The Electric Firetruck Acid Test

From the Toronto Sun, a note on a new fire truck in Vancouver. It’s electric.

“… the new e-truck will cost $300,000 more than a comparable diesel model, pump 40 per cent less water and have such a short range (30 km) because of its enormous weight that it will have to have backup diesel power in case it runs out of juice on the way to a blaze.”

It seems like an incredibly stupid purchase, guaranteed to get you booted out of office. Let’s see if it’s accurate. A “fact check” if you will.

The central question is, “Is it likely purchases of this nature will contribute significantly to saving us from the coming climate horror, or is it a vanity bonfire fueled by virtue signaling public officials?” We’re provisionally accepting the assumption of CO2 precipitated planetary catastrophe here, because it is a religious tenet for a goodly majority of Vancouverites… who elected the people who bought the truck. The virtue Vancouver public officials are signaling is sacrosanct.

Still, some questions naturally follow (though I doubt Vancouver asked them).

How much emitted CO2 will it prevent? Is there data about life cycle carbon emissions for EV vs ICE (internal combustion engines)?

There is, and Bjorn Lomborg references a comprehensive set of data at the International Energy Agency in a WSJ article. Policies Pushing Electric Vehicles Show Why Few People Want One:

Making batteries for electric cars also requires a massive amount of energy, mostly from burning coal in China. Add it all up and the International Energy Agency estimates that an electric car emits a little less than half as much CO2 as a gasoline-powered one.

The climate effect of our electric-car efforts in the 2020s will be trivial. If every country achieved its stated ambitious electric-vehicle targets by 2030, the world would save 231 million tons of CO2 emissions. Plugging these savings into the standard United Nations Climate Panel model, that comes to a reduction of 0.0002 degree Fahrenheit by the end of the century.

Vehicle electrification is having a very small impact on future climate. And an electric firetruck’s contribution to CO2 reduction is proportionally much less than a car’s. A firetruck is driven very few miles compared to a car, and since driving is where the emissions are actually saved an electric firetruck is CO2 reduction theater. A better use of well over a million dollars would have have been replacement of every city car with an EV. Well, except for public safety vehicles like police cars. They’d have to be hybrids if they were appropriate to their mission.

As the article alludes, the firetruck needs diesel backup. Unsurprisingly, it’s an OEM option. If we look at the truck specs we can see whether that’s really optional; get some indication about whether the range is only 30 kilometers; and gain some insight into how well the truck can pump water once it gets to the fire.

The truck is an Austrian made Rosenbauer RT, and there is a claim here that it can go 100 kilometers, round trip. That would be 60 miles.

“The system is set to be recharged incredibly quickly and can power the truck for 100 km of driving; Moore notes that in Vancouver they usually only drive five to 10 km, and never anywhere near 100 km. And if they do need power for an extended period of time there is a range extender, a 350 hp diesel engine from BMW which can refill the batteries faster than driving depletes them. Using that it can go another 300 to 400 km.”

No word on what ‘incredibly quickly’ means, but with a dedicated 350 HP Beamer diesel, it doesn’t matter. Of course, that makes it a hybrid, not an EV.

The range discrepancy might be explained by the fact that there are options for 1 or 2 50KW hour battery packs, and how far it can go/how long it can pump will vary depending on the outside temperature.

On the pumping question we have this:

With the battery packs at 100% of charge, the water pump can work continuously for one hour at 528 gpm until the charge falls to 20%. When the turbodiesel engine kicks in, the truck can keep pumping water for five hours more.

With 2 battery packs then, it can pump for an hour. Let’s assume 80% of that is available given the need to drive to and from the fire. That’s 48 minutes. That’s maybe 24 minutes with a single battery pack.

It seems that each truck would have to be equipped with the Beamer diesel in order to fulfill a mission of public safety. Practically, that means it’s a hybrid, not an EV. The carbon emissions it does save? At best, that’s for an hour of operation per fire. But then it has to be recharged…

Beyond the base emission scenario there are carbon questions related to a firetruck’s job.

Are the batteries in Vancouver’s new truck kept up solely by a combination of dedicated windmills, solar panels, and hydro power? If not, there is a carbon cost to having it sit in the firehouse.

Is there additional carbon generated by fires that will burn longer, or spread, with less water being delivered? Is the cost of increased property damage considered? What about increased danger to life and limb?

The laser focus on CO2 emissions is the same error similar myopic apparatchiks made with the CCP virus. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ELSE MATTERS but flattening the curve. Pathetic.

So, right in line with the logic behind mandating electric vehicles before we have the means of powering them. Ref: California, where internal combustion engine vehicles were banned by 2035 just a few days before EV owners were asked not to charge their EVs due to threats of rolling blackouts.

Get back to me when you have affordable electricity infrastructure in place. You’ll need nukes.

The existential threat of the Perfumed Princes

Our President has lately been fear mongering about climate change as “a clear and present danger.” A “threat to national security.”

He wouldn’t recognize such a threat even if his handlers wrote it on his mentalprompter. And stamped it on his palm with a branding iron.

He seeks to invoke emergency powers to accomplish AOC’s Green New Deal. That ‘deal’ our Federal legislators will not countenance.

Joe Biden is valorizing higher energy costs (and the consequent disproportionate suffering from food and goods shortages, employment shrinkage, and lessened government ability to respond)… as a defense of democracy.

He is playing the race/transphobe/climate-catastrophe cards all at once.

‘Climate change’ is the magic intersectional trump card – it’s claimed to disproportionately affect people of color, the 51% of our people who are actually female, the shrinking proportion of our population who are children. A group the President has abused in person, over decades, with his sniffing fetish; and now generally via his promotion of puberty blockers.

An actual threat to national security posed by the President’s governance (and I use the term loosely) is the cadre of Perfumed Princes in the Pentagon

General Mark “Thoroughly Modern” Milley is the Patchouli poster child for those military CNN gig seeking, poseurs, wokies, stalwarts the President encourages to focus on proper pronoun usage, critical theory, and free transgender transition surgery for service members. If you missed the ‘member’ pun, assume it wasn’t intended.

Salon, a lefty rag, noticed the trend as long as long ago as 1999:
How the grunts are betrayed by the U.S. Army’s “perfumed princes”

Our ability to maintain a volunteer military has suffered since.

America’s woke Army is facing a recruiting nightmare

No one wants to join the military anymore

US Army Abandons Recruitment Goals, But Not Its Woke Policies

The Great American Military Rebrand

The Next Republican President Must Fix the Military First

Priorities: U.S. Military Base Is Hosting a Drag Show

West Point is going woke, alumnus warns

That is all.

Malinformation

Hunter Biden’s laptop turns out to be exactly what the New York Post reported it to be. Exactly what presidential candidate Biden denied it to be.

Accurate, well researched reporting got the NYP blocked on Twitter and Facebook.

But that’s just one recent Prog conspiracy identified. Let us not forget these longer running scams:
Wage gap.
Recycling.
Males Pretending to be Females.

A review:

‘Equal Pay Day’ this year is March 15 — the next ‘Equal Occupational Fatality Day’ won’t be until April 23, 2032

America Finally Admits Recycling Doesn’t Work

Aannd… Progs argue that this biological male competing athletically with biological females is the only “fair” thing to do. “Lia” has no advantage from having gone through puberty as a male…

You gonna believe us or your lying eyes?

This is a human with male chomosomes and male genitalia who insists on showering with women. Women he forces to use his anti-scientific pronouns. We used to know this by the term “abuse.”

We should regard the “wage gap” canard, all the Green Ordeal virtue signaling, and the chromosome denialists in the same light as Hunter’s laptop.

Gaslighting

Gaslighting is an emotionally-abusive strategy that causes someone to question their feelings, thoughts, and sanity. Someone who employs gaslighting tries to convince the other that their own perception of reality is wrong. The purpose of this is to convince the person being gaslit that they can’t trust their own instincts or thoughts. A gaslighter may try to convince you that your memories are incorrect, that you overreact to situations, or that something is “all in your head.” They may then try to convince you that their version of events is the truth.

In 2008, future Obama administration Secretary of Energy Steven Chu shared his vision for American energy policy:

“Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.”

In the month before the Obama administration assumed office, the average price for a gallon of gasoline in the United States was $1.59. This week, [April 1, 2012] the price of gasoline has climbed to $3.79.

The Biden administration resumed Obama’s sabotage of our domestic oil and gas producers on day one. The average price for gasoline at the end of Biden’s first week of office was $2.39 a gallon. Prices have now hit above $4.

The Democrats, having pummeled investment in oil and gas extraction, pretend that production can be flipped like a light switch. Jen Psaki tells us there are “9,000 leases not being exercised.” This may be true, but it is entirely unrelated to the fact the United States is no longer energy independent. How does that even happen in under 12 months?

Leases not in use is a factoid servicing a Big Lie.

A friend wrote:

“A lease is but one element necessary to overcome to get oil to market: “Copious permitting paperwork over a period of months or years, financing from banks and investors being pressured to disinvest, means of getting the crude to refineries, refining capacity, taxes that threaten return on capital, and legal challenges.”

That’s a great summary of this must read article:
In-depth analysis debunks Biden admin blaming oil companies for not developing 9000 leases – Feds ‘spent over a year making it more difficult’ to drill & environmentalists ‘constantly sue to stop any development’

With Putin’s invasion of Ukraine the plot has gotten out of hand for the President. So, he complains that the oil and gas producers aren’t doing enough. Putin provides Democrats more cover for the real Green Ordeal objective, described masterfully in this excerpt from a book review by Peter W. Wood of Bewilderment, a novel by Richard Powers: RTWT.

[T]he real endgame is a remnant human population on a vegan diet perhaps supplemented with insects; the restoration of Earth’s landmass to animal-friendly wilderness; and small-scale cooperative (socialist) societies living in harmony with nature. Less utopian versions of this vision are available, but properly understood, all of them rule out modern life as we know it. People like Biden don’t take any of that seriously. Their interest is in the political game, not the endgame, but it is important to understand the premises and the motives of the activists who are driving the politics. They may never get their utopia, but they can cause profound misery in their attempts to reach it. And we are seeing some of that now.

Solyndrafication

Jennifer Granholm is highly experienced at gamifying green giveaways. She has acquired lots of badges, awards, stickers, and trophies – and now she’s leveled up.

Her latest accomplishment is the “If you fail, just do the same thing again. Only bigger,” badge, with “Fed cluster.” It grants the power to reuse your old speeches just by changing a few numbers.

Biden Administration Rolls Out $3 Billion EV Battery Program

“As electric cars and trucks continue to grow in popularity within the United States and around the world, we must seize the chance to make advanced batteries — the heart of this growing industry — right here at home,” Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm said in a statement. “With funding from Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, we’re making it possible to establish a thriving battery supply chain in the United States…

But the White House acknowledged that China controls an “outsized share” of global mineral refining capacity in a supply chain report published in June. Mineral refining is a key component for renewable energy technology including battery manufacturing.”

Compare that announcement with this one from 2010:

Our first clue should have been that they didn’t name it ‘MichiganWatt’ – December 9, 2010.

Despite bad reviews of ethanol and an unrequited flirtation with windmills, the Governor thinks she has a clue about THE NEXT BIG THING:

“In Michigan, we are trying our own version of this race — focused on the lithium-ion advanced battery for electric cars, a high-tech product previously manufactured almost exclusively in Asia.

We offered irresistible state tax incentives for manufacturers of “advanced energy storage.” We pancaked our state incentives on top of the competitive federal Department of Energy grants to advanced-battery companies and suppliers. We also created robust public-private partnerships.”

Her reasoning was that if we gave A123 $100 million it would make them a success. What it did was encourage bad business decisions. “Irresistible tax incentives,” are so hard to resist you don’t worry about business plans.

That mention of ethanol? It was the previous BIG THING. Granholm had just watched the bankruptcy of her earlier irresistibly incentivized green boondoggle – $20 million for an ethanol plant that never got built.

That bright future for batteries in Michigan didn’t work out either.

One of the reasons China has an outsized share of battery manufacturing is because Jennifer Granholm hand picked winner went bankrupt. And then the Chinese bought it for pennies.

And the winner the statists picked is… China – August 13, 2012.

A123 has ripped off the American taxpayer for $249 million in grants from the U.S. Department of Energy. It was one of former governor Granholm’s favorite picks, to the tune of $100 million. The Chinese are grateful, I suppose, for taxpayer assistance while A123’s stock dropped from $26.00 to $0.82. Without said assistance, A123 might have been gone before they could buy it. Worse yet, from Obama’s point of view, Bain Capital might have turned it around.

China Syndrome

Think again, sweetie. The UK is running out of coal.
UK Readying New Law Mandating Home EV Chargers Be Shut Down During Peak Hours

Turns out the China Syndrome is coal fired power plants, not the nuclear plant meltdown the Greens told us it was. #Greenfail.

“In 2019, 58 percent of the country’s total energy consumption came from coal, which helps explain why China accounts for 28 percent of all global CO2 emissions.”

And it’s going to get worse for the warm mongers. China Dominates 2020 Coal Plant Development

The Happerning

Hillsdale College – National Leadership Symposium.
Address by William Happer,
Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics, Emeritus – Princeton
How to Think About Climate Change
56 minutes (1.25 speed works)

That link is to Watt’s Up With That? because the YouTube version has a “Climate Change” “fact check” disclaimer from WikiTedia appended, and I cannot find the lecture on Hillsdale’s site. WUWT deserves a hat tip, in any case.

On the off chance that you won’t autonomically watch the whole thing based on my recommendation, at least check this 2 minutes out.

It’s the next to last question of the Q&A. It’s a core question. Any catastrophist who watches this, if they have half a clue about their own position, will bring it up. If they don’t have that clue, they’re likely to make some ad hominem objection. You’ve been warned.

Happer set the stage for how one must think about CO2 “forcing” to design climate models politically acceptable to the IPCC, but did not address it in his lecture.

I noted the rigor of those IPCC models, and the quality of the data, in December 2009: Prometheus unbound

All the models admit that CO2 alone CANNOT cause the predicted apocalypse. So, CO2 must have secondary catastrophic consequences. All the models take this as given.

It’s the “forcing” assumption: A little bit of warming from CO2 will cause increases in water vapor (by orders of magnitude the most important greenhouse gas). Atmospheric carbon dioxide iteratively “forces” more and more water vapor – creating a feedback loop that fries the planet.

Clouds are part of that “water cycle.” But they aren’t part of the modeling. The modeling that depends on a particular prediction about the water cycle: NASA: We Can’t Model Clouds, So Climate Model Projections Are 100x Less Accurate [than is required for policy decisions]

“Because the uncertainties are so pervasive, NASA concludes that “today’s models must be improved by about a hundredfold in accuracy” if we wish to make climate projections.”

Clouds. They cannot say within 1% certainty that the models’ “forcing” policies of immiseration upon us can be used to support those policies.

TOC noted this 15 years ago.
Science tempers fears on climate change
Posted on September 4, 2006
The link in that has rotted, but I’m sure a copy of the Kyoto ‘Treaty’ is out there on the InterTubes.

I’ve looked at clouds from no sides now…
Posted on June 30, 2007
The first link in that has rotted, but the second one has not. Note “water cycle” – of which clouds are but one phenomenon unknown to IPCC “science.” That’s where the title of the post came from.