you also own the software which your hardware requires to function when you buy it.
@@alanj9978 rubbish. Our local guy fixed mine for $50. My iPhone battery also ran down and instead of buying a new phone for $2k I got a replacement battery put in for $65. Repair and learning how to repair is a massive part of the future, and having laws about producing stuff that is repairable as they do in England. Just throwing shit away is lazy and expensive to you and the planet.
One thing that was not discussed here is that electricity is much more efficient at moving stuff than fossil fuels, so it is not a 1 to 1 comparison. I’m not saying this is the answer, but just as food for thought, if you stopped using electricity to dig up oil, transport it, and refine it, you could use that energy saved to convert all cars and trucks to EV’s.
He did state that near the start.
Conjecture... batteries low power density cannot compete with diesel for heavy transport..
Luke,
a very common misconception, electrcity is convenient, it is not efficient.
@@iareid8255how is electricity not efficient? Do you think gas is more efficient than electricity?
Luke,
the ball park figure for the efficency of electrcity is 33%, i.e. three times the energy is used to generate and distribute it befor e it reaches the consumer.
If you are American, I don't know if you are talking about gasoline or gas as in natural gas.
Natural gas to nuclear (and gas)
Excellent video thanks.
At some stage the Venus project needs to transition to the Mars project. Contact Elon for venture capital
Everyone who understand supply chain and the emissions connected to it, understand that the green transition doesn't work.
It was always a scam. When I hear green anything or transition, I first look for what mechanism will reduce or control energy production/consumption and there is never anything. If they shut down a coal plant in the US, China will build 10 and move all the manufacturing. They will celebrate progress and sell windmill contracts. Total energy consumption only ever grows
depends on the scale you're trying to make it work in. Easily works in small scale (people doing it off-grid all over the world), not a chance in large.
Thanks for the breakdown! Could you help me with something unrelated: My OKX wallet holds some USDT, and I have the seed phrase. (alarm fetch churn bridge exercise tape speak race clerk couch crater letter). Could you explain how to move them to Binance?
Where did you get your stat that electric car batteries need to be replaced every 4 to 5 years?
My hair on my arms went straight up when hearing this, utter bs. It is not because a car manufacturer immediately writes off a full battery pack when the bms fails, that the batteries are dead. My vw ev is still going strong 10 years in...
Yes, that is a bit off the mark for light passenger vehicles. Maybe heavy vehicles, battery life not so long
It depends how you use it. An ev on a jobsite will see a more vigorous pattern of use. A better example would be your plumber’s drill. How long does his battery last?
@@puppetperception7861 what's the battery management system of the drill like. No comparison with ev batteries
Gen 2 Nissan Leafs driver. 7yo battery 85% soh. Very usable. Today's battery management far better so should last longer. Unless manufacturers have built in obsolescence already. I agree EVs are only a transition, but this misinformation does your case no good.
I agree in having diversified energy souces, for example in cars, in order to have a more resilient system
Oh, was sounding good at first, with EROEI, and all, but then took a turn for the worse... "We've all gotta change" (hence the term "climate change", instead of something a little more"problemy solving sounding" such as "the excess CO2 problem", right 🤔
Then, I read the description. It says "we don't have enough resources, bla, bla, bla" and I now have to ask myself "is this guy just pretending to be a mining expert, just to muster up a little credibility, in order to push that UN net zero crap?
To be fair, although Elon says there's enough resources to do solar and battery thing, for like 10x today's population, he does not mention the overall EROEI for both the energy needed to mine, refine, make, and recycle solar... And ditto for the LFP or other best batteries.
Now, I've flown in a big ole jetliner and I do realize just how big this largest of rocky planets really is...
That's plenty of fucking resources (duh).
I was hasty, this guy's for real. He even talks about advanced nuclear 😀
Interesting, but this guy doesn't understand the logistics of running an EV. The reality is most EV owners only occasionally need to use a commercial charging station. The vast majority of charging is done at home. Most EVs only require recharging once per week, this can easily be done using a 3KW outlet same as for an electric clothes dryer. In my case I do a full charge once every Sunday, the power comes mainly from the 10KW rooftop household solar array. Others simply top up overnight.
The reality is the logistics associated with charging EVs is vastly different from what many believe. It will be nothing like the logistics of providing petroleum fuels. Most of that will disappear not to be replaced.
My neighbour's Tesla has never been rapid charged in 5 years.
Fine if you have a drive - millions don't!
@JimSmith-d9t his land is only 400m².
His car is on his front lawn.
Many do have a drive.
I have seen street plugin ideas as well, so good point.
@@JimSmith-d9t The millions that live in high rises don't have cars though. Nowhere to put them and driving in big cities harder than public transport, bike or scooter.
@@d.Cog420 I live in Edinburgh, a city of half a million, and where it is very difficult to park because it is full of cars. Public transport here is good, but people still need cars for some journeys - this is not going to change for a long while yet.
we need to be more efficiant and less polluting in everything we do! and the only way to do that, in a capitalistic society, is to make the activity/source of energy to be priced at its TRUE cost ! and the cheapest energy is to use no energy other than food.
What you are asking for is the end of liberalism
You wouldn't be able to afford food though, or water, power, anything made with or transported by fossil fuel. If the cost of extraction and also pollution were factored in there would be riots. This is one of the big reasons a transition is so difficult, we don't know how good we have it or how badly our ignorance is fucking things up.
Its always being rethought. Boring attacks on a train in motion by UA-cam whining whiners are useless.
This guy is so obviously anti-EV it's not funny.
Almost all of his assertions are i correct or challengeable!
No time for a rethink. Replace fossil fuels with electric asap
Mandates needed.
Spoken like a true fascist on the losing side of the equation..
It is really impossible without total collapse. You are asking to forgo a modern life and a large reduction in the population.
There really isn’t even a regulatory mechanism that can reduce production/consumption of hydrocarbons. Making solar panels just reduces the cost of energy and increases overall energy consumption
@@MrBallynally2 , we have postponed any real solutions for many decades now under the guise of there being enough time, or under the guise of making sure, or under the guise of money problems, or anything. Meanwhile, the problems have become even bigger as we are emitting more CO2 than ever. At the same time, these delaying tactics have been planned by the oil industry all along. So putting off things is really not desirable. We do not really know what the solution is, but while working on the problems, we will slowly and sometimes quickly find breakthroughs that make solar 3 times as efficient as 20 years ago. And yes, mistakes will be made. Without making mistakes, it is impossible to succeed.
And 'the losing side' is society in 100 years as we keep using fossil fuels. It is important to dare to think a little further than your own lifetime. A project like the US was not set up with one generation in mind. Why limit ourselves now?
Rob,
CO2 is not the source of climate change.
I know how the grid could be run without emitting CO2 and it does not involve one watt of renewable generation. That is a dead end and no amount of 'advancements' will overcome the inherrent fact that it is uncontrollable (technically known a asynchronous generation) supplying a system that has to be finely controlled on an instantaneous basis. They have a few more technical and practical deficincies.
Unless there is scope for more hydro generation, then nuclear is Hobson's Choice. No alternative!
Simon Michaux annoys me massively. He speaks in this pompous way like Lord Monkton. He also says a lot of stuff that is totally wrong. Most EVs will not need a battery replacements after 5-6 years. The batteries wil in most cases last longer than the rest of the car. I don't know why anyone bothers to listen to him at all.
you do not get this message
@thunderstorm6630 I believe that his message is to give a distorted presentation of reality and to purport offer some kind of solution to this. The EV batteries just lasting 5-6 years is an example. Another thing that annoys me is that the "Green transition" is presented as some sort of agreed agenda. The green transition simply is the idea that we should use less fossil fuels. There is not anything revolutionary about his "Purple revolution." All his suggestions are already part of the green revolution. It will be good if he can move things in a positive way, but basically, I mostly think he only likes to be in the lime light and to hear his own voice.
Run
that doesn't say much for the life of the car.
@iareid8255 I have a little 12 year old EV. I have not spent more than 170 USD on it, excluding wiper fluid and electricity. I expect it will be ok yhe next 12 years too.
@@runeaanderaa6840
you sugested the battery will outlast the car? Do you really expect to get another twelve years on the same battery?
Oh dear, lots of fossil propaganda, batteries only last 6-7 years, but warranties are actually 8-10 years. I think you are living in 2010 mate. LFP batteries last for 1 million miles.
No-one was suggesting would wouldn't need mining, of course we cannot get new needs from recycling when material requirements are changing.
Grids already has the capacity for EVs charging overnight in off-peak.
You wasted your time, wrong assumptions and you don't understand electricity or batteries.