• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Sustainable Fuels

There are industrial and remote areas where diesel will be the best option for a long time to come.

Remote logging, short term mining and drilling operations like water wells come to mind. Areas where the infrastructure required for E or whatever wouldn't be required after the job.
It is easier for first world nations to have a portable solution brought on site for recharge.

Driving in a truckload of diesel has worked for every military or construction crew for 90 years. A simple solution to a problem. Job done and no specialized equipment brought in.

Contractors in Mexico will subcontract local businesses in the area to get heavy equipment on site rather than move thier own across five states for a two month job.
They have no incentives to invest in all new cutting edge sustainable fuel equipment beyond biodiesel.
Moving and maintaining a full fleet of alternative fuel equipment plus a crew is much more costly. Just moving in on site an office and a small management team for the job is much more profitable.

Money talks, it drives all decisions. Make alternative fuels cheaper than the current business model.
 
ahhell said:
I have a hard time seeing how they get the deer home on a back unless they leave most of it in the forest.
Click to expand...
I haven't done it or gone with them when they go hunting. But I do know they do it.
 
There's an even funnier image. I guy on a bike with one of those trailers meant for kids but with a deer in it. Or one of those cargo bikes, with a deer in it. Any rate, I'm moderately jealous that acbytesla gets to see this and I don't.

Side, note, my city gives folks a couple of hundred bucks to by e bikes. I assume it's because they would supplant a car. I'm unconvinced and really seems like a bit of a subsidy to the mostly upper middle class. E-bikes tend to cost a bit more than a few hundred bucks. But hey, I've got an ebike!
 
8enotto said:
There are industrial and remote areas where diesel will be the best option for a long time to come.

Remote logging, short term mining and drilling operations like water wells come to mind. Areas where the infrastructure required for E or whatever wouldn't be required after the job.
It is easier for first world nations to have a portable solution brought on site for recharge.

Driving in a truckload of diesel has worked for every military or construction crew for 90 years. A simple solution to a problem. Job done and no specialized equipment brought in.

Contractors in Mexico will subcontract local businesses in the area to get heavy equipment on site rather than move thier own across five states for a two month job.
They have no incentives to invest in all new cutting edge sustainable fuel equipment beyond biodiesel.
Moving and maintaining a full fleet of alternative fuel equipment plus a crew is much more costly. Just moving in on site an office and a small management team for the job is much more profitable.

Money talks, it drives all decisions. Make alternative fuels cheaper than the current business model.
Click to expand...

I think you're right as regards the present-day situation, but I wouldn't be too sure in the medium to long term. ICE-based technology is mature, and not getting significantly better any time soon or ever. Electricity-based technology, in this area, is new and developing fast. The massive torque an electric motor can put out is a significant advantage in this sort of work. The relative simplicity of an electric motor compared to a combustion engine, with the consequent savings in maintenance and fewer breakdowns is also an advantage. The issue is, how do you get the electricity (in sufficient quantities) to remote sites, and sometimes only temporarily?

I don't know, but I'll bet someone is working on it. It seems to me that it may be an easier problem to solve than the "alternative fuels" one. The fact that something has worked for 90 years is no guarantee that it will continue to be the best solution for the next 90 years. On the contrary, it's far more likely that it's a technology ripe to be superseded by something more modern.
 
8enotto said:
There are industrial and remote areas where diesel will be the best option for a long time to come.

Remote logging...
Click to expand...
The best option might be to not cut down those trees.
8enotto said:
Driving in a truckload of diesel has worked for every military or construction crew for 90 years. A simple solution to a problem. Job done and no specialized equipment brought in.
Click to expand...
And before that steam engines did the job. Most of New Zealand's native forest was destroyed milled using them.
8enotto said:
Contractors in Mexico will subcontract local businesses in the area to get heavy equipment on site rather than move thier own across five states for a two month job.
They have no incentives to invest in all new cutting edge sustainable fuel equipment beyond biodiesel.
Moving and maintaining a full fleet of alternative fuel equipment plus a crew is much more costly. Just moving in on site an office and a small management team for the job is much more profitable.
Click to expand...
Would it still be more profitable if diesel was 5 times the price? That's what it should be to pay for scrubbing the CO2 it produces out of the atmosphere. Contractors are making a profit because externalities aren't accounted for. They are effectively stealing from us because we have to pay for the damage they are doing.

BTW biofuels are nowhere near carbon-neutral. According to this study in 2016 of biofuel production in the US, the CO2 taken up by the growth of the biofuel crops canceled out only 37% of the emissions related to its production and use. If you take into account the extra land use it gets even worse.

But renewables can be used to power logging operations.
World’s First Fully Electric Timber Truck with Crane
The world’s first fully electric logging truck, equipped with a working crane, is now on road- with the multi-year Swedish project a major step towards decarbonising the carbon-intensive forest-to-terminal transport process... the new truck follows in the footsteps of an earlier model that has, for two years, successfully hauled logs between a terminal and SCA’s Obbola paper mill... the new 80-tonne vehicle has been rolled out after years of collaboration between Scania, one of the world’s leading truck and bus manufacturers, and SCA, Europe’s largest private logging company – which is now pushing to make the total supply chain for timber products fossil-free.
Click to expand...

8enotto said:
Money talks, it drives all decisions. Make alternative fuels cheaper than the current business model.
Click to expand...
But businesses are run by people, who don't always make the best decisions. Often they avoid change even though it would make the business more profitable, because change means stress and uncertainty. Their current system is working OK so why take a risk? Money often doesn't talk loud enough.

But you are right about one thing, it will be a long time before all diesel powered machinery goes away. And that's OK. We should be focusing on the areas with greatest potential for improvement, where our efforts will have the most effect. Tropical deforestation contributes about 20% of global GHG emissions. We need to stop doing that. Passenger airline flights contribute ~2%. Flights made by 'the rich' (who travel business class) account for ~1%. I don't know the contrubution from Mexican contractors, but I bet it's much less than 1%. These industries should be doing what they can too of course, but it's not a priority.
 
To make electricity remotely you need something to spin a generator. Like maybe a big diesel engine or possibly a turbine running on some alternative fuel.
One is tried and true, the other has yet to be implemented. Either way a fuel and generator need to be brought in and set up to charge Evehicles daily.

Either solution has reduced emissions than many diesels running a 12 hour shift.
It may be a good interim solution until a zero emissions idea comes into use.

The real problem is who is going to invest in the technology early on from electric powered excavators to the generator unit. It's risky and expensive to innovate. What extremes it can operate in must be considered. Especially when parts are very specific and hundreds of miles distant.
Parts for a Caterpillar diesel may be available much easier and faster. At least early on.

Everything breaks, speed and ease of repair are key to deadlines and profits. Eco brownie points aren't the same as big profits to large corporations.

Now if Cat or other makers were to retrofit E power units into an established chassis that could take out some of the risk.
The future has yet to be seen.
 
RogerR, trees have a limited healthy lifespan in 2nd growth forests. Harvesting them is just like a crop on a farm.

It's just a 20 year cycle as opposed to yearly. Near all of them are managed very carefully.
 
8enotto said:
RogerR, trees have a limited healthy lifespan in 2nd growth forests. Harvesting them is just like a crop on a farm.

It's just a 20 year cycle as opposed to yearly. Near all of them are managed very carefully.
Click to expand...
More like 40 to 100 years. I live in Weyerhauser territory in Washington State. Half the people I know around here work in the forests or the mills. Most common timber grown for lumber is douglas fir and western hemlock. But they also grow different varieties of cedar, pine, spruce and alder. Almost no timber younger than 40 years is harvested.

And yes, they are heavily managed.
 
A friend with some acreage said his was thinned about every 20 years, all pines for paper mills.
 
The fuel for EVs can come from solar cells. Then batteries can be recharged during the day and swapped for the dead batteries from the trucks. Then there will be no need to import fuel into a remote area. This is an ideal solution where the location is remote and somewhere between 45N and 45S and outside of that too.
 
Solar tends to hit limits in overcast areas, dusty , snow or winter conditions. Extreme cold also affects a solar array.

A generator can be at 100% output charging day or night in most any conditions. Its also smaller to move onto the site. No company would risk weather related reasons shutting down equipment.
College student idealism vs contract deadlines and profit margins has a clear winner. At least right now.

Solar technology has a ways to go to meet some demands. Right now stationary arrays are huge if they meet big demands.
 
That's why I said that you were almost certainly right as regards the present situation. However, I would caution against assuming this will continue even in the medium term. People will be working on this, and it's quite startling what a combination of solar and wind can achieve. (It's also quite startling how much solar panel output increases in cold temperatures, but that's by the by.)

Any technology that has "worked well for 90 years" is a great bet to be on its last legs and about to be superseded.
 
8enotto said:
Solar tends to hit limits in overcast areas, dusty , snow or winter conditions. Extreme cold also affects a solar array.

A generator can be at 100% output charging day or night in most any conditions. Its also smaller to move onto the site. No company would risk weather related reasons shutting down equipment.
College student idealism vs contract deadlines and profit margins has a clear winner. At least right now.

Solar technology has a ways to go to meet some demands. Right now stationary arrays are huge if they meet big demands.
Click to expand...
Be careful which denier you quote.

Cold does 'affect' solar panels, it makes them work better.

Overheating makes panels less efficient.
 
I am all for new technology replacing old and combustion based current technology.

That said even in my microcosm of things I need gasoline mowers and trimmers. I can't afford the professional level battery stuff yet.
I hope to replace what I have with battery powered when it wears out.
Right now it's 5X the price in my market, if I can find it.

Yet I am restoring a 4500 peso two stroke pro level trimmer back to life for less than 1000 pesos. Not exactly going the right direction. But it's affordable. The practical will usually beat the ideal .
 
novaphile said:
Be careful which denier you quote.

Cold does 'affect' solar panels, it makes them work better.

Overheating makes panels less efficient.
Click to expand...
I quote no one. Deniers or otherwise.
I am not fully up to date on all solar cell types but I do know it's getting better every year.

I also want it to become a thing anyone could put on thier home. I want it already.
In my area the ones that perform better in hot climates would be ideal.
 
8enotto said:
Solar tends to hit limits in overcast areas, dusty , snow or winter conditions. Extreme cold also affects a solar array.
Click to expand...
I have to kind of refute this. Snow, overcast skies, dust or anything that obstructs light negatively affects electricity generation. What really doesn't is extreme cold.

Cold temperatures actually increase the efficiency of photovoltaic (PV) cells by reducing electrical resistance and improving voltage output,
8enotto said:
A generator can be at 100% output charging day or night in most any conditions. Its also smaller to move onto the site. No company would risk weather related reasons shutting down equipment.
College student idealism vs contract deadlines and profit margins has a clear winner. At least right now.

Solar technology has a ways to go to meet some demands. Right now stationary arrays are huge if they meet big demands.
Click to expand...
There are limits to solar. But I'm afraid you have exaggerated them. I live off grid. I generate all the electricity I need and then some nine to ten months of the year with solar. And I live in Western Washington where cloudy and overcast skies are common, particularly in the winter.
It doesn't make sense for me to buy an EV just yet. The closest commercial charging station is 15 miles away. And a Tesla super charger is 35 miles away. But the day when it does is coming fast.

It's all about electricity storage. Which is getting cheaper and cheaper. For thirty years I've been listening to the right wing bashing solar. But I've watched PV solar go from costing $110 a watt in 1975 to $.20 a watt in 2015. And batteries keep getting cheaper and cheaper as well. The fossil fuel companies are terrified. Their ability to own the energy market has been falling apart.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom