The New Climate Reality

So would another automated highway system made specifically to remove large trucks and vehicles off the normal highway. This would increase the safety and reduce traffic of normal vehicles. it would also set the stage for moving toward AI driven cars by separating the automated vehicles from the self driven cars until all the bugs are worked.

Another Railway will just cause congestion where the roads need to cross and long wait times. The automated highway system would just be another road with off and on ramps and the vehicles can enter and exit with less traffic disruptions because they are not long carts tied together. Also, the vehicles won't have to slow down through towns and crossing all the time and will be able to maintain high speeds through most of the transit. Trains are required to slow for all crossings.

 

No people on the automated [high speed] roads. There will be people involved in technology and such.

Yes but in those situations the businesses have to build next to the rail and compete for limited space. This also results in more road to rail crossings because those business also need access to a road.
The automated trucks would be able to exit the high speed roads and enter normal roadways as the technology gets more efficient and AI gets more advanced, allowing more businesses access to this transportation system.

It would be hard to program the vehicles to recognize and adjust for unforeseeable circumstances and human error (other cars). Having a simple designated highway would be a lot different than programming a care to drive around town and watch for pedestrians, stop signs, and pot holes. By having a designated highway system, they can get a working transit up and running and transport goods to businesses close to the highway, eventually expanding the system to allow automated-trucks onto normal [low speed] roads as the technology advances.

Sure. As long as it makes sense. It also needs to happen at the power plant before it can happen elsewhere or we are just changing where we burn the fossil fuels instead of moving away from fossil fuels.

The Federal government needs to focus more on the general needs of power and supply and NEW infrastructure. Biden should absolutely stay away from repairing existing roads and rail. The states and cities should be focusing on individual specific needs that only apply to them as well as maintenance. If the federal government spends money the state should of spending, their state/city might just waste that money they saved on things that have nothing to do with infrastructure and energy. It would be better for Biden to increase regulations on rail to force companies to pay to upgrade their systems themselves. I know the government can just borrow and print money, but it is not without consequence.

 

I think I misunderstood as to why you were making that statement. The trucks are going LNG and electric like everything else.

https://landline.media/electric-and... to Ohio. West Coast electric trucks corridor

 

Your assuming the cost of building a special purpose, say 4 lane cross country heavy vehicle roadway is cheaper than building a two track rail bed. Pretty sure the latter would (much) be cheaper per kilometer. And that assuming it was all new build. There's no reason the existing rail network couldn't be upgraded as necessary. In fact logically that s what would happen.

QUOTE="GrayMan, post: 1072748010, member: 35617"]Another Railway will just cause congestion where the roads need to cross and long wait times. The automated highway system would just be another road with off and on ramps and the vehicles can enter and exit with less traffic disruptions because they are not long carts tied together. Also, the vehicles won't have to slow down through towns and crossing all the time and will be able to maintain high speeds through most of the transit. Trains are required to slow for all crossings.[/QUOTE]

As noted above it doesn't necessarily have to be another railway. Just use the existing ones.The railway crossing issue exists but as I noted if you are serious about getting heavy, long distance freight off the raids you have to allow for the cost of over/underpasses and related rail upgrades etc in the budget. We've actually started a new north south trans-continental rail project that deliberately bypasses major cities with the express purpose of getting more freight onto rail and off the road thereby clearing up congestion on the main north/south highways which run through those cities. Freight will be is picked up/off loaded at terminals outside the cities proper and existing railways or trucks used for short distance haulage.

 

I thank you for the response, but I just don't see your focus on the logistic of goods to be that big a need. One word alone proves my point: Amazon. The fact that I can order a tank drum online and have it delivered the next day is quite amazing.

You are describing an outdated model of logistics. I just don't see that aspect lacking, except maybe to some rural areas, but that would be addressed in Biden's plan already.

 

And yet climate change activists are still flying private jets to climate change conventions, recycling is not enforced and everyone is still driving SUVs
Complaining about climate change doesn’t fix it. Are you ready to trade your car for a horse? I am!

 

The climate activists want to ban fossil fuels but when they figure out what is made with fossil fuels, like the computer they access this forum with, they tend to shut up.

 

Look to where EV is heading



Every one of those cars will bring new innovations to the game and that is just one aspect
The charging issue
https://www.nsenergybusiness.com/features/electric-vehicle-charging-innovations/
Battery innovation
https://www.power-technology.com/features/is-this-the-golden-age-of-battery-innovation/
there is even talk of repurposing EV batteries that are no longer at peak and cannot be used in EVs to power grid storage
https://www.pocket-lint.com/gadgets...in-seconds-last-months-and-power-over-the-air

you don’t think that the huge government fleet going EV want light up capitalists and innovators? It has in Europe

As for the night time storage - look to South Australia


Now THAT is a battery!

 

Do they? Really? Well I have yet to see that happen!

 

Whataboutism

 

What trees where? New growth forest does NOT a soak up as much as old growth forest

 

Not if the energy is produced by renewables

 

Where I live these guys are common



A cross between a truck and a train they have advantages over either

 

False

https://icp.giss.nasa.gov/research/ppa/2001/anwar/

"The chart above shows the amount of total tree carbon in the young and the old forest. The chart describes the carbon storage within each plot in one area for both young and old. The horizontal axis describes the site and the vertical axis shows the carbon storage in kilograms. The young site had more carbon storage then the old, because there were half as many trees and there was less species variety in the old site. The chart above shows the amount of total tree carbon in the young and the old forest. The chart describes the carbon storage within each plot in one area for both young and old. The horizontal axis describes the site and the vertical axis shows the carbon storage in kilograms. The young site had more carbon storage then the old, because there were half as many trees and there was less species variety in the old site."

 

Its good evidence that they don't believe what they preach. The are all alarmists.

 

I don't even know what those are... chemical batteries? Those are not the most durable or environmentally friendly. Good luck getting enough lithium with small electronics soaking up the market along with EVs. The old school lead acid wont' cut it. Salt based thermal storage facilities would be much better for the environment and they wont break down like the batteries will.

 

Hmmm one unreferenced paper - written by a student about one site and it is twenty years old

Good find

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/gcb.15036

DAYAM but this is complex!

https://www.pnas.org/content/116/10...7n3RBEj6Sjru3hAiF1bA86B3mMWF56a-aslfiDD91tPlI

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-019-0427-2

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-018-0367-7
https://www.forestandbird.org.nz/si...tems' carbon sinks - Forest & Bird report.pdf

Okay this is from Mongabay and is probably a bit biased

https://news.mongabay.com/2019/05/tall-and-old-or-dense-and-young-which-kind-of-forest-is-better-for-the-climate/

 

Whataboutism

the “dirty bedroom excuse”

“But Muuuuuuum! Billy doesn’t cleanup his bedroom!”

 

You didn’t read those lovely links I provided

oh! Well next time I won’t bother

 

Yeah and none referenced that image. The closest thing was just about emergency backup batteries/storage using lithium/hydro/etc

 

It says a lot of the carbon is released from the tree when it is cut down due to the decomposition of the roots. It's something I largely overlooked. Out of sight out of mind I guess

 

Doesn't make sense, does it?? It suggests that folks KNOW w hat needs to be done.........but are not wiling to "sacrifice" their conveniences and comforts or change their behavior to a achieve it.

 

This is a common misconception not supporter by empirical evidence. For people wishing to base their beliefs on something more than urban legend or opinions of the uninformed here is the actual empirical evidence.

https://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/pnw_gtr931/pnw_gtr931_050.pdf

This study was in the US Pacific Northwest, but the underlying dynamics are the same in most forest environments. Managed forests with medium aged trees but facilitated addition of younger ones are actually the best all round carbon sequestration models.

 

More like, it's not as bad as they say it is but if they didn't scare people, they probably wouldn't do anything until it's too late. Also it pays well to support the narrative.

 

Just nonsense.

Major Media FAIL on Reporting the Pacific Northwest Heatwave
Anthony Watts
The headline in E&E News, WOWT-TV, Scientific American, WorldNewsNetwork, and other media outlets this week, “Unprecedented Heat Wave in Pacific Northwest Driven by Climate Change” couldn’t possibly be more unscientific. With absolutely no analysis, no…