EV owners of today and tomorrow

[Grumpycat]

I read this over the weekend and found it interesting.

In this day and age anyone can publish misinformation. Of course one always could but in the past people insisted on references and actually looked them up.

So you read an article which confirmed your biases and came here to share your brilliant new insight!

Batteries do not create electricity, but they store electricity produced elsewhere, especially through coal, uranium, natural power plants or diesel generators.

Primary batteries do create electricity. The classic carbon battery, then the alkaline battery. The AA, AAA, C, D, and 9v batteries you are familiar with. The ones that do not charge after being discharged.

So the claim that an electric is a zero-emission vehicle is not true at all, because the electricity produced comes from power plants and many of them burn coal or gas.

All depends on the electric power source.

And it depends on your definition of "emission".

Nuclear is considered carbon neutral. However construction of nuclear power plants consume vast amount of concrete which isn't so carbon-neutral. If one counted concrete for nuclear plants then one would be forced to count similar components of blessed "green" sources such as hydroelectric dams.

So 40% today ? some of electric cars on the road are carbon-based.

So what? Only the EV haters here care. The actual EV owners are happy we can effortlessly power from any electrical source. From hydro, PV solar, wind, coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear, and even unicorn farts.

Those who are enthusiastic about electric cars and the green revolution should take a closer look at batteries, but also wind turbines and solar panels.

Hey, how about the horrible environmental impact of the LCD you are viewing this on? And the horrible chemicals and byproducts of the integrated circuits in the computer?

A typical electric car battery weighs 450 kg, about as big as a suitcase. It contains 11 kg of lithium, 27 kg of nickel, 20 kg of manganese, 14 kg of cobalt, 90 kg of copper and 180 kg of aluminum, steel and plastic. There are more than 6,000 individual lithium-ion cells inside.

Boy, that is quite some generalization. Only Tesla uses thousands of small cells, not that it matters, but it is evidence the author is raking the internet for numbers he/she believes will incite the masses.

Munro took a Hyundai EV9 battery apart on YouTube this week.

38 modules each with 4 groups of 3 cells, total 456 cells for 100 kWh. Typical of a non-Tesla battery. But hey, "more than 6000 cells" is scary! Lets write hyperbole to maximize the fright!

To make each BEV battery, you will need to process 11,000 kg of salt for lithium, 15,000 kg of cobalt mineral, 2.270 kg of resin for nickel and 11,000 kg of copper mineral.

Meh, a bunch of numbers selected to incite the ignorant. Many tons of ore are extracted and moved around for pounds of desired content. Nothing is unique to EV batteries, same for copper, aluminum, iron, etc. All are essential for your home and your ICE.

Also you pretend there is only one way to process lithium ore. Or extract lithium.

What the rabble rousers are ignoring is how the EV battery does not consume these materials. The act of charging/discharging is a mostly reversible chemical reaction. Eventually the errors compound, capacity falls below interesting levels. At that point all the ingredients are still there, ripe to be reprocessed into a new battery. An old battery is a much richer source of ore than anything dug from the ground.

In total, you have to extract 225,000 kilograms of soil for one battery.

Oh! You are killing me!

I think ore weighs more than "soil" but typical soil weighs 950 kg/m³ so 236.8 m³ or a block 6.19m x 6.19m x 6.19m. Not really that much "soil". You'd have us think the volume of a 20 story building was required by citing numbers no one has a feel for.

The biggest problem with solar systems is the chemicals used to convert silicate into the gravel used for the panels.

So what? China happily kills their land for us.

US production is much cleaner, but even so our Enlightened Globalist Elite Leaders have decided to favor China.

To produce sufficient clean silicon, it must be treated with chloride, sulfuric acid, fluoride, trichloroethane and acetone.

You'd think we never used those chemicals before PV panels were invented.

In addition, gallium, arsenide, copper-indian-galium diselenuride and cadmium telluride are necessary, which are also highly toxic.

You'd think we never used those elements before PV panels were invented. How about your LCD?

Silicone dust is a hazard to workers and tiles cannot be recycled.

Responsible manufacturers know full well how to manage dust and protect workers.

Chip makers would laugh at your "silicon can not be recycled" line. The key magic to producing a silicon IC or PV panel is purifying silicon on site. Texas Instruments went from something to nothing by inventing a practical process. Guess what? No chemicals in TI's process, it is brilliantly simple.

Wind turbines are not plus-ultra in terms of cost and environmental destruction.

Wind turbines make little men who migrate to government happy.

Each windmill weighs 1,688 tons (equivalent to the weight of 23 houses) and contains 1300 tons of concrete, 295 tons of steel, 48 tons of iron, 24 tons of fiberglass and rare lands that are hard-to-get Neodymium, Praseodymium and Dyprosium.

Frightening numbers! I'm hiding under the kitchen table!

And frightening element names!

Each of the three shovels weighs 40,000 kg and has a lifespan of 15 to 20 years, after which they must be replaced. We cannot recycle used rotor blades.

Little men have to have big things to do with their government power. The solution is not to have enough government for little men to play.

Certainly these technologies can have their place, but we need to look beyond the myth of freedom of emission. Going Green may seem like a utopian ideal, but if you look at the hidden and embedded costs in a realistic and impartial way, you’ll find that “Going Green” is doing more damage to the Earth’s environment today than it seems.

Wait, they "have their place" but are doing more harm than good?

 

[Grumpycat]

Well you are definitely doing what the Government is herding you towards. Hmmm

Your memory gets wiped after reading one paragraph so you don't remember anything said previously.

 

[ChiefBodie]

In this day and age anyone can publish misinformation.

Maybe not for long. I read recently of someone who is saying misinformation is not covered as free speech under the first amendment.

 

[Grumpycat]

Good post, even if the write-up came from a third party. Some of it is misleading or misinformed though, such as "In addition, gallium, arsenide, copper-indian-galium diselenuride and cadmium telluride are necessary, which are also highly toxic." The semiconductor is gallium-arsenide, a group III-V compound semiconductor, typically deposited on SiC. It's not "using gallium and arsenoide", they form an inert molecule, as deployed.

All of the posting has the earmarks of an internet scraper who collects words here and there without understanding then lumps it all together pretending to understand any of it.

But you are correct, the EV is more efficient and more diverse-fueled means of transportation.

 

[Grumpycat]

I’m surprised to see you post that common false narrative.
I thought I remembered you and I debunking that pro-EV misinformation months ago. Maybe it was someone else.

Here you go:

More than 60% of energy used for electricity generation is lost in conversion - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

www.eia.gov

You’re starting with only 40% making to your home, 60% lost as wasted energy , now of that remaining, you now loose another 4-12% losses through the battery charging system. You then have the vehicle motor and motor controller losses.

The most honest metric of resource consumption is the dollar.

Under 3¢/mile to fuel my Tesla. 10¢/mile at 30 MPG and $3.00/gallon.

Arguing "efficiencies" and "losses" is playing numbers games without weighing for the true cost and effort.

As an engineer it is fun to look at efficiencies and losses looking for a better way. But is erroneous to cite efficiencies and losses as proof one has found a better way.

 

[Grumpycat]

EV’s also get an equivalent mpg statistical “free pass “from the government and the entire battery movement when it comes to daily charge losses. EV’s loose 1% charge daily. Doesn’t sound like much, but for people who have a vehicle that doesn’t get used often, that’s a big hit to actual equivalent mpg.
Drive your EV once a week, you’re losing over 6% per week. That’s significant.

Oooh! How many months can I park an ICE with a full tank of gasoline before the gasoline goes bad? 6 months? That is 180 days or 0.05% per day. Not much different.

Then there’s cold climate states where ICE waste heat, heats the cabin. EV’s have to use battery power for that. Again, you won’t find those comparisons statistics because it’s not in favor of EV’s

In cold climates ICE does not use waste heat. Heats the cabin with energy which would otherwise not be shed under those conditions. ICE gets poorer MPG in the cold, especially considering warmup.

EVs do not have to use battery power to warm the cabin before departure, if connected to shore power for charging. Tesla app has a climate control page to control the HVAC away from the vehicle. Also has a "be ready at" timer which will heat/cool the battery and the cabin as necessary prior to your departure.

 

[Grumpycat]

I’ve never actually met a FE’r for real.
Heard of them but never thought it real.
Kinda like big foot, or the Loch Ness monster.
Makes him somewhat of a celebrity here, doesn’t it?

If you are buying the beer I'll argue for Flat Earth!

Remember:

Men Drink
Birds Fly.

 

[Grumpycat]

Maybe not for long. I read recently of someone who is saying misinformation is not covered as free speech under the first amendment.

Yes! Comrade! Only Approved Speech is allowed to be Free! Can't have people reading stuff contrary to The Party Line! Only we know what is true and what is not!

 

[CloverKnollFarms]

So, an ICE won't run on gas that is older than 6 months? Really? . If it will, is the gas "bad"? Is it wasted?

I think I'd challenge that idea.

 

[WinterDeere]

So, an ICE won't run on gas that is older than 6 months? Really? . If it will, is the gas "bad"? Is it wasted?

I think I'd challenge that idea.

Agreed. Old stored gas can cause issues, but it's not as simple as % energy loss per day. Moreover, the battery is always losing some charge, even when driven daily, whereas an ICE driven even moderately will suffer no loss from storing a little gas in the tank week to week.

However, I think it's also a stupid point to even debate. I don't think any EV owner is honestly worried about 1% per day charge loss, if it's really even that high. Non-issue, other than another small factor to consider when calculating total yearly fuel usage.