Net zero nonsense

[Burgerman]

Earlier today at 1pm the contribution being made from wind was 3.3% of the total! Solar was at 0.4%
Yesterday was pretty much identical.
This is after 20 years of building solar and wind farms, at a cost that runs into many hundreds of billions.

I JUST took another look (below) at the UKs power mix (4 minutes ago)
Wind has now improved! 8% Solar now 0% (its dark).
Yesterday and earlier today the GAS powered generation was at over 60% and is still at 57% of the total... And realise that its 0C outside and almost all the housing in the country is heated with gas, which is not even included in these figures!

The total amount of gas being consumed at this time is approximately 5.5x greater than what is shown here. So the (wind/solar) energy input to the system as a whole, is around 1.5% of the total.
Because of this, and all the taxation to subsidise green energy production, and because of the fact that while being an island MADE of coal, with oil and gas available cheaply on land, floating in an ocean of oil, gas, all around us, THAT OUR IDIOT POLITICIANS are refusing to utilise so they can virtue signal to the worls we are having to BUY all our energy in the form of forrests cut down in the US and canada. At 4x the cost of coal. And gas in ships refrigerated to liquify it from the US, the middle east etc in order to keep the lights on at 5 TIMES the cost of using our own. And buying electricity from 9 different cross sea interconnects from 7 different countries. At equally extortionate cost.

Meanwhile Ed Milliwatt is about to increase our taxes even further to build and double up on our green energy! Which means that instead of todays 1.5% total, it will be 3% of our actual needs! That obviously wont work. By spending 200 billion in yet more green subsidies. Its already bankrupting our industry and businesses across the board and means we are all scared to heat our homes.

To say they virtue signalling net zero bullshit is nonsense doesent begin to scratch the surface.
Because remember those 23 million homes that are heated with gas boilers? Those will be forcebly replaced with ELECTRICALLY powered heat pumps. So that electrical energy required will mean that we need much ore than double the energy and closer to 4x as much. Thats before we all start on electric cars. Or industry...

[woodygb]

The World seems to be run by people without a grasp of the problem / solution.

I.E .... Also research the environmental cost of producing and running an electric car.

https://www.mei.edu/publications/enviro ... c-vehicles

[Burgerman]

Well actually I already did. But its not just cars, they want the same nonsense for everything from airliners, trucks, shipping inc those huge container ships and the ones carrying overpriced methane in refrigerated tankers. They truly are all living in a dreamworld. With the best will in the world, its simply not possible. Even if you accept he bull that is human warming, and even if you accept that its a bad thing. And its not! And I dont...

So now the moronic labour marxist party are confused as to why we are all getting ever poorer! Same thing with the consocialists we just kicked out.

Politicians simply do not grasp the problem. They listen to the idealogs and the greens as well as those in the very profitable climate industry... So do their WEF freinds.

The worst is yet to come.

Talking of your electric cars.
Right now we have inadequate elecricity and are paying 500% more than we should because of it.
And an average house uses 10 to 15kWh to keep the lights on daily.
But we HEAT them with gas. And use approx 5x more kWh of gas (and pay 5x less per kWh). But they want us to heat them electrically!
So now the 10kWh is 50kWh...
Now add a 50 to 100kWh battery in the new EV you are forced to drive... Lets say it needs a 50% charge daily.
So now you take the 10kWh. And add 50kwh for heat. And 75kWh for car charge. And so thats 135kWh instead of 10...

How will the grid manage that?
How will the current 8% of green electricity manage a 7.5x increase in daily demand?
Its all rediculous!

And anyway, you are not saving the planet as we only contribute 1% of the worlds CO2. And your EV is charged mostly with fossil fuel - gas. Same with house/heating with heat pumps.

[wheelchairer]

Without getting into the Debate about global warming, isn't nuclear the way forward anyway?

https://www.nuclearnowfilm.com/lays out a compelling argument. Also exposes links between the oil industry and the anti-nuclear Greenpeace.

[Burgerman]

Well for elctricity it can be good. But electricity is 1/5th the UKs power source. So it keeps lights on, and runs computers etc.

ALMOST every normal house in the UK is heated with a gas boiler. Gas as in gas, methane, not petrol car fuel (why call a liquid gas anyway?)
For those not in town/city areas, its oil (usualy diesel) or propane stored in tanks to keep you warm or dry your crops or store seed etc.

The net zero fanatics seem to think banning gas central heating boilers (the thing you call a furnace) and replacing those with electric heat pumps by 2030 will work... That just means that we will need a 500% increase in electricity, worse it will all have to be green generated electricity! Worse still thats 500% mostly all at once in winter, so muuch worse than it seems. 5X more electricity infrastructure, 5x more generation, 5x more bills... And after spending hundreds of billions in solar and windmills for 25 years now bankrupting society, that hasecaused the UK to have the most expensive energy in the world, with windmills which stretch as far as the eye can see. We came within 99.9% of being maxed out at the weekend, meaning country wide power cuts. That included a third of our power bought in at a rediculeous 13x premium from france, norway, ireland, belgium, holland via undersea interconnects.

And they are about to shut down another 2 end of life nuclear plants. We had 15, down to 5 now...

Then they want us to all drive electric cars... Which use 5x the average house daily kWh per charge!
So now we need way more than 500% more electrical power!

Of course to make stuff even more rediculous we DESTROYED all our coal plants with explosives, allowed 40 coal mines that produced really cheap retail power to flood and be filled with cement slurry. All to virtue signal to the world. And we also buy in hugely overpriced gas, and oil, and coal for industrial purposes as well as canadian and US forrests all cut into "green" pellets to burn in europes biggest once coal power station... We are literally paying a massive premium to burn down tens of thousands of square miles of forests to feed a ex coal station. And thats supposedly green?

So provided you dont mind the short battery life, in your car, short range, added 1 ton of mass, and huge purchase cost and increadible devaluation levels, or the sheer level of hypocracy in charging your EV with fossil fuel (and twice as much of it due to inefficiency of transporting electricity, heavier car etc) then yes nuclear would work. Wont work for aircraft, shipping, making steel, or the hundreds or thousands of things we all use in daily life made FROM oil! Or gas. One example being fertilisers. You like food right? Plastics or roads, or practically everything in your house?

Non of this stupid nt zero stuff makes sense because we cannot run our society without oil, gas, coal.

[JohnnyUK]

IMO Climate Change is just another political tool requiring supranational control to achieve Sustainable goals including Net Zero ... viola there's your New World Order. Welcome to communism 2.0

Net Zero is a hoax along with plandemics, 9/11 and many other historical non events. CO2 is not a pollutant it's the food of life, commercial greenhouse get injected with the stuff to elevate CO2 levels for an improved yield.

Don't have to look back too far and see CO2 levels at 1200ppm, they're now 400ppm or 0.04% of the atmosphere (95% of which is generated by the oceans). If the CO2 level halves ALL plant life dies, game over!

[Burgerman]

The Net Zero is a hoax along with plandemics, 9/11 and many other historical non events. CO2 is not a pollutant it's the food of life, commercial greenhouse get injected with the stuff to elevate CO2 levels for an improved yield.

Don't have to look back too far and see CO2 levels at 1200ppm, they're now 400ppm or 0.04% of the atmosphere (95% of which is generated by the oceans). If the CO2 level halves ALL plant life dies, game over!

All correct except that the 9/11 wasnt a hoax. And the pandemic was real enough just blown out of proportion by frankly ignorant stupid politcians. Mixing obvious nonsensene with real climate data just weakens the climate position and arms the lefty green warmist nutters with more amunition to call those that didnt fall for the CO2 bullshit conspiracy theory nutters.

For what its worth c02 does cause lobal warming. At least it should. Just not by the amounts they claim, and that it isnt significant in the scheme of things. Even if it was the cost to society in wealth trying to reduce the C02 is way greater than dealing with any real or imagined consequences.

[JohnnyUK]

I don't think it was ignorance it was all planned for many years, politicians do what they're told or else

Moon landings?

[Burgerman]

All conspiracy theory nonsense. You need a checkup from the neck up.

[JohnnyUK]

You're right!

[wheelchairer]

IMO Climate Change is just another political tool requiring supranational control to achieve Sustainable goals including Net Zero ... viola there's your New World Order. Welcome to communism 2.0!

communism? Fascism? What was the difference between Hitler and Stalin in practice? Isn't it just really dictatorship that is the problem?

[Burgerman]

They were both socialists. And both idealogs. Both with a huge following. Both ended in disaster.
Fascists USUALLY advocate for the establishment of a totalitarian one-party state. Just like the left... And for a market economy in which the state plays a strong directive role through economic interventionist policies, just like comunist china today after they realised socialism starves everyone to death...

The thing I dont and never understood is what the hell is it with all the jew hate? Why?

[wheelchairer]

Well for elctricity it can be good. But electricity is 1/5th the UKs power source. So it keeps lights on, and runs computers etc.

ALMOST every normal house in the UK is heated with a gas boiler. Gas as in gas, methane, not petrol car fuel (why call a liquid gas anyway?)
For those not in town/city areas, its oil (usualy diesel) or propane stored in tanks to keep you warm or dry your crops or store seed etc.

The net zero fanatics seem to think banning gas central heating boilers (the thing you call a furnace) and replacing those with electric heat pumps by 2030 will work... That just means that we will need a 500% increase in electricity, worse it will all have to be green generated electricity! Worse still thats 500% mostly all at once in winter, so muuch worse than it seems. 5X more electricity infrastructure, 5x more generation, 5x more bills... And after spending hundreds of billions in solar and windmills for 25 years now bankrupting society, that hasecaused the UK to have the most expensive energy in the world, with windmills which stretch as far as the eye can see. We came within 99.9% of being maxed out at the weekend, meaning country wide power cuts. That included a third of our power bought in at a rediculeous 13x premium from france, norway, ireland, belgium, holland via undersea interconnects.

And they are about to shut down another 2 end of life nuclear plants. We had 15, down to 5 now...

Then they want us to all drive electric cars... Which use 5x the average house daily kWh per charge!
So now we need way more than 500% more electrical power!

Of course to make stuff even more rediculous we DESTROYED all our coal plants with explosives, allowed 40 coal mines that produced really cheap retail power to flood and be filled with cement slurry. All to virtue signal to the world. And we also buy in hugely overpriced gas, and oil, and coal for industrial purposes as well as canadian and US forrests all cut into "green" pellets to burn in europes biggest once coal power station... We are literally paying a massive premium to burn down tens of thousands of square miles of forests to feed a ex coal station. And thats supposedly green?

So provided you dont mind the short battery life, in your car, short range, added 1 ton of mass, and huge purchase cost and increadible devaluation levels, or the sheer level of hypocracy in charging your EV with fossil fuel (and twice as much of it due to inefficiency of transporting electricity, heavier car etc) then yes nuclear would work. Wont work for aircraft, shipping, making steel, or the hundreds or thousands of things we all use in daily life made FROM oil! Or gas. One example being fertilisers. You like food right? Plastics or roads, or practically everything in your house?

Non of this stupid nt zero stuff makes sense because we cannot run our society without oil, gas, coal.

I agree with you about the Zero stuff. Seems much more to be window dress than anything practical.

so the documentary claims that the oil industry funded Greenpeace to oppose nuclear power, afterthe president of America was promising cheap energy from nuclear power. it's also claimed they had massive influence over transport building in America, "Lobbying government" away from trains and trams to cars.. All of which has only impeded the inevitable hasn't it? However you look at, gas and oil as a means of energy Has to go away of the steam engine, surely?

[Burgerman]

Why?
Its by far the cheapest and best fuel, abundant and easy to access, the left overs are used to make almost everything in the modern world, one that is BUILT on cheap energy. It feeds and homes us, it supplies everything. And steam hasnt gone away. Its used in every power station be it gas, nuclear, or coal to drive the generators in order to power your EV and your wheelchair and your heat pump or your nuclear aircraft carier... Across the planet. Its use has continued to grow and it is still doing so. It even powers the once steam trains too.

So why?

The documentary is nonsense however.

[wheelchairer]

isn't fuel efficiency better with electric than gas, oil, Et cetera? Basically the same reasons as we got rid of the horse and cart.

[wheelchairer]

The documentary is nonsense however.

yes I know you will NOT agree with all the green stuff, but is it correct about the nuclear?

I do think the Oil industry is completely embedded in the US state, and influences national and foreign-policy.

[Burgerman]

No. Quite the opposite.

Think about your EV. It uses fossil fuel burned in a power station at approx 35% efficiency in converting the water to steam to blow through a turbine.
Another 10% is lost in transmission across the various step up, step down transformers. And then theres losses due to resistance in the thousands of miles of cables. Which waste power also from EM radiation. Then it hits your 90% efficient buckboost charger in the car. Then it loses 2% while battery charging in heat due to resistance and in charging losses due to other causes. Then it loses another few% as it goes through the power controller (like the power module in our wheelchairs). Then it hits a 90% efficient at best motor... To drive a car that is heavy as hell due to an enormous battery... Which wastes yet more power over the lighter petrol or diesel car.

So why not put the fossil fuel DIRECTLY into the modern engine, which is equally as efficient as the bare power station today, without all the other losses. And without the extra mass to push around.

???

Its also CHEAPER!!!
Not in america, yet. But once you start growing windmills by the trillion dollars, and buying electricity from the countries around you at 600% of the current market prices (as the UK was all week to try and keep the lights on) the cost of electricity will do what ours has. We are the country with the most net zero (C02 reduction) policies in the world. We have thousands of square miles of windmils around the coast and on land. Solar on houses, and across the countryside. We also have the most expensive electricity AND GAS in the world too because of it, since there isnt enough of that green energy around to generate the electricity we need! See the image above.

It simply cant work.

Nuclear can help with electricty. Its not cheap enough however. Coal, gas, IS. Thats why most of the stuff you buy is now made in china. They manufacture CHEAPLY as they have coal power stations and are building hundreds more every year! They are selling the west solar and windmills and laughing all the way to the bank.
The green nonsense, and the anti nuclear fearmongering is all driven by the net zero fanatics who do not want to know the technical details. They are just idealogs that do not care if it can be done technically. All thats someone elses problem.. Until they cant eat and the west are begging china for help.

[wheelchairer]

looks like you are correct.

In the documentary Nuclear Now, directed by Oliver Stone, it is suggested that the fossil fuel industry, including coal and oil interests, funded public relations campaigns to instill fear about nuclear energy. These campaigns allegedly conflated nuclear power with nuclear weapons and exaggerated concerns about low-level radiation, thereby stalling progress in nuclear energy adoption.
Nuclear Now

While the film implies that such campaigns may have influenced public perception and the broader environmental movement, it does not explicitly name specific environmental organizations as being directly funded by the oil industry. However, historical accounts indicate that the fossil fuel industry has engaged in efforts to undermine nuclear energy, viewing it as a competitor. For instance, organizations like the American Petroleum Institute have been involved in anti-nuclear lobbying. Additionally, some environmental groups have received grants from fossil fuel companies, which has led to debates about potential conflicts of interest.
Wikipedia

It's important to note that these claims are subject to ongoing debate, and many environmental organizations, such as Greenpeace, have consistently denied any direct funding from fossil fuel industries. The relationship between environmental advocacy, energy policy, and industry funding is complex and multifaceted, warranting careful consideration of various perspectives and sources.

[Burgerman]

You also need to understand that you are talking just about america. Thats a small fraction of the world. just over 4%.

The reason the "rich west" is rich is the industrial revolution driven by coal, and oil. Starting in britain and exported along with democracy, the rule of law around the world.

Now the left wo hate anything to do with free market capitalism, that hate imperialism, nation states etc tried socialism for 100 years. It all sounded so nice, everyone has the same outcome. The trouble is that we all now know that it doesent work. So they smuggle their marxism in via the back door. Green marxism. Hundreds of "genders". No free speech allowed unless it left speech. Black lives matter. Open borders. No law enforcement unless its to control those that do not want some muslim raping their children. But they do not prosecute the muslims. All of this is to control the masses so the woke, green, marxist globalist central controlling idiots get their power.

But non of this stuff works. It destroys countries, economies, and your cultures. It will end in civil war at least in the UK and maybe the EU. They are trying to errode your free speech in the USA now. But its more diffu=icult because of your bill of rights. Not impossible.

[martin007]

In Spain.

> https://www.ree.es/en/datos/generation/ ... -structure

[Burgerman]

The left keep showing graphs like that. But it fails to show why it cant work.

You see that huge green windmill (wind) part? Its doing OK right?

But it isnt!
It works when its windy. On your graph. It isnt showing you the huge power spikes where the power is greater than can be used, (or the grid frequency and voltage rises) or where it drops. Sometimes as low as 5% of the demand. Or less. I have seen it drop from 70 to 3% in the UK for several days!

But there are times when theres no wind for a week or longer at a time. Its called an anticyclone. We have 60 and 70% wind power some days. But then the wind stops. And we have practically non.
And so the need for energy remains the same. And now you need to fire up all the coal, gas, etc fast (A full grid capacity) to keep the lights on.
And that means fossil fuel.
Why?
Because nuclear can vary slightly, but usually runs at its max output or at leasy 95% as otherwise its economically not viable. So that cant increase that. It leaves gas, oil, coal...
So as well as paying billions for windmills (and solar that barely works in winter and doesent work at all at night) you also need to build enough fossil power plants AS WELL to take over rapidly as needed. To ramp up to replace that missing wind power.

[JohnnyUK]

Just like the weather forecasts green energy isn't dependable. We're contractually obliged to pay for wind/solar generation regardless of whether or not it's used. The reality is we have to plan generating electricity from hydrocarbons and the base load power stations can't all be switched on/off at will. Green Energy contracts are such that corporate wind farms earn just as much from the taxpayer by sitting idle as they do when the generation is needed. Green energy is a massive waste of taxpayers money that could never be self sufficient in a free market, it's yet another scam cunningly woven into globalist plans along with Net Zero nonsense

[Burgerman]

Its just more marxist nonsense by the back door. Thats why its always the left that push it. And the same woke/left/green/socialist/proEU/Anti british/open border liberals have taken over what was once the conservative party.

Which is why they got such a massive kicking in the last erection. Allowing the even worse labour moronic numpties in. The "centre" in politics moves ever further left. Mention that you dont want your country overun with muslim rapeugees, or sky high taxes to prop up millions of pointless civil servants all holding each others hands and you are hitler.

If we dont deal with this then the rich safe western countries will collapse. Which they are actually doing as we watch.
There are signs however that the masses are finally waking up.

[JohnnyUK]

Spot on Burgerman! This is a global coup people need to wake up quicker, we're being lied to and they need calling out.

It's bye bye freedom if we don't stop the globalist psychos soon

[Burgerman]

They are not lying as such. They are just idealogs and ignorant of the reality. Much like all the brainwashed anti israel students. If you ask them a few questions it ALWAYS shows their sheer ignorance. They are the sheep. They are taught selective nonsense. By the green/marxist zealots.

[wheelchairer]

They were both socialists. And both idealogs. Both with a huge following. Both ended in disaster.
Fascists USUALLY advocate for the establishment of a totalitarian one-party state. Just like the left... And for a market economy in which the state plays a strong directive role through economic interventionist policies, just like comunist china today after they realised socialism starves everyone to death...

The thing I dont and never understood is what the hell is it with all the jew hate? Why?

That's absolutely true. The pair of them were dictatorships, the centralisation of power in few hands. There is very little difference between the 2. In the French Revolution those who wanted power centralised in a few hands sat on the right, and those who wanted power in the hands of the people sat on the left. Hence the term in politics left-wing and right-wing.

[wheelchairer]

No. Quite the opposite.

Think about your EV. It uses fossil fuel burned in a power station at approx 35% efficiency in converting the water to steam to blow through a turbine.
Another 10% is lost in transmission across the various step up, step down transformers. And then theres losses due to resistance in the thousands of miles of cables. Which waste power also from EM radiation. Then it hits your 90% efficient buckboost charger in the car. Then it loses 2% while battery charging in heat due to resistance and in charging losses due to other causes. Then it loses another few% as it goes through the power controller (like the power module in our wheelchairs). Then it hits a 90% efficient at best motor... To drive a car that is heavy as hell due to an enormous battery... Which wastes yet more power over the lighter petrol or diesel car.

So why not put the fossil fuel DIRECTLY into the modern engine, which is equally as efficient as the bare power station today, without all the other losses. And without the extra mass to push around.

???

Its also CHEAPER!!!
Not in america, yet. But once you start growing windmills by the trillion dollars, and buying electricity from the countries around you at 600% of the current market prices (as the UK was all week to try and keep the lights on) the cost of electricity will do what ours has. We are the country with the most net zero (C02 reduction) policies in the world. We have thousands of square miles of windmils around the coast and on land. Solar on houses, and across the countryside. We also have the most expensive electricity AND GAS in the world too because of it, since there isnt enough of that green energy around to generate the electricity we need! See the image above.

It simply cant work.

Nuclear can help with electricty. Its not cheap enough however. Coal, gas, IS. Thats why most of the stuff you buy is now made in china. They manufacture CHEAPLY as they have coal power stations and are building hundreds more every year! They are selling the west solar and windmills and laughing all the way to the bank.
The green nonsense, and the anti nuclear fearmongering is all driven by the net zero fanatics who do not want to know the technical details. They are just idealogs that do not care if it can be done technically. All thats someone elses problem.. Until they cant eat and the west are begging china for help.

Oh I think I read this;
"Overall Efficiency
Modern petrol-powered vehicles typically achieve 15-25% efficiency, meaning 75-85% of the energy in petrol is wasted. This inefficiency contrasts sharply with electric vehicles (EVs), which convert around 80-90% of the energy in their batteries into motion."

I do think you're right in general, I do think the switch to Wildlife sustainable energy usage is being badly run. I say wildlife because a reasonable estimate is, there are 350,000,000 tonnes of human biomass, 750 tons of livestock biomass, and 100 tons of wildlife biomass. Do you think it is possible to sustain wildlife with this level of human consumption?

[wheelchairer]

You also need to understand that you are talking just about america. Thats a small fraction of the world. just over 4%.

The reason the "rich west" is rich is the industrial revolution driven by coal, and oil. Starting in britain and exported along with democracy, the rule of law around the world.

Now the left wo hate anything to do with free market capitalism, that hate imperialism, nation states etc tried socialism for 100 years. It all sounded so nice, everyone has the same outcome. The trouble is that we all now know that it doesent work. So they smuggle their marxism in via the back door. Green marxism. Hundreds of "genders". No free speech allowed unless it left speech. Black lives matter. Open borders. No law enforcement unless its to control those that do not want some muslim raping their children. But they do not prosecute the muslims. All of this is to control the masses so the woke, green, marxist globalist central controlling idiots get their power.

But non of this stuff works. It destroys countries, economies, and your cultures. It will end in civil war at least in the UK and maybe the EU. They are trying to errode your free speech in the USA now. But its more diffu=icult because of your bill of rights. Not impossible.

But don't the hardline capitalist Ideologues such as Sir Keith Joseph argue for free trade in immigration as well? Hasn't Elon musk just banned people on Twitter for arguing against his right to bring immigrants into America?

[Burgerman]

Theres nothing intrinsically bad about immigration. The RIGHT type of immigrants that musk is refering to are the ones that bring abilities, knowledge, and are beneficial to your countries society. And in his case his business, and so the economy.

I for e.g living in britain would have no objection at all to having a stable, intelligent immigrant coming to britain. In the US after world war 2 you took a lot of good engineers, people with high IQs, which included jews etc into the states. I myself moved in a girl from the former yugoslave republic, and she was ALLOWED in legally and wanted by the country as we had a shortage of math and physics teaches. As such the embassy fast tracked her visa.

But allowing in A MILLION 3rd world violent rapugees a year ILLEGALLY and undocumented is not a capitalist idea! With an average IQ of room remperature (average 70 to 75 across africa) or middle eastern muslims that are trying to take over the country with their vile religious views, and living in the US you are isolated from this pretty much, is not the same thing is it. Hardly any of these so called "asylum seekers" mix, or integrate, are a net drain on the economy, and are no.1 in every possible bad metric from murders, rapes, benefits, drugs, theft, prisons, etc. We see this day after day.

I dont care if a spanish, or german, etc sane family, that integrate, that work, that contribute, that dont go around stabbing and attacking us, that dont blow themselves up etc moves in next door.
I certainly would if 15 black african muslim fighting age rapugees did.

Big difference. The ones that come in LEGALLY for the right reasons, from anywhere except the middle east and africa, I have no issues with. The fake asylum seekers bring their 3r world problems with them, come for free money, free medical care, free hotels, etc.

[wheelchairer]

No. Quite the opposite.

Think about your EV. It uses fossil fuel burned in a power station at approx 35% efficiency in converting the water to steam to blow through a turbine.
Another 10% is lost in transmission across the various step up, step down transformers. And then theres losses due to resistance in the thousands of miles of cables. Which waste power also from EM radiation. Then it hits your 90% efficient buckboost charger in the car. Then it loses 2% while battery charging in heat due to resistance and in charging losses due to other causes. Then it loses another few% as it goes through the power controller (like the power module in our wheelchairs). Then it hits a 90% efficient at best motor... To drive a car that is heavy as hell due to an enormous battery... Which wastes yet more power over the lighter petrol or diesel car.

So why not put the fossil fuel DIRECTLY into the modern engine, which is equally as efficient as the bare power station today, without all the other losses. And without the extra mass to push around.

???

Its also CHEAPER!!!
Not in america, yet. But once you start growing windmills by the trillion dollars, and buying electricity from the countries around you at 600% of the current market prices (as the UK was all week to try and keep the lights on) the cost of electricity will do what ours has. We are the country with the most net zero (C02 reduction) policies in the world. We have thousands of square miles of windmils around the coast and on land. Solar on houses, and across the countryside. We also have the most expensive electricity AND GAS in the world too because of it, since there isnt enough of that green energy around to generate the electricity we need! See the image above.

It simply cant work.

Nuclear can help with electricty. Its not cheap enough however. Coal, gas, IS. Thats why most of the stuff you buy is now made in china. They manufacture CHEAPLY as they have coal power stations and are building hundreds more every year! They are selling the west solar and windmills and laughing all the way to the bank.
The green nonsense, and the anti nuclear fearmongering is all driven by the net zero fanatics who do not want to know the technical details. They are just idealogs that do not care if it can be done technically. All thats someone elses problem.. Until they cant eat and the west are begging china for help.

Oh I think I read this;
"Overall Efficiency
Modern petrol-powered vehicles typically achieve 15-25% efficiency, meaning 75-85% of the energy in petrol is wasted. This inefficiency contrasts sharply with electric vehicles (EVs), which convert around 80-90% of the energy in their batteries into motion."

I do think you're right in general, I do think the switch to Wildlife sustainable energy usage is being badly run. I say wildlife because a reasonable estimate is, there are 350,000,000 tonnes of human biomass, 750 tons of livestock biomass, and 100 tons of wildlife biomass. Do you think it is possible to sustain wildlife with this level of human consumption?

what are your opinions on this postJohn?