Electric vehicle battery factory will require so much energy it needs a coal plant to power it!

Yes!
So, the IPCC reports are in effect systematic reviews - who would or rather which source would you say comes up to that standard when it comes to climate change?

 

So did I - I m not too far off your age (not saying which direction though) and I learnt to read and critique research in a field far more demanding than many other disciplines. One thing I have noticed over my more than 20 years of studying this field is that engineers generally do not have the same attitude to academic rigor as many other disciplines.

 

I'd say thermodynamics vastly exceeds any climate change standard including the IPCC. So basically any high school or better physics class.

 

Okay if that is the case please present your theorem and we will see if we can get it published and submitted to the IPCC through its review process

 

And I learned to make engines run in the real world, not just critique how they run, for the last 35 years. That's demanding in the real world where failure is not an option. And technical writers need not apply.

 

Why?

 

Well, the process is there to challenge the IPCC findings so why not do so? This is my core complaint with a lot of the so called “denialists” like Judith Curry. She has a pathway to bring her concerns to the IPCC and would be better suited if she not only used that pathway but assisted others to also do the same but that is not the “game”.
This is the “game”


First used for the tobacco industry it was copied and used for the Fossil Fuel industry to throw doubt on the science.

 

So in your eyes the IPCC is some kind of Pope-like secular figure speaking ex cathedra and inerrantly on matters of science. Therefore they (or it as the case may be) must be revered and never doubted.

Basically, it's your religion.

Sorry, not buying it.

 

Except fossil fuels are not at all like tobacco and they are core to the functioning of modern life and the advancement of humanity everywhere.

Other than that, the comparison is just downright silly.

 

No because it is not one single person but an amalgam of critiqued research. The climate equivalent of Evidence Based Practice. 20 odd years ago the medical profession realised that a lot of doctors were relying on untested traditional medicines or “best guesses” based on personal experience. Still happening to a degree. What the profession did was to put together EBP guidelines based on systematic reviews and meta analysis of research. This is what now guides practice. The IPCC reports are systematic reviews s you would know if you have ever read one - and by that I am talking about the actual full report not skimming the “summary for policy makers”

 

Is it? I have been following this debate for over 20 years and have also followed the money. Eg Exxonmobil is well documented as having run disinformation astroturf sites. It got caught, it’s shareholders didn’t like it and a lot of the funding - at least the easily traced funding got pulled which is why you have seen a dramatic downturn in denialist websites

 

See China's Abandoned EV Graveyard: Thousands Of ...

InsideEVs
https://insideevs.com › News


Jun 20, 2023 — A recent video showcases enormous fields filled with thousands of abandoned Chinese electric cars. Some of these EVs appear to be the Geely ...

 

Here in the UK, the government went all out to ban the sale of new ICE vehicles from the year 2030. When this was announced, I wish I had gone to the bookies to put money on to say, "No chance". Just the other week, the Prime Minister has postponed the date to 2035. I'm still tempted to go in and put money on, cos the whole idea of EV's is laughable.

Everything EV always goes full circle back to diesel, petrol, coal, gas. Even electric diggers on site are hooked up to diesel generators, breakdown vans carry petrol generators to charge EV's.

And all we get is, "Renewables are free electric, EV's will get cheaper, and the infrastructure will magically appear", but these dreams are not matching reality.

 

Musk and Tesla wouldn't be here if it wasn't for government money. As they say in America, Period

 

False narrative.

 

Lols! This is no conspiracy theory - they used the “tobacco industry playbook” to “throw shade” on the science of climate change. They have or rather had about 50-100 scientists, some of whom were even known to have participated in the tobacco industry’s misinformation campaign. (Fortunately most of those have “kicked the bucket” since the height of this)

https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/ho...ts-used-astroturf-front-groups-confuse-public

https://climateinvestigations.org/global-climate-coalition-koch-exxon/
On the Kochs
https://climateinvestigations.org/?s=Koch

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/02/climate-scientists-exxon-mobile-report-497805

And THAT is just the tip of the iceberg

 

However he is hardly the only one producing electric cars nowadays (side note I tire of these repeat debunked twaddle that is brought up over and over and over again.)

 

I cannot roll my eyes hard enough for this. Just one question. Why do you think that happens? I mean it has to be more expensive to do it that way so why? (Hint the massive draglines they use in mining run on electricity Look up the word torque)

 

And the reason for that is……….

Basically the revolution has been too fast. It is not that they are not buying them au contraire it is that the newer models are getting better and better

 

ExxonMobil published all their research and was a significant contributor to the IPCC.
The "Exxon Climate Papers" show what Exxon and climate science knew and shared
7 years ago
Anthony Watts
If they withheld or suppressed climate research from the public or shareholders, it is not apparent in these documents.
Guest essay by Andy May
". . . I’ve reviewed the 22 internal documents from 1977 to 1989 made available by ExxonMobil here. I’ve also reviewed what I could find on 104 publications (most are peer-reviewed) with ExxonMobil personnel as authors or co-authors. For some of the peer-reviewed articles I only had an abstract and for some I could find the reference but no abstract or text without paying a fee. Below this short essay is an annotated bibliography of all 22 internal documents and 89 of the published papers. The documents are interesting reading, they fill in the history of modern climate science very well. Much of the current debate on climate change was being debated in the same way, and often with the same uncertainties, in 1977.

Between 1977 and the fifth IPCC report in 2013 ExxonMobil Corporate Research in New Jersey investigated the effect of increasing CO2 on climate. If they withheld or suppressed climate research from the public or shareholders, it is not apparent in these documents. Further, if they found any definitive evidence of an impending man-made climate catastrophe, I didn’t see it. The climate researchers at ExxonMobil participated in the second, third, fourth and fifth IPCC assessment reports making major contributions in mapping the carbon cycle and in climate modeling. They calculated the potential impact of man-made CO2 in several publications. They investigated methods of sequestering CO2 and adapting to climate change. They also investigated several potential biofuels. . . . "

 

We shall see.

 

Shall we? But I love how this is manufactured outrage ignoring the huge stockpiles of abandoned ICEs in every country

 

"Abandoned ICEs"? Isn't that just a fancy name for a junkyard where one can go and find usable parts to fix your car?

Can one do that with EV parts?

 

Lols! You are trying to use an astroturf site to show that there were no astroturf sites?

 

Yeah, but musk wasn't forced to start the company. That was my point.