Category: misinform

  • The EV Hurricane Disaster: a 1-sided scenario, part 2

    Read  The
    EV Hurricane Disaster: a 1-sided scenario
    on our sister blog
    ScenarioPlans.com (also DelphiPlan.com). The EV disaster article analyzes a viral email
    that talks about how horrible it will be when a hurricane is storming into a
    population center and the electric vehicles are all stuck on the road with no
    possibility for charging.

    The unauthored and undated email makes the implied conclusion
    that we shouldn’t go to EVs because they could be problematic in a disaster, stuck in a mass exodus from a hurricane with dying batteries and no place to charge.

    There are at least three scenarios for analysis in that
    ScenarioPlans article (part 1). One is related to disaster planning related to
    EVs. Two is related to insisting on comparisons with “business as usual”
    comparisons so the non-sustainable and broken business models do not somehow
    become the gold standard. Three is combating bias and taking away the power
    from misinformation.

    It would be interesting to work through the scenario of a
    future with mostly EVs. That may be at best 30 years from now because of the
    time to turn over the existing internal combustion (ICE) fleet of vehicles. The
    average age of cars on road is currently 11 years.  In 2022 there will probably be only 5% new electric.
    It will take decades, under any EV adoption rate for EVs to overtake ICE
    machines.

    You first have to envision what the infrastructure will be
    in the future. (This, as we currently are building lots of large gas stations
    for gas and diesel, phasing out the small gas stations.) It would be reasonable
    to assume that all gas stations would start to add in charging stations in a few
    years.

    But with millions of people and businesses having charging stations,
    there should be no reason that those charging locations could not be
    incorporated to the charging grid options.  If the businesses and homes had solar (and
    battery backup) the resilience could be impressive. With solar and wind, many
    areas could have plenty of electricity for personal and commercial EV use
    indefinitely. No oil tankers needed.

    I’m thinking of kind of an Air B&B for charging, maybe
    and Air Charge & Go (Air C&G). Any superstore or parking lot with
    charging stations could offer to charge (pun intended) the mass exodus of EVs.

    Of course, we might be trying to find a solution to a
    problem that does not exist. In 30 years, the batteries and the charging
    technology will be much better. So, it may only take 5 to 10 minutes to charge
    (say 70%), not that much longer than it takes a car to get gas. And
    transporting gas around during disasters has its own set of problems.

    About 8% to 10% of the world’s economy is embedded directly
    and indirectly in energy, most of which is fossil fuels. All this money funds
    countries that are ruthless and unfriendly to us, as well as companies that
    have generally demonstrated a disregard for people, society, and the
    environment. Plus, fossil fuels are unsustainable. Period. Somehow, we have
    come to think of the broken business model of fossil fuels as “normal”. If it
    is not sustainable, then “business as usual” is not a viable option; yet in
    scenario planning, you should probably consider fossil fuels the “base case”.
    Shell has been a leader in scenario planning, including the energy future
    (check out Scenarios
    and The Energy Future from Shell
    ).

    Recession has winners and losers, destructive innovation.
    An energy revolution will have winners and losers. There will be lots and
    lots of good paying jobs (in hydro, wind and solar). But there will be ongoing
    pain to the fossil fuel economy. Workers in mines and on rigs will have to
    transition. Investors will lose money as oil companies go out of business.
    Governments will have to pick up the expenses of hundreds of years of mines,
    pipes, refineries, and tanks. Orphaned wells are already a huge problem; many,  if not most, are leaking or will leak in the
    future.

    Of course, fear and uncertainty is actually the point of
    many of the misinformation initiatives. Imagine what happens to Russia, Saudi
    Arabia and oil companies when (not if) we get off of our addition to oil. Russia
    could no longer do as much mischief around the world when the major source of
    government funding (oil exports) dries up. Iran’s funding for nuclear weapons
    and terrorism would dry up… etc…

    So, when a one-sided meme or email comes flittering across
    your screen that trashes a renewable, ask them where is the other half of the
    discussion. No one would send out only one side of a discussion or a one-sided
    debate. And certainly no one would want to perpetuate one-sided propaganda? Right?
    !:-)

    #ScenarioPlans #BrokenBaseCase #Sustainability #EVs #100RE

  • Wikipedia founder to fight fake news with new WikiTribune site

    Wikipedia founder to fight fake news with new Wikitribune site | Technology | The Guardian:
    Way to go Jimmy! You will now Jimmy Wales a founder of Wikipedia, that GREAT crowd sourcing information repository in the sky.
    It is unclear when WikiTribune will actually launch. More than 10,000 subscribers agreed, in advance, to pay a monthly fee for this quality news. You can still join up at www.WikiTribune.com and encourage the effort.
    It seems that using crowds, we can attack bogus news and untruths!  Jimmy thinks so, and a lot of other people do too.
    The news is broken in soooo many ways, and the WikiTRIBUNE approach may be the single best way to fix the news. Or at least partially fix it.
    Fact-based journalism with a Wikipedia twist, the site that brings you the world’s largest ‘pedia.
    Or we can continue to perpetuate the junk news, fake news, and big-advertiser skewed news.
    It is a free subscription, actually, but if you pay a little for the monthly subscription, it will be a sustainable source of real, and unbiased news.
    And, you too, can become an author. And you too can become an editor.
    I assume this will work much like the articles in Wikipedia that have tighter controls. Where bias is noted and flagged, and comments that are unsupported have prominent warnings like[citation needed].

    I’ve long thought that we should be able to utilize technology to clobber the bad, bogus and fake news, while promoting high-quality, fact-based news. Wikipedia has been great, but it works best for historical facts, science and current popular facts/figures. Projections and commentary, not so much so. 
    In the world of the information cocoon, and all people can create their own content, news has only gotten worse and worse.
    Maybe, just maybe, WikiTribune is a way to overshoot the bots and the media silos and the paid information propaganda.  This could bring us back to discussing the full range of facts at one time, not just the left or the right half.
    Maybe. Gotta hope. 
    The Skimm. Here’s another place to find actual, real live news summaries, with a twist. This is daily snippets, or the Daily SKIMM of the news, visit http://www.theskimm.com/. This is short, sweet and fun presentation of the news. Couple ways to read the Daily Skimm, but I get it in my email every day. It is actually targeted toward young(er) urban women, say 22 to 34. Short, sweet, and very unbiased. For politics it says something like: well the DEMs say this, and the GOP want this, but here is what will probably happen. This is great because you don’t have to read where the left lies, and the right lies, and then guess what’s a pretty accurate truthful spot in the middle.

    Pretty funny reading stuff that the youth will pick up on, but the older crowd will probably miss.
    Paid advertising. Full disclosure as to ownership conflicts, appears related to adds and articles.
    ‘via Blog this’

  • Why are so many Americans skeptical about climate change? A study offers a surprising answer. – The Washington Post

    Why are so many Americans skeptical about climate change? A study offers a surprising answer. – The Washington Post:

    So lots of money used to confuse and misinform can go a long way if you want to make sure that no one knows the truth and no meaningful action is taken.

    That brings us to Super PACs. They mostly lie, and always obfuscate the issues. Since there’s no one responsible, they are free to throw mud and tar at will and at random.

    Don’t see how anything could go wrong with the political engines. Do you?

    Misinform and misdirection works.
    We all need to realize that and start propagating truths, not lies. The tools are at our fingertips (and keyboards).

    ‘via Blog this’