quote:

Originally posted by ugeesta:
Something I'd like to see is the Carbon footprint of an EV vs. normal car. I can't believe it is any better with all the battery requirements with the EV.

I have a friend in Silicon Valley, Ph.D. in electrical engineering, worked for an elite engineering firm, the electric grid was one of his specialties. His analysis was that electric cars, when considering manufacturing, operations, disposal, was a less efficient use of energy resources, and did more overall harm to the environment, than gasoline powered cars.

quote:

Originally posted by Scoutmaster:

quote:

Originally posted by braillediver:
And an autonomous car is easier to regulate, control and tax. .

I understand California is considering a per mile excise for electric vehicles, as they don't pay gasoline taxes but do use the roads.

It's not just California. Did you really think a politician was going to be happy sucking less money out of people by missing out on gasoline tax money.

Think of a big city in the south with long hot summers, especially close to the coast where humidity is high.

Early in the AM before a million indoor workers arrive (office, restaurant, services etc), A/C units are cranked to bring temps to working daytime temps and to allow for body heat load. Elect power companies adjust their output to allow for this surge.

With conversion to elect cars, now there will be a similar surge when the commuters return home and a great many will have to plug in and recharge.

I guess one could evaluate the estimated additional pollution generated at the plant vs average per petrochem car pollution load vs number of area elect cars.

From what I’ve picked up here, the main emission load from elect cars is in their production.

I may be incorrect but isn't it all for nothing unless we get the Indians and Chinese to stop polluting? I thought this was a global problem and needs a global solution. So you can drive an EV assuming it's a net reduction in energy consumption and it's still just a drop in the bucket, maybe just a drop in the ocean.

quote:

Originally posted by maxdog:
Think of a big city in the south with long hot summers, especially close to the coast where humidity is high.

Early in the AM before a million indoor workers arrive (office, restaurant, services etc), A/C units are cranked to bring temps to working daytime temps and to allow for body heat load. Elect power companies adjust their output to allow for this surge.

With conversion to elect cars, now there will be a similar surge when the commuters return home and a great many will have to plug in and recharge.

I guess one could evaluate the estimated additional pollution generated at the plant vs average per petrochem car pollution load vs number of area elect cars.

From what I’ve picked up here, the main emission load from elect cars is in their production.

I think one of the arguments for EVs is that most charging will occur overnight and utilize the grid during off-peak production. For places that produces wind/hydro power, this is a key benefit as there would not be any place to store that power otherwise.

quote:

Originally posted by maxdog:
Think of a big city in the south with long hot summers, especially close to the coast where humidity is high.

Early in the AM before a million indoor workers arrive (office, restaurant, services etc), A/C units are cranked to bring temps to working daytime temps and to allow for body heat load. Elect power companies adjust their output to allow for this surge. . . .

And in Southern/Central CA, there is a big hit in electricity demand in the afternoon as workers get home from work and turn on their home AC.

A few years ago CA had revolving black outs as they simply didn't have enough electricity to meet demand. CA appointed a couple of purchasers to buy electricity on the spot market, seems they paid premium spot prices (from CA taxpayer money) to firms in which they had equity positions. Hmmm.

quote:

Originally posted by ugeesta:
Something I'd like to see is the Carbon footprint of an EV vs. normal car. I can't believe it is any better with all the battery requirements with the EV.

Don't forget the carbon footprint created while making the batteries. That's significant.

^^^After they're beyond their useful life those batteries need to be disposed of too...

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:
^^^After they're beyond their useful life those batteries need to be disposed of too...

Not a problem, dump them in the ocean.

One would think it's possible to do a Total Pollution comparison between an EV and a conventional vehicle taking into account batteries, life cycle, oil used at the electric plant to charge the vehicles, etc.

I wouldn't be surprised being that it's still new technology that the EV is still more polluting.

quote:

Originally posted by old rugged cross:
All this environmental save the planet bullshit is all more propaganda for the school children.

Currently, this country can't even determine who should use which bathroom, or if boys and girls are different, so forgive me for asserting this group of retards are far too stupid to ever have any appreciable impact on the planet. If the earth actually had a voice, it would be laughing hysterically at the little humans and their ridiculous arrogance.

As has been shared and discussed ad-nauseum in similar threads, until some major new development occurs in battery tech that substantially moves the needle in terms of storage and recharge times, or in renewables in general, all this talk of electric cars taking over is hysterically moronic (i.e. the subject of liberal circle jerks).

quote:

Originally posted by Scoutmaster:

quote:

Originally posted by braillediver:
And an autonomous car is easier to regulate, control and tax. .

I understand California is considering a per mile excise for electric vehicles, as they don't pay gasoline taxes but do use the roads.

And just how do they propose to get the real information about miles driven? The gas tax is paid at the pump--no getting around it. To be sure that drivers weren't cheating they'd have to put electronics in each vehicle to broadcast mileage to some central taxing authority, and I suspect it would not be difficult to disable those.

flashguy

Manufacturers of EVs need to be responsible for developing a solution to deal with the lithium toxic goo in the used batteries that shifts the costs to EV owners, otherwise, I guarantee it will fall on taxpayers.

The power grid does not have anything close to the capacity necessary to handle the demand created by a significant shift to EV adoption. There are significant environmental costs to expanding this capacity especially given we are not expanding nuclear power.

quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:
I understand California is considering a per mile excise for electric vehicles, as they don't pay gasoline taxes but do use the roads.

And just how do they propose to get the real information about miles driven? The gas tax is paid at the pump--no getting around it. To be sure that drivers weren't cheating they'd have to put electronics in each vehicle to broadcast mileage to some central taxing authority, and I suspect it would not be difficult to disable those.

flashguy[/QUOTE] That's a simple fix. You will be required to get it checked and reported. Just like states with emissions test requirements. When you are there for that required test they also write your mileage down. Don't worry if there is a way to get their hand in your pocket they can always figure that out.

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:
all this talk of electric cars taking over is hysterically moronic (i.e. the subject of liberal circle jerks).

Except the pesky fact that the government is mandating it.

quote:

I think one of the arguments for EVs is that most charging will occur overnight and utilize the grid during off-peak production.

If everyone has an EV or two, will there really be off-peak times if every household is charging cars?

quote:

Originally posted by Veeper:

quote:

I think one of the arguments for EVs is that most charging will occur overnight and utilize the grid during off-peak production.

If everyone has an EV or two, will there really be off-peak times if every household is charging cars?

That's the point. Currently, there's a peak demand and then demand drops off into the night. Power plants can't store excess power, so there's a bunch of production capacity that's wasted.

A bunch of EVs out in the wild act as battery packs to store this production capacity.

There’s a fuckton of rationalization going on. The primary driver of EV is the perception of “green” clean usage. Say that here and you guys are all quick to say, nope not me I just like fast cars and tech. Well which is it? Fast cars and cool tech aren’t really good reasons to turn out infrastructure upside down to the tune of billions if not into the big T’s.

Let’s be intellectually honest. Why the move to EV? If it’s saving the planet then the math should be real easy. The math is anything but at this point. If it’s not saving the planet then why sink a fortune into infrastructure that isn’t saving the earth but makes for fast cool tech cars which is neat but isn’t a reason to make taxpayers subsidize your rocket starts from a red light.

I'm firmly in the camp that environmental benefits are not one of my purchase considerations.

The question raised by the OP is whether an EV produces less pollution. I'm contributing to the discussion, even if such concerns do not affect me.

At this point the answer would be NO. The pollution derived from creating the batteries and building the cars exceeds any pollution that "may" be saved by using electricity instead of gasoline. The technology is not far enough along as far as batteries go.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
There’s a fuckton of rationalization going on. The primary driver of EV is the perception of “green” clean usage. Say that here and you guys are all quick to say, nope not me I just like fast cars and tech. Well which is it? Fast cars and cool tech aren’t really good reasons to turn out infrastructure upside down to the tune of billions if not into the big T’s.

Let’s be intellectually honest. Why the move to EV? If it’s saving the planet then the math should be real easy. The math is anything but at this point. If it’s not saving the planet then why sink a fortune into infrastructure that isn’t saving the earth but makes for fast cool tech cars which is neat but isn’t a reason to make taxpayers subsidize your rocket starts from a red light.

It's actually still quite a ways off considering it's almost 20 years away that the real heavy mandates start to hit. We tend to focus on the U.S. because that's where we live but we are NOT going to be the worlds leading early adopters. The U.S. is really spread out so infrastructure is much more problematic here which will make us a little slower to change over the entire fleet. Countries like China and India will be way ahead of us.

It's inevitable but full implementation is still quite a long ways off for the U.S. Very few people who have owned an EV ever want to go back to ICE unless they have a specific need that electric won't meet. Those specific needs will become less and less as the EV capabilities become greater and greater. That means over time EV will naturally be more and more prevalent. Combine that with the manufacturers wanting this to happen focusing the vast majority of development dollars being poured into electric and you can see what the obvious outcome will be.