China's e-buses dent oil demand more than electric cars do • Hacker News Board

Re: China's e-buses dent oil demand more than electric cars do

#221

Post by asdff » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 2:11 PM UTC

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #177

jseliger wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China is actually running nuclear AP1000 reactors: https://sg.news.yahoo.com/nuclear-shares-soar-china-plans-11... . It seems serious about nuclear power, unlike the U.S.

The US' main problem with nuclear waste is that they still don't have a place to stash it; waste is building up at the nuclear plants and it's becoming a huge risk. Whereas China can just dig a storage facility in the desert or something; they can disregard locals' complaints easily thanks to being a totalitarian state. I mean so is the US but it's an ineffective one.

Modern reactors produce very little waste. It's a non issue, the technology is here and we can build them today, it just takes decades to recoup investment and no shareholder will consent to margins that slim.

Re: China's e-buses dent oil demand more than electric cars do

#222

Post by bbojan » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 2:18 PM UTC

fulafel wrote: post #201

jseliger wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China is actually running nuclear AP1000 reactors: https://sg.news.yahoo.com/nuclear-shares-soar-china-plans-11... . It seems serious about nuclear power, unlike the U.S.

The new reactor completions are tails of the nuclear craze years ago, but it seems that the current attitude to nuclear starts is not so excited: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/612564/chinas-losing-its-... Central quote: "The 2011 meltdown at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi plant shocked Chinese officials and made a strong impression on many Chinese citizens. A government survey in August 2017 found that only 40% of th…

Actually just yesterday China announced the plan to build 4 more reactors: https://www.scmp.com/business/companies/article/3002379/nucl...

Re: China's e-buses dent oil demand more than electric cars do

#223

Post by mcv » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 2:21 PM UTC

growlist wrote: post #220

mcv wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but without immigration during the 19th and early 20th century, the US wouldn't have anyone to work on those resources and the continent would still be virtually unoccupied. The US would have been as empty as Siberia.

So then you admit that immigration was just one part of the puzzle? Or are you asserting that you could take those same immigrants, transplant them anywhere in the world, and have the same outcome?

I'm pointing out that immigration helped rather than hurt the US. The claim that it makes countries poor or underdeveloped is wrong.

Re: China's e-buses dent oil demand more than electric cars do

#224

Post by mcv » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 2:23 PM UTC

heavenlyblue wrote: post #216

mcv wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amsterdam also has a number of electric buses, though I'm not sure how many. I'm also glad to see lots of Teslas and Priuses as taxis. Clearly this is the low-hanging fruit for cutting back on fossil fuels: short range city traffic that's in constant use. It also improves the air quality in city centers.

How Ansterdam taxi drivers afford Teslas, btw?

Same way they used to afford the Mercedeses they had before, I suppose.

Re: China's e-buses dent oil demand more than electric cars do

#225

Post by asdff » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 2:24 PM UTC

reustle wrote: post #6

"Forget Tesla" is the wrong attitude. We should applaud every win we can get, big or small.

We need collective solutions, not individual displays of wealth and awareness like a 40k tesla you take from home to work with 3 empty seats. I saw elsewhere in the thread that 1 bus = 33 cars in terms of congestion savings. Projects like the hyperloop seem vain and childish in comparison. It would be trivial for tesla to design a bus and they already have the ear of LA city hall to dig a half assed tunnel. Musk could make a real name for himself if he helps to convert the second largest bus fleet in North America into EVs.

Re: China's e-buses dent oil demand more than electric cars do

#226

Post by asdff » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 2:31 PM UTC

hawkice wrote: post #31

twblalock wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The framing of the article is that oil companies need to be more concerned about the Chinese buses than about Tesla. It's a simple rhetorical device, not a statement that Tesla does not matter.

I've sometimes been concerned that headline writing is (metaphorically) subcontracted to buzzfeed everywhere, NYT, The Atlantic, Bloomberg, just about everywhere.

"The Holy Bible" was the first editorialized clickbait title

Re: China's e-buses dent oil demand more than electric cars do

#227

Post by masklinn » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 2:36 PM UTC

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #101

evolve2k wrote: post #61

This points out a new opportunity. Why stop at China for electric busses (yes they are probably manufacturing them locally)? Cities are seeming increasingly more able to be proactive than countries. Encourage local cities to one by one electrify the bus network and this effect goes global. It’s obvious tangible action that citizens can demand and mayors can visibly deliver. Game for those playing at home, do a search…

The opposite is occurring in places like Seattle. The overhead electric trolley lines are coming down as batteries become good enough to support electric buses without the PITA of going off line (electric was already needed for many routes in Seattle because of hills). Electric also makes more sense in Seattle because 70% of its electrify comes from hydro.

> The opposite is occurring in places like Seattle. The overhead electric trolley lines are coming down as batteries become good enough to support electric buses without the PITA of going off line (electric was already needed for many routes in Seattle because of hills).

A good option (which is being implemented in Lyon) is IMC buses, battery-supplemented trolleys (or electric buses with pantographs): they can go off-grid for segments where the grid hasn't been built (not enough traffic or whatever) and it allows for spot-charging at bus stops.

Re: China's e-buses dent oil demand more than electric cars do

#228

Post by masklinn » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 2:37 PM UTC

asdff wrote: post #221

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US' main problem with nuclear waste is that they still don't have a place to stash it; waste is building up at the nuclear plants and it's becoming a huge risk. Whereas China can just dig a storage facility in the desert or something; they can disregard locals' complaints easily thanks to being a totalitarian state. I mean so is the US but it's an ineffective one.

Modern reactors produce very little waste. It's a non issue, the technology is here and we can build them today, it just takes decades to recoup investment and no shareholder will consent to margins that slim.

> Modern reactors produce very little waste.

Sadly that has very little impact in the face of the US's epidemic NIMBY-ism. Yucca is dead, and the US is completely opposed to reprocessing.

Re: China's e-buses dent oil demand more than electric cars do

#229

Post by TheAdamist » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 3:05 PM UTC

smcl wrote: post #173

VladimirGolovin wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No need to build and maintain the infrastructure (rail and overhead power lines.) The ability to navigate the road freely -- trolley buses often have trouble circumnavigating badly parked cars in their way, sometimes causing the driver to get out to reattach the "prongs" to the wires. Also, trams are somewhat prone to "tram jams" caused by one faulty streetcar blocking the railway. And they simply cannot get around a…

Other than the need to maintain rail + power lines, I think these issues are overblown. The badly parked car scenario sounds pretty horrendous in theory - one careless actor causes chaos for an entire city center! In my experience it simply doesn't happen - I think people just know how damaging it could be (and possibly how much trouble they would be in) that they pretty much have to be considerate and self-aware. Ho…

you way overestimate people - it happens fairly frequently in philadelphia that the trolleys are blocked by illegally parked cars. Cars also try to beat the trolleys at intersections and cause accidents all the time - which when the trolleys are old 50s/60s solid steel beasts - a modern car does not win that fight.

Re: China's e-buses dent oil demand more than electric cars do

#230

Post by eMSF » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 3:06 PM UTC

smcl wrote: post #173

VladimirGolovin wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No need to build and maintain the infrastructure (rail and overhead power lines.) The ability to navigate the road freely -- trolley buses often have trouble circumnavigating badly parked cars in their way, sometimes causing the driver to get out to reattach the "prongs" to the wires. Also, trams are somewhat prone to "tram jams" caused by one faulty streetcar blocking the railway. And they simply cannot get around a…

Other than the need to maintain rail + power lines, I think these issues are overblown. The badly parked car scenario sounds pretty horrendous in theory - one careless actor causes chaos for an entire city center! In my experience it simply doesn't happen - I think people just know how damaging it could be (and possibly how much trouble they would be in) that they pretty much have to be considerate and self-aware. Ho…

>In my experience it simply doesn't happen - I think people just know how damaging it could be (and possibly how much trouble they would be in) that they pretty much have to be considerate and self-aware.

That's not really the why, at least not here. The shortcomings of trams (including derailing and the inability to maneuver past stuck or badly parked cars) are handled by a 24h emergency crew dedicated for just that. I think they move on average less than one car per day, but those missions are much more frequent during wintertime.

Trams are much more prone to failure than buses.