More Inconvenient Truth about Electric Vehicles

[79ford]

Originally Posted by BlackHeart

Comparisons that start with such a strong bias to getting the answer they want.........

So.......lets look at what you conveniently left out;
1) Electrical producing turbines are not 100% efficient.
2) The heating of water to steam is not 100% efficient
3) Transmission of electricity through powerlines has resistance that reduces efficiency
4) All that electrical infrastructure needs energy consumption to maintain it.
5) Batteries are a consumable in EVs and its take energy to make them.

To think that "ZAP", carbon free electricity results and an EV sudden has no carbon footprint and ignoring their total massive energy consumption is pure fantasy analysis. If you want a belief system with religious overtones, then the EV dream is for you. Pretending this belief is fact versus actually doing an unbiased analysis of the true energy cycles/costs is foolishness.

I always have a few question for the EV believers and none can stand answering them, nor can they, because they have conveniently ignored them.
Here goes.

Whats the carbon foot print of hydroelectric? (currently the brainless mantra is zero)

What is the biggest cost in building a hydroelectic dam.

What is the carbon footprint of that cost item?

Whats the carbon footprint effect of the reservior.

Once we covert a substantial number of vehicles to EVs how does the govt replace the massive amount of fuel taxes it current uses to pay for roads and infrastructure AND for the EV buyer rebates?? (its going to have to be a new energy tax and its going to cost)

So if you look at the cost of electricity and the cost of fossil fuel without tax, would that not be the fair comparison to use in the (near/distant depending on your forecasts) the future you're trying to achieve? (if there is no fuel tax govt income to pay for roads, its going to have to be added on to EV electricity eventually)

So if in the future we go from the current fuel taxes with carbon taxes to a carbon tax on electricity (supported by the concept that eventually the govt WILL let the "full carbon impact of electricity" shoe drop when its tax coffers are dwindling) .......want to guess how much that will have to be?

AND after answering all of these truthfully, you think your life/finances are going to be better off, replacing batteries every 5 years and paying for much more expensive EVs and the needed massive carbon taxes??

Its a zero sum poker game, with the govt always taking its cut of every hand (and even cheating a bit on that).

You do realize oil production utilizes tonnes of electricity and natural gas right? They also use natural gas to heat boilers that make steam which is combined with natural has to strip out the hydrogen to desulpherize fuel in refinery units that use tonnes of natural gas to heat diesel/gasoline before adding hydrogen to 'hydrotreat fuel right? Lol, these diesel stream are distilled by using tonnes of electricty to pump oil, tonnes of nat gas to heat the oil.


Oh yeah you got to mine the oil in some cases before upgrading the bitumin into oil which uses hundreds and hundreds of megawatts of electricity......


You need electric pumps to pump oil thousands of miles to refiners, gas stations run on lelectricuty and require hydro dams, gas turbines, etc etc.



Dont play like oil exists in some fantasy world and pours out of the heavens into your gas tank without using an amazing amount of resources

[Don_Parsons]

The infrastructure for Motor City is in place, one would think that it won't change till fossil fuel costs rise to $9 or $10 liter.
Even then, today's new cars are pulling off some out standing fuel mileage. Today's fossil fuel units are cheap to build, buy, maintain, and throw away.

$12 to $17 G for a frugal sewing machine car that gets better then 40 mpg.

If it last for 5, 7, 10 or more years, then the wallet remains thick.

We can only guess that if EV units start showing up, the over all costs of electricy "could" incress in price to make up for the demand.

I'm most likely looking at this the wrong way since I drive a chunk of junk 2 wdr pick-up truck that's gets me from A to Z.

I know one thing, I'm not paying for 2 vehicles, 2 registrations and insurances when I can't drive both.

1 horse, 1 truck kind of dude I guess.

This is my take, most likely won't change until I figure out how to get my pony into one of these election cars,,, I hope they come out in self driving unit since my pony is not a good driver.

Don

[Stinky Buffalo]

[Scott h]

Originally Posted by Stinky Buffalo

Some of that power is produced by coal......for now. That percentage is however dropping and I suspect you won't be seeing any more coal fired plants being built in Canada or the USA.

[FCLightning]

Originally Posted by Scott h

Some of that power is produced by coal......for now. That percentage is however dropping and I suspect you won't be seeing any more coal fired plants being built in Canada or the USA.

So you think that burning Nat Gas for the power is better?

[Scott h]

Originally Posted by FCLightning

So you think that burning Nat Gas for the power is better?

Pretty much anything is better than coal

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by Scott h

Some of that power is produced by coal......for now. That percentage is however dropping and I suspect you won't be seeing any more coal fired plants being built in Canada or the USA.

http://www.mining.com/chinese-compan...outside-china/

In USA under Trump...maybe. In Canada...agreed no new cheap sources of power for Canadians.

There are "Overall, 1,600 coal plants are planned or under construction in 62 countries, said Urgewald, which uses data from the Global Coal Plant Tracker portal. The new plants would expand the world's coal-fired power capacity by 43 per cent."

So while you smile that your power cost is rising exponentially... feel relieved 43% increase in coal fired power plants around the world are easing the economic burden on others.

LOL

Just LOL.

Full article


Chinese companies to build 700 coal plants in and outside China

1,600 coal plants are planned or under construction in 62 countries

Andrew Topf | Oct. 8, 2017, 4:35 PM |  8,762 |  41

Coal is dead. Coal mining is a sunset industry. Donald Trump is crazy if he thinks he can revive Big Coal. While all these statements have become part of global consciousness when it comes to the future of the much-maligned fossil fuel, a report by Urgewald, a Berlin-based environmental group, casts doubt on at least the first two assertions.

Citing data gleaned from the world's biggest developers of coal-fired power plants, Urgewald found that of all the new coal generation expected to go online over the next decade, Chinese companies will build nearly half of it. Specifically, that means 700 new coal plants, with most to be built in China, and about a fifth outside the country, according to figures provided by Urgewald and reported by the New York Times:


Overall, 1,600 coal plants are planned or under construction in 62 countries, said Urgewald, which uses data from the Global Coal Plant Tracker portal. The new plants would expand the world's coal-fired power capacity by 43 per cent.

The fleet of new coal plants would make it virtually impossible to meet the goals set in the Paris climate accord. Electricity generated from fossil fuels such as coal is the biggest single contributor globally to the rise in carbon emissions, which scientists agree is causing the earth's temperatures to rise.

Shanghai Electric Group, one of the country's largest electrical equipment makers, has announced plans to build coal power plants in Egypt, Pakistan and Iran with a total capacity of 6,285MW – almost 10 times the 660MW of coal power it has planned in China.

The astounding numbers go against the trend that has been happening throughout the year in China, where dangerously high pollution levels have forced the closure of hundreds of coal mines and a curtailment of steel mill output. Examples of China's domestic aversion to coal include:
•Two days ago Taiyuan, the capital of China’s northern province of Shanxi, which is known for its coal production, banned the sale, transport and use of most coal as it tries to cut air pollution
•In May Shanxi province decided to suspend or hold back the development of mines until 2020, which effectively will take out of the market about of 120 million tonnes of the fossil fuel.
•Also in May provincial authorities announced they will close 18 collieries and cut 17 million tonnes of coal capacity by the end of the year.
•In January Beijing announced it plans to shut down 800 million tonnes of outdated coal capacity by 2020.

Fact is if we could supply LNG to China and reduce their coal use our gas industry could save the planet...however BC says no.

[FCLightning]

Originally Posted by Scott h

Pretty much anything is better than coal

Not so fast...
Conclusions
• Coal vs. Natural Gas, which is better?
– Evidence does not lend itself strongly to either
side


The chart is for a 100 year period. Over the short term - <50 years Coal is the clear winner.

[Big Sky]

Here's a couple of articles that describe the approach taken by Mazda. When total emissions are taken into account, their vehicles are close to the cleanliness of EV's. The articles are well worth the short read.

Mazda is already working on the successor to its efficient Skyactiv-X motors, and thinks it could make cars as clean as EVs, if you take into account CO2 from electricity production.

https://www.engadget.com/2018/01/30/...ell-to-wheels/

This article appeared in the Calgary Herald this week.

Indeed, a technology forum recently put on by Mazda makes a valid argument ......... that setting a rigidly enforced CO2 mandate is actually more effective at cleaning up our air.

http://driving.ca/mazda/auto-news/news/motor-mouth-8

[Newview01]

More inconvenient truth.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-for-batteries

The appetite for electric cars is driving a boom in small-scale cobalt production in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where some mines have been found to be dangerous and employ child labor.

Production from so-called artisanal mines probably rose by at least half last year, according to the estimates of officials at three of the biggest international suppliers of the metal, who asked not to be named because they’re not authorized to speak on the matter. State-owned miner Gecamines estimates artisanal output accounted for as much as a quarter of the country’s total production in 2017.


That’s a concern for carmakers from Volkswagen AG to Tesla Inc., who are seeking to secure long-term supplies of the battery ingredient but don’t want to be enmeshed in a scandal about unethical mining practices. Tech giants including Apple Inc. and Microsoft Corp. endured bad publicity after a 2016 Amnesty International report said children were being sent down some Congolese mines to dig for cobalt destined for their gadgets. Pit and tunnel collapses killed dozens of workers in 2015, the advocacy group said.

[EZM]

Originally Posted by 79ford

You do realize oil production utilizes tonnes of electricity and natural gas right? They also use natural gas to heat boilers that make steam which is combined with natural has to strip out the hydrogen to desulpherize fuel in refinery units that use tonnes of natural gas to heat diesel/gasoline before adding hydrogen to 'hydrotreat fuel right? Lol, these diesel stream are distilled by using tonnes of electricty to pump oil, tonnes of nat gas to heat the oil.


Oh yeah you got to mine the oil in some cases before upgrading the bitumin into oil which uses hundreds and hundreds of megawatts of electricity......


You need electric pumps to pump oil thousands of miles to refiners, gas stations run on lelectricuty and require hydro dams, gas turbines, etc etc.



Dont play like oil exists in some fantasy world and pours out of the heavens into your gas tank without using an amazing amount of resources

Good post.

I think you response is excellent and thoughtful - a point most people tend to miss - all forms of energy currently produce some form of pollution. You really need to add up, on aggregate, everything that goes into, eventually, spinning that tire on your car to make it go from A to B.

The bottom line is not as simple as all these expert Googlers (columnists and opinionists alike) who seem to be smarter than the engineers developing this technology or the companies seeking to profit from it.

I laugh at both types of articles - the ones that claim electric vehicles, powered from the electricity generated on your roof has zero footprint (which is BS) as much as the articles that describe EV's to be significantly worse compared to conventionally powered vehicles. The fear of "how bad the batteries are in a landfill" compared the by products disposed of, or left in SITU, extracting and refining fossil fuels is of no comparison. This is another major point people never think about.

Clearly, at some point, as the demand for this "clean energy" continues to increase so will the efficiency/technology of it resulting in a significant "actual aggregate" reduction in pollution - and, frankly, that a good thing.

It's probably not there yet - but it's coming - I figure we will continue to creep forward in this direction so I'm not selling my gas/diesel vehicles just yet BUT if it makes us (and our grandkids) breathe cleaner air - I all for it.

[260 Rem]

Projected that by 2040, 50% of all vehicles will be electric.

[Twisted Canuck]

Originally Posted by 260 Rem

Projected that by 2040, 50% of all vehicles will be electric.

I love that Porsche is doing some cutting edge stuff with EV, but it's sad that an EV will never sound the same as the naturally aspirated flat six....when I wind my Cayman out at 7500 RPM the banshee noise behind me is pure music...

[32-40win]

Toyota and Paccar are playing around with Ballard fuel cells now in drayage units for the ports in LA and other places. Shud be on the road in a month or so.
http://www.worktruckonline.com/news/...mid=1102450052

[Sundancefisher]

Used in batteries.

2/3 come from the Congo where child labour is used.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ct-from-miners