OT: Electric Vehicles--anyone driving them or seriously looked at them?

[bikinchris]

Originally Posted by Dave

You need to add the inefficiency for the coal or natural gas power plant making the electricity. Coal is the worst - only 33-48% of the energy gets converted into electricity, due to low efficiency of the steam cycle. Natural gas is 45-57%.

True, but the coal doesn't get brought over on supertankers that burn the dirtiest fuel in creation.
Solar panels are better and EVs don't pollute the air in urban areas. There was a study that said 4 people die from tailpipe emissions for every person killed in traffic.

[AngryScientist]

Lots of misconceptions, oversimplifications and creative, but agenda driven manipulations in this thread.

[gdw]

'There was a Tesla the burned while driving this week and the story was RUSHED to national news detailing it took 6,000 gallon of water to put out the fire. No mention of the tens of thousands of ICE cars that burned this week. An ICE car is roughly 100 times more likely to burn for every mile driven than an EV"

Only 6,000? Really? EV fires are much more difficult to extinguish than an ICE fire. It took 6 fire departments 3 hours and over 20,000 to extinguish a burning Tesla on 128 in Massachusetts a couple weeks ago.
https://www.masslive.com/police-fire...o-put-out.html
Fortunately the accident occurred on the weekend and not during the evening commute.

[Dave]

Our local coal is the dirtiest of all fuels. Fortunately, it is being phased out. Until all fossil fuel burning methods of electricity production end, most EVs are using a large percentage of fossil fuel. Don't kid yourself.

You could invest in solar panels for your home that might make you feel better.

[bikinchris]

Originally Posted by Dave

Our local coal is the dirtiest of all fuels. Fortunately, it is being phased out. Until all fossil fuel burning methods of electricity production end, most EVs are using a large percentage of fossil fuel. Don't kid yourself.

You could invest in solar panels for your home that might make you feel better.

Those super tankers (and large cruise ships) might be better off burning crude oil.
Also having lived in Louisiana most of my life I can see that most of you are completely unaware of the ecological disaster that is oil drilling. Some of those oil leaks have been going on for decades.

[MikeD]

Originally Posted by bikinchris

I always like the hit pieces aimed at EVs. Like the battery mining is not great, but the process of exploring for oil, drilling, producing, transporting the crude, refining it, transporting for sale and then wasting roughly 66% of the energy in the gasoline is just stupid.
Internal combustion engines WASTE 66% of the energy in a gallon of gasoline.
This flip flops the energy leaving the electric generating station. Only 30% of the energy in the electric energy is lost between the power station and the rear wheels of the EV.

There was a Tesla the burned while driving this week and the story was RUSHED to national news detailing it took 6,000 gallon of water to put out the fire. No mention of the tens of thousands of ICE cars that burned this week. An ICE car is roughly 100 times more likely to burn for every mile driven than an EV.

Every Chevy Bolt was recalled due to battery fires. You'd have to go back to to 70s and the Ford Pinto for a recall in the ICE realm to compare. The fix for the Pinto was simple and cheap too.

100 times more likely? BS. Of course there more ICE vehicle fires. There's millions more on the road than EVs (a tiny percentage overall) in various states of repair.

[David Kirk]

Originally Posted by Dave

Our local coal is the dirtiest of all fuels. Fortunately, it is being phased out. Until all fossil fuel burning methods of electricity production end, most EVs are using a large percentage of fossil fuel. Don't kid yourself.

You could invest in solar panels for your home that might make you feel better.

My wife is a researcher and science writer for NASA and her work points out something interesting and surprising. Even the dirtiest coal plant is more efficient than an ICE car. Meaning that if one looks at how much pollution an ICE car makes per mile and compares it to an EV that is charged by a coal burning power plant the EV/coal plant emissions are about 30% lower than the ICE vehicle.

So the worst case scenario of 100% coal power is better than our each driving our own private power plants around in the form of an ICE car. That’s good news. Even better is that every state in the nation uses a blend of power sources and that there isn’t a single state in the nation that uses only coal to produce electricity. Our state of Montana is pretty dirty when it comes to power production and yet 51% of the power generated in the state of Montana comes from renewables (hydro and wind leading the way followed by solar). So even here in a coal state the electricity used to power an EV results in much lower emissions than an internal combustion car.

It’s good stuff that very few people know about. The myth that driving an EV powered by coal is as bad or worse than an ICE vehicle is just that - a myth.

dave

[dgauthier]

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

Lots of misconceptions, oversimplifications and creative, but agenda driven manipulations in this thread.

This thread started over three years ago (pre-pandemic!), and it's fascinating to read the old posts.

Talk about yer global warming -- the temperature in this thread has gone through the roof in the last three years!

Some people say the tipping point for electric vehicles is happening *right now*, so I can't wait to read these posts three years from now. A lot will have happened.

[Mr. Pink]

Originally Posted by bikinchris

I always like the hit pieces aimed at EVs. Like the battery mining is not great, but the process of exploring for oil, drilling, producing, transporting the crude, refining it, transporting for sale and then wasting roughly 66% of the energy in the gasoline is just stupid.
Internal combustion engines WASTE 66% of the energy in a gallon of gasoline.
This flip flops the energy leaving the electric generating station. Only 30% of the energy in the electric energy is lost between the power station and the rear wheels of the EV.

There was a Tesla the burned while driving this week and the story was RUSHED to national news detailing it took 6,000 gallon of water to put out the fire. No mention of the tens of thousands of ICE cars that burned this week. An ICE car is roughly 100 times more likely to burn for every mile driven than an EV.

Tens of thousands? In a week? I have to ask for a source on that one.

[dgauthier]

Originally Posted by David Kirk

My wife is a researcher and science writer for NASA and her work points out something interesting and surprising. Even the dirtiest coal plant is more efficient than an ICE car. Meaning that if one looks at how much pollution an ICE car makes per mile and compares it to an EV that is charged by a coal burning power plant the EV/coal plant emissions are about 30% lower than the ICE vehicle.

So the worst case scenario of 100% coal power is better than our each driving our own private power plants around in the form of an ICE car. That’s good news. Even better is that every state in the nation uses a blend of power sources and that there isn’t a single state in the nation that uses only coal to produce electricity. Our state of Montana is pretty dirty when it comes to power production and yet 51% of the power generated in the state of Montana comes from renewables (hydro and wind leading the way followed by solar). So even here in a coal state the electricity used to power an EV results in much lower emissions than an internal combustion car.

It’s good stuff that very few people know about. The myth that driving an EV powered by coal is as bad or worse than an ICE vehicle is just that - a myth.

dave

You're so calm and sensible. There must be some nice places to ride a bike in your neck of the woods...

[MikeD]

Originally Posted by David Kirk

My wife is a researcher and science writer for NASA and her work points out something interesting and surprising. Even the dirtiest coal plant is more efficient than an ICE car. Meaning that if one looks at how much pollution an ICE car makes per mile and compares it to an EV that is charged by a coal burning power plant the EV/coal plant emissions are about 30% lower than the ICE vehicle.

So the worst case scenario of 100% coal power is better than our each driving our own private power plants around in the form of an ICE car. That’s good news. Even better is that every state in the nation uses a blend of power sources and that there isn’t a single state in the nation that uses only coal to produce electricity. Our state of Montana is pretty dirty when it comes to power production and yet 51% of the power generated in the state of Montana comes from renewables (hydro and wind leading the way followed by solar). So even here in a coal state the electricity used to power an EV results in much lower emissions than an internal combustion car.

It’s good stuff that very few people know about. The myth that driving an EV powered by coal is as bad or worse than an ICE vehicle is just that - a myth.

dave

The Toyota Prius is 40% efficient. https://www.greencarreports.com/news...ne-toyota-says Compare that 40% to the 33-48% efficiency of the coal burning plant in posting #435. Then there's losses over transmission lines and power conversion losses, then the losses from the EV itself which is NOT 100% efficient in converting electrical into mechanical energy. The Prius is looking pretty good to me.
.

[Mr. Pink]

Originally Posted by David Kirk

My wife is a researcher and science writer for NASA and her work points out something interesting and surprising. Even the dirtiest coal plant is more efficient than an ICE car. Meaning that if one looks at how much pollution an ICE car makes per mile and compares it to an EV that is charged by a coal burning power plant the EV/coal plant emissions are about 30% lower than the ICE vehicle.

So the worst case scenario of 100% coal power is better than our each driving our own private power plants around in the form of an ICE car. That’s good news. Even better is that every state in the nation uses a blend of power sources and that there isn’t a single state in the nation that uses only coal to produce electricity. Our state of Montana is pretty dirty when it comes to power production and yet 51% of the power generated in the state of Montana comes from renewables (hydro and wind leading the way followed by solar). So even here in a coal state the electricity used to power an EV results in much lower emissions than an internal combustion car.

It’s good stuff that very few people know about. The myth that driving an EV powered by coal is as bad or worse than an ICE vehicle is just that - a myth.

dave

Maybe, but the real issue is how we ramp up electrical production to accommodate millions and millions of EVs on the road. We are nowhere near that capacity, and I hear of no real plans to achieve that. The cleanest and quickest solution is nukes, lots of them, in every state. That ain't gonna happen. Nobody wants to live next to one of those things, that, like Chernobyl and Fukishima, could literally scorch the earth for hundreds of miles for a very long time. So, the other choices are gas and coal. We'll need both, and, again, a lot of them. The choice for the two will depend on the availability and pricing of either commodity. Natural gas supplies won't last forever. There's a lot of coal in the world. A lot of you kids may have never experienced places like Pittsburgh and Gary, Indiana back before we exported that pollution to China, but, it was really bad. Awful. We've been spoiled with the lack of industry, but, check out the air in Beijing and Mumbai some time. That's where it went. And we could easily return to all that if every American is driving a clean, modern, EV.
When the auto was introduced, one selling point was that it was a cute for pollution. Horse crap. Which was literally knee deep high in crowded cities. Imagine August in the Lower East Side combined with the lack of toilets and sewage in the testaments, around 1895. Well, they fixed that, but, be careful what you hope for.

[yngpunk]

Originally Posted by David Kirk

My wife is a researcher and science writer for NASA and her work points out something interesting and surprising. Even the dirtiest coal plant is more efficient than an ICE car. Meaning that if one looks at how much pollution an ICE car makes per mile and compares it to an EV that is charged by a coal burning power plant the EV/coal plant emissions are about 30% lower than the ICE vehicle.

So the worst case scenario of 100% coal power is better than our each driving our own private power plants around in the form of an ICE car. That’s good news. Even better is that every state in the nation uses a blend of power sources and that there isn’t a single state in the nation that uses only coal to produce electricity. Our state of Montana is pretty dirty when it comes to power production and yet 51% of the power generated in the state of Montana comes from renewables (hydro and wind leading the way followed by solar). So even here in a coal state the electricity used to power an EV results in much lower emissions than an internal combustion car.

It’s good stuff that very few people know about. The myth that driving an EV powered by coal is as bad or worse than an ICE vehicle is just that - a myth.

dave

DoE/EPA has a nifty tool that lets you compare EV vs ICE GHG emissions (including the GHG generated to produce the electricity to power the vehicle) based on your zip code. Check it out here:

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=bt2

[yngpunk]

Originally Posted by Mr. Pink

like Chernobyl and Fukishima,

Let's be fair here...any new nuclear plant being built is going to be like Chernobyl and/or Fukishima.

[Brian Smith]

Originally Posted by Dave

You took my post entirely wrong. It's simple facts comparing a low level car charger to running a big AC unit.

Well, I don't think I took it entirely wrong, and that's not a very charitable statement in response. I'm not here for charity, I'm here to contribute.

Referring to your assertion as simple or factual doesn't reconcile the fact that most extant plug-in models, whether hybrid or battery only, cannot even accept current from a residential device at the capacity of the circuit you mention. That, I reluctantly mention, is a fact. The home circuit is a non-issue, or charitably, at the very least is not a difficult issue. Something else is making you raise the objection though, and that's more interesting than the "facts." Objectionable is probably the least appropriate term for how I personally view peoples' use of EVs, yet your behaviour in this thread indicates that it's probably somewhere within your top thousand. Bring some calm to your limbic for a moment...

Originally Posted by Dave

I have no problem with utilities promoting the electricity they sell either, but my local utility only gets about 30% of its power from renewable sources, so your AC or EV is mostly running off natural gas and coal right now. I don't think my local utility even knows when my electricity is being used since there's no mention of it in their advertisements.

Dave, there is no EV or hybrid that reacts to the fuel source behind the plug feeding it energy. It runs the same no matter the source. This is a thread about EVs and their use. I'm not sure why you are compelled to share with us, in this environment, your thoughts about your local utility and their fuel sources. Nobody here has called into question the "green-ness" of your potential EV use. That said, if you really have a point to make about green-ness, are you suggesting that the fossil fuel arrangement is presenting you a more credible green path forward than the increasing green-ness of electric power?