|
Mar 21, 2023 | 12:59
91
 Originally Posted by fjlip
Every test ever done since 1975, calls for MORE than we apply/can afford.
Only one year, 1991 called for ZERO added N and it was correct. 60 bu wheat happened.
#1 CWRS worth less than $2
It is your team's job to provide information. It is yours to interpret and make the money.
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2023 | 13:01
92
Originally Posted by WiltonRanch
I have high calcium content 6” and down. Ph 8.2 down there. Top 6” 6.5 to 6.9. Using mesc on virtually every acre at maybe 5-9 lbs of sulphur depending if it a cereal or canola. Barley yields sucked here until I inadvertently did a side by side trial of urea/11-52 and urea/mesc. Same nitrogen and phosphorus levels but 20 bushels better with mesc blend. Tried again in 21’ on another field in the drought but barley was still in the 80’s. Last year didn’t use mesc and barley sucked. My bins are full of urea/mesc. Is it the safer nature of mesc vs 11-52 or is it the sulphur? I run stealth pr double shoot so separation is good and a 20# rate of actual p is really stuff all. So what’s going on? Im a cowboy hill farmer. My remedy is usually seed it to grass and alfalfa but can’t do that on every acre.
You mean MESZ from Mosaic?
Sorry, I leave the chemistry and theory to someone else. I just have to make decisions lol.
I think we are pushing rather old information and the ratios of the 4 macros more important. So wag possibly is the S. And the P right with N in same granule makes it easier to find. That could facilitate more P usage. Sounds good.
??
Last edited by blackpowder; Mar 21, 2023 at 13:34.
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2023 | 16:22
93
Originally Posted by chuckChuck
I soil test about 1/2 my fields every year. How about you?
We do every acre every year except the alfalfa
And then our agrologist tells us what to put
|
|
Mar 22, 2023 | 18:09
94
Sask budget.
1 billion surplus.
1st pic they show is a oil pump.
Not a EV charger.
So when oil is not used where is the $$$ going to come from?
|
|
|
Mar 23, 2023 | 07:06
95
I really don’t need to say much, headline says it all. 
|
|
|
Mar 23, 2023 | 07:55
96
"Germany's Transport Ministry sees no need to rush combustion engine phase-out deal with EU
Saying Germany needs a backup before agreeing to EU plans."
A lot of the enthusiasm has gone out of the believers .
Reality check?
G7 meeting coming up.
Will be a tough one to spin.
|
|
|
Mar 23, 2023 | 08:00
97
5% of Ford dealers have backed out of selling a minimum of 25 EV vehicles per yr..
|
|
|
Mar 23, 2023 | 08:56
98
Why does the govt to solicit votes, always turn to supply push policies that never work? Artificial demand is still artificial.
|
|
|
Mar 23, 2023 | 21:15
99
History repeats itself again…
Now a bail out????
Common sense sadly…. Not so common….
Cheers
|
|
|
Mar 24, 2023 | 07:59
100
Originally Posted by Partners
Sask budget.
1 billion surplus.
1st pic they show is a oil pump.
Not a EV charger.
So when oil is not used where is the $$$ going to come from?
So are you suggesting we should continue to use very inefficient gasoline ICE engines that only put 20% of the total fossil energy in to moving a vehicle forward, when EVs can transfer 80-90% of their energy for the same purpose?
Oil will have uses going forward, but burning it and wasting 80% in ICEs in a carbon emission constrained world is not a good use of it and can never be justified, just because we need government tax revenue from the oil industry.
Once we get through the transition to lower costs EVs, most consumers would happily put the massive efficiency gains of EVs in their own pocket, than give it to the oil companies who don't even cover all their cleanup costs and environmental damage during periods of high profitability.
Last edited by chuckChuck; Mar 24, 2023 at 08:14.
|
|
|
Mar 24, 2023 | 08:16
101
Question is where is Gov.going to get their $$$ from?
Tax the shit out of EV vehicles.
To support health care etc..
|
|
|
Mar 24, 2023 | 08:32
102
Oil and gas revenues will not dry up completely because oil has other uses than just for ICEs
Surely governments can figure out how to replace revenues from oil and gas especially since direct revenues are currently only 5%
Last edited by chuckChuck; Mar 24, 2023 at 08:46.
|
|
Mar 24, 2023 | 11:04
103
Yes, TAX EV when all are captive to it. See how smart Gov is?
Decreasing costs? BS, ever increasing raw materials cost due to scarcity, will cancel that and increase costs of EV.
Dream on.
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2023 | 02:10
104
Originally Posted by chuckChuck
Oil and gas revenues will not dry up completely because oil has other uses than just for ICEs
Surely governments can figure out how to replace revenues from oil and gas especially since direct revenues are currently only 5%
Chuck2, Saskatchewan like Alberta is considered a have province, therefore I believe Saskatchewan like Alberta would pay more to Ottawa in personal and corporate tax then it receives back in federal transfers. So your pie chart is quite laughable as Saskatchewan residents and businesses would have payed more than that to Ottawa in the first place.
Last edited by Hamloc; Mar 25, 2023 at 07:30.
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2023 | 07:26
105
Originally Posted by Hamloc
Chuck2, Saskatchewan like Alberta is considered a have province, therefore I believe Saskatchewan like Alberta would pay more to Ottawa in personal and corporate tax then it receives back in federal transfers. So your pie chart is quite laughable as Saskatchewan residents and business would have payed more than that to Ottawa in the first place.
And regardless, such figures are quite meaningless in reality. For example, Saudi Arabia calculates that oil at gas only account for less than 1/3 of their gdp. In reality, if you removed that revenue, the rest of those economic sectors would cease to exist. There would be no government programs, no retail sector etc. Same thing is true here of course. All of the spin-off economic benefits of the energy sector are counted separately as their own category.
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2023 | 08:35
106
So what industry or economy succeeds with the idea we shouldn't increase productivity by becoming more efficient - more output with less inputs.
ICEs are 20% efficient while EVs are 80-90% efficient.
80% of the energy of gasoline used for transportation is wasted because of the inefficiency of ICEs.
And it's wrong to assume that EVs will never come down in relative cost nor improve their technology.
We shouldn't keep using oil for transportation energy just because we need the tax revenue of the oil industry.
Governments can easily figure out how to find revenue from other sources.
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2023 | 08:42
107
Originally Posted by AlbertaFarmer5
And regardless, such figures are quite meaningless in reality. For example, Saudi Arabia calculates that oil at gas only account for less than 1/3 of their gdp. In reality, if you removed that revenue, the rest of those economic sectors would cease to exist. There would be no government programs, no retail sector etc. Same thing is true here of course. All of the spin-off economic benefits of the energy sector are counted separately as their own category.
Potash alone generates more direct revenue than oil and gas. And then there are other non renewable resource revenues.
Is potash going to cease to exist? I doubt it. Is agriculture going to cease to exist? What about mining? Nope.
Alberta is certainly more dependent and there will still be an oil industry for other uses.
And how will Crypto Polly stop the transition to EVs? Ontario is counting on their economic benefits.
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2023 | 10:19
108
Only works with Gov $billions$, try with market forces only...math is crap.
|
|
|
Mar 28, 2023 | 07:52
110
https://www.motortrend.com/news/evs-more-efficient-than-internal-combustion-engines/
Electric Vehicles Are Way, Way More Energy-Efficient Than Internal Combustion Vehicles
Say you drop $5 on a gallon of gas—only about $1 dollar's worth actually gets you moving in a traditional ICE vehicle.
Justin WestbrookWriterFile PhotoIllustratorPovi PullinenPhotographer
Aug 12, 2022
Out of the 8.9 million barrels of gasoline consumed daily in the U.S. on average, only 1.8 million gallons, or approximately 20 percent, actually propel an internal combustion vehicle forward. The other 80 percent is wasted on heat and parasitic auxiliary components that draw away energy. As the world begins its shift to EV proliferation, the good news is electric vehicles are far more energy efficient on the road.
A new set of graphics from Yale Climate Connections makes visualizing the efficiency gains of an EV over an ICE vehicle straightforward. Using data from fueleconomy.gov and the U.S. Energy Information Administration, these graphics break down the energy waste in your typical gas-powered car.
The vast majority of energy wasted in an ICE vehicle is through the heat the engine produces, which you can literally feel radiating from under the hood. About 5 percent is lost through parasitic engine components including the cooling system, which draws on the engine's own energy to help cool it down, about 4 percent is lost through the mechanical friction of the drivetrain and transmission components, and another 2 percent could be lost to auxiliary electrics like heated and powered seats, lights, and infotainment systems. In total, approximately 75 to 84 percent of the original gasoline's energy is lost.
Compare that to only 31-35 percent energy loss in the average electric vehicle (average EV battery size is about 63 kWh), before factoring in potential recuperation from energy regeneration. Its losses can be broken down into approximately 10 percent of the source energy from the grid lost in the charging process, 18 percent lost to the drivetrain motor components, up to 4 percent lost to auxiliary components, and another 3 percent lost solely from powertrain cooling and other vehicle systems.
Comparing the two, "the rough math pencils out to the energy equivalent of around 2 million barrels of gasoline per day, which is a substantial savings over the 8.9 million barrels currently used," according to Yale Climate Connections. But what about the power plants used to "refuel" those electric cars? Are they any more efficient than gas-powered cars? Well, yes. Much more efficient, in most cases.
"Even if the grid were entirely fueled by coal, 31% less energy would be needed to charge EVs than to fuel gasoline cars. If EVs were charged by natural gas, the total energy demand for highway transportation would fall by nearly half. Add in hydropower or other renewables, and the result gets even better, saving up to three-fourths of the energy currently used by gasoline-powered vehicles," according to Yale Climate Connections. Right now, all of that energy is getting lost mostly to heat. What a waste. For more facts and figures, read the full Yale Climate Connections report here.
|
|
|
Mar 28, 2023 | 07:53
111
https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2022/08/electrifying-transportation-reduces-emissions-and-saves-massive-amounts-of-energy/
Electrifying transportation reduces emissions AND saves massive amounts of energy
Electric vehicles are far more energy-efficient than traditional internal combustion vehicles.
Karin Kirk
by Karin Kirk August 7, 2022
|
|
|
Mar 28, 2023 | 08:25
112
Chuck2 an equivalent EV model of an ICE model costs more initially. The equivalent 2024 Chev Blazer EV to the 2023 ICE Blazer I bought is $10000 more. Insurance is higher. Plus the EV is projected to depreciate faster. So not cheaper to run.
The University Profs doing all the computer models are cut from the same cloth that tell me I should be on Covid shot #5 by now. Also the same people telling me that intermittent power sources like wind and solar are a technological advancement even though they require a third generation source for dependable output.
|
|
|
Mar 28, 2023 | 09:25
113
Did your new Lightning pickup come in yet Chuck? Sooner you get it the more you save?
|
|
|
Mar 28, 2023 | 10:53
114
Cause the price will never be cheaper, as the scarce minerals skyrocket due to demand.
EU passed a law to cancel ICE vehicles by 2035, plan ahead boys.
|
|
|
Mar 29, 2023 | 00:00
115
https://www.motortrend.com/news/evs-more-efficient-than-internal-combustion-engines/
Electric Vehicles Are Way, Way More Energy-Efficient Than Internal Combustion Vehicles
Say you drop $5 on a gallon of gas—only about $1 dollar's worth actually gets you moving in a traditional ICE vehicle.
Justin WestbrookWriterFile PhotoIllustratorPovi PullinenPhotographer
Aug 12, 2022
So, who gives a flying fu(k? We could also all drive some shit can like a smart car, and some people do, but most people want a decent comfortable car that is going to protect them or get them out of trouble if they are on an icy road or something like that.
In New Zealand where gas is $4.00/liter people still want to drive powerful cars or inefficient pickup trucks. So let people drive what they want to, if they think they can afford to, or need it to do a particular task.
|
|
|
Mar 29, 2023 | 13:12
116
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/implausibility-net-zero-carbon-energy-future-now-obvious
From article ….
|
|
|
Mar 29, 2023 | 14:21
117
There is intelligent life in the EU!
Chucky crying.
|
|
