The electric vehicle climate change push is a false solution.

[Grandpappy]

I've been in the car biz for 35 years, and still am. The push to electric vehicles (EVs) is just a feel good waste with current technology.

Do you know how many tons of overburden (Mining term) it takes to make an EV battery?
500, 000. Yep . And what's moving that dirt? Yep. Diesels.
Now, let's look at the electrical grid. Currently, natural gas is the most cost effective source of electrical energy.
It makes CO2 when burned. No benefit there.
And finally, the disposal of worn out batteries. Not cheap. And environmentally hazardous.

This is a classic example of stupid, technology challenged bureaucrats making pie in the sky policy.
And the Chinese laugh at the stupidity .
We need a real leader with a brain. Now, not later.

 

[Rickeroo]

I've been in the car biz for 35 years, and still am. The push to electric vehicles (EVs) is just a feel good waste with current technology.

Do you know how many tons of overburden (Mining term) it takes to make an EV battery?
500, 000. Yep . And what's moving that dirt? Yep. Diesels.
Now, let's look at the electrical grid. Currently, natural gas is the most cost effective source of electrical energy.
It makes CO2 when burned. No benefit there.
And finally, the disposal of worn out batteries. Not cheap. And environmentally hazardous.

This is a classic example of stupid, technology challenged bureaucrats making pie in the sky policy.
And the Chinese laugh at the stupidity .
We need a real leader with a brain. Now, not later.

The good news is that global warming isn't a big deal - otherwise there would be a call for far more than performative reductions in CO2. We'd be getting advice for massive reductions in consumption: essential items only like food and shelter. Single family houses would be looked upon as wasteful, as would any form of entertainment or vice: the Earth itself hangs in the balance.

 

[Cardinal]

I've been in the car biz for 35 years, and still am. The push to electric vehicles (EVs) is just a feel good waste with current technology.

Do you know how many tons of overburden (Mining term) it takes to make an EV battery?
500, 000. Yep . And what's moving that dirt? Yep. Diesels.
Now, let's look at the electrical grid. Currently, natural gas is the most cost effective source of electrical energy.
It makes CO2 when burned. No benefit there.
And finally, the disposal of worn out batteries. Not cheap. And environmentally hazardous.

This is a classic example of stupid, technology challenged bureaucrats making pie in the sky policy.
And the Chinese laugh at the stupidity .
We need a real leader with a brain. Now, not later.

Yes, our entire infrastructure has been based in fossil fuels for over a hundred years. Nobody said you can completely upend that overnight.

 

[HIP56948]

Supposedly >>>
The most talked about company has been QuantumScape, with backing from VW which says the tech is no less than "the most promising approach to electromobility of the future." QuantumScape has developed a ceramic separator between anode and cathode that helps its cells charge from 10% to 80% in less than 15 minutes
PLus the batteries will last 6 times longer.

No expert on this, I just remembered the above article

 

[Antiwar]

I've been in the car biz for 35 years, and still am. The push to electric vehicles (EVs) is just a feel good waste with current technology.

Do you know how many tons of overburden (Mining term) it takes to make an EV battery?
500, 000. Yep . And what's moving that dirt? Yep. Diesels.
Now, let's look at the electrical grid. Currently, natural gas is the most cost effective source of electrical energy.
It makes CO2 when burned. No benefit there.
And finally, the disposal of worn out batteries. Not cheap. And environmentally hazardous.

This is a classic example of stupid, technology challenged bureaucrats making pie in the sky policy.
And the Chinese laugh at the stupidity .
We need a real leader with a brain. Now, not later.

I'm sure that your being in the "car biz" means that your scientific research (and simple reasoning) displaces actual scientific research (and the simple reasoning that humans have almost completely ****ed up the habitability of Earth).

 

[Mr Person]

Your daily bumper sticker trolling thread, folks, and yes as always he makes sure to include those "lol wtf" moments that are likely to bring replies.... the bringing of them being the only thing he's actually after. The content is irrelevant.

We need a real leader with a brain.

Yes, a very big brain bigly, good people are saying it. See you tomorrow morning, about whatever stupid shit Fox tells you to say tonight.

 

[Antiwar]

You know where much of the components of the solar arrays (that have gone up in California) were made?

 

[Hamish Howl]

Agree.

You still have to generate the power for EVs, and the best batteries are less than 80% efficient when in actual use (far, far less in reality). The "book value" of a charge means the highest charge rate, the highest voltage, and use at a completely constant rate in the center band of the battery's output.

Ah Efficiency - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

www.sciencedirect.com

So you have to generate 120% (minimum) of the same calories as you would with a gasoline engine of the same horsepower, and most electrical generation is just as messy as internal combustion.

And then you have to take all that required energy and add it to your existing grid, which is really bad news, especially in a place like California or Texas, where the grid is already strained to the breaking point.

 

[Deuce]

I've been in the car biz for 35 years, and still am. The push to electric vehicles (EVs) is just a feel good waste with current technology.

Do you know how many tons of overburden (Mining term) it takes to make an EV battery?
500, 000. Yep . And what's moving that dirt? Yep. Diesels.
Now, let's look at the electrical grid. Currently, natural gas is the most cost effective source of electrical energy.
It makes CO2 when burned. No benefit there.
And finally, the disposal of worn out batteries. Not cheap. And environmentally hazardous.

This is a classic example of stupid, technology challenged bureaucrats making pie in the sky policy.
And the Chinese laugh at the stupidity .
We need a real leader with a brain. Now, not later.

So you care about the environment when it comes to batteries but you care about cost effectiveness when it comes to fossil fuels. Curious double standard.

 

[Antiwar]

I suppose humanity should just wait for the perfectly clean and perfectly adequate solution to environmental collapse.

 

[Deuce]

Agree.

You still have to generate the power for EVs, and the best batteries are less than 80% efficient when in actual use (far, far less in reality). The "book value" of a charge means the highest charge rate, the highest voltage, and use at a completely constant rate in the center band of the battery's output.

Ah Efficiency - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

www.sciencedirect.com

So you have to generate 120% (minimum) of the same calories as you would with a gasoline engine of the same horsepower, and most electrical generation is just as messy as internal combustion.

And then you have to take all that required energy and add it to your existing grid, which is really bad news, especially in a place like California or Texas, where the grid is already strained to the breaking point.

Weirdly ignoring that internal combustion engines have vastly lower efficiency.

 

[Antiwar]

Agree.

You still have to generate the power for EVs, and the best batteries are less than 80% efficient when in actual use (far, far less in reality). The "book value" of a charge means the highest charge rate, the highest voltage, and use at a completely constant rate in the center band of the battery's output.

Ah Efficiency - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

www.sciencedirect.com

So you have to generate 120% (minimum) of the same calories as you would with a gasoline engine of the same horsepower, and most electrical generation is just as messy as internal combustion.

And then you have to take all that required energy and add it to your existing grid, which is really bad news, especially in a place like California or Texas, where the grid is already strained to the breaking point.

Is the well-to-wheels efficiency of battery electric cars or internal combustion engine cars better?

 

[Hamish Howl]

Weirdly ignoring that internal combustion engines have vastly lower efficiency.

I'm not ignoring it. I'm talking about battery requirements as they relate to the power grid.

I am in favor of EVs. We're just not there yet.

 

[Mr Person]

Agree.

You still have to generate the power for EVs, and the best batteries are less than 80% efficient when in actual use (far, far less in reality). The "book value" of a charge means the highest charge rate, the highest voltage, and use at a completely constant rate in the center band of the battery's output.

Ah Efficiency - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

www.sciencedirect.com

So you have to generate 120% (minimum) of the same calories as you would with a gasoline engine of the same horsepower, and most electrical generation is just as messy as internal combustion.

And then you have to take all that required energy and add it to your existing grid, which is really bad news, especially in a place like California or Texas, where the grid is already strained to the breaking point.

Bear in mind that even the most aggressive state on this set the ban for 2035 and that's for sales of brand new gas-powered cars, not used gasoline/hybrid.

Gotta start somewhere. The Enterprise won't build itself, yadda yadda. And if a certain contingent stops huffing their own farts, we could lean more heavily on nuclear rather than fossil for a while despite its imperfections.

 

[Hamish Howl]

Bear in mind that even the most aggressive state on this set the ban for 2035 and that's for sales of brand new gas-powered cars, not used gasoline/hybrid.

Gotta start somewhere. The Enterprise won't build itself, yadda yadda. And if a certain contingent stops huffing their own farts, we could lean more heavily on nuclear rather than fossil for a while despite its imperfections.

If we went over to nuclear power with goethermal, hydro, etc as backups for high use periods, I would be in favor of switching to EVs immediately, just for the pollution reduction.

 

[Hamish Howl]

Also, the best part about EVs is that people who insist on gigantic ****ing vehicles for no purpose would be mostly seen on the side of the road.

I would allow conventional fuel vehicles for farm use for a while, since they have an actual need for bigass trucks.

 

[Gordy327]

I've been in the car biz for 35 years, and still am. The push to electric vehicles (EVs) is just a feel good waste with current technology.

Do you know how many tons of overburden (Mining term) it takes to make an EV battery?
500, 000. Yep . And what's moving that dirt? Yep. Diesels.
Now, let's look at the electrical grid. Currently, natural gas is the most cost effective source of electrical energy.
It makes CO2 when burned. No benefit there.
And finally, the disposal of worn out batteries. Not cheap. And environmentally hazardous.

This is a classic example of stupid, technology challenged bureaucrats making pie in the sky policy.
And the Chinese laugh at the stupidity .
We need a real leader with a brain. Now, not later.

How does that compare to the current system of obtaining and refining fossil fuels for use? Natural gas is great for use, but not every home can utilize it for heating and cooking or whatever. Sure it releases CO2 upon combustion, but so do the other fossil fuels. Natural gas doesn't release "dirty" pollutants like coal or oil do. Speaking of coal or oil, extracting, transporting, and processing it for use extracts a heavy environmental toll. And fossil fuels are finite resources. According to the EPA, vehicles account for 26% of CO2 emissions. That doesn't even take into consideration of other pollutants produced by internal combustion. Electric vehicles produce no emissions. The batteries can also last for many years before needing replacement and can be recycled. Unfortunately, our current infrastructure is not set up for widespread electric vehicle use. But EVs are most beneficial in urban travel or short distances where they can be recharged at home. Add solar panels to a home and it's basically a free recharge and/or less demand of electrical production. Nuclear power is the most efficient means of electrical generation.

 

[Antiwar]

How energy efficient and polluting are the Pentagon's killing machines?

 

[Deuce]

I'm not ignoring it. I'm talking about battery requirements as they relate to the power grid.

I am in favor of EVs. We're just not there yet.

I think we need to replace every coal and gas plant in the country with two nuclear plants.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

I've been in the car biz for 35 years, and still am. The push to electric vehicles (EVs) is just a feel good waste with current technology.

Do you know how many tons of overburden (Mining term) it takes to make an EV battery?
500, 000. Yep . And what's moving that dirt? Yep. Diesels.
Now, let's look at the electrical grid. Currently, natural gas is the most cost effective source of electrical energy.
It makes CO2 when burned. No benefit there.
And finally, the disposal of worn out batteries. Not cheap. And environmentally hazardous.

This is a classic example of stupid, technology challenged bureaucrats making pie in the sky policy.
And the Chinese laugh at the stupidity .
We need a real leader with a brain. Now, not later.

Not sure what you mean by “car biz”, but clearly your 35 years experience has not included much in the way of learning the actual cost/benefit analysis of IC and EV vehicles.

Cut/pasted from a previous post of mine on the subject, because your above nonsense isn’t worth the time it would take to draft a new rebuttal to your old ignorance.

“As for EV’s, over the average lifespan (manufacturing to salvage yard), they account for about 60% of the greenhouse gases that a comparable internal combustion vehicle (IC) emits.

And while it is correct that greenhouse gases created in manufacturing the battery packs that power EV’s can mean higher pollution during that stage of an EV’s lifespan, within a year or two of operating an EV, the excess is negated and the EV moves well ahead of it’s IC competition.”

There is a lot of more useful factual information to be found with a simple Google search. No excuse for remaining ignorant of all the benefits associated with transitioning to EV’s.

 

[CaughtInThe]

it's just a vehicle.

 

[Lovebug]

I've been in the car biz for 35 years, and still am. The push to electric vehicles (EVs) is just a feel good waste with current technology.

Do you know how many tons of overburden (Mining term) it takes to make an EV battery?
500, 000. Yep . And what's moving that dirt? Yep. Diesels.
Now, let's look at the electrical grid. Currently, natural gas is the most cost effective source of electrical energy.
It makes CO2 when burned. No benefit there.
And finally, the disposal of worn out batteries. Not cheap. And environmentally hazardous.

This is a classic example of stupid, technology challenged bureaucrats making pie in the sky policy.
And the Chinese laugh at the stupidity .
We need a real leader with a brain. Now, not later.

Ok, I bite. Who?

 

[eohrnberger]

The good news is that global warming isn't a big deal - otherwise there would be a call for far more than performative reductions in CO2. We'd be getting advice for massive reductions in consumption: essential items only like food and shelter. Single family houses would be looked upon as wasteful, as would any form of entertainment or vice: the Earth itself hangs in the balance.

Don't give them any ideas. It'll be the next set of politically driven push narratives they'll constantly harp on.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

Agree.

You still have to generate the power for EVs, and the best batteries are less than 80% efficient when in actual use (far, far less in reality). The "book value" of a charge means the highest charge rate, the highest voltage, and use at a completely constant rate in the center band of the battery's output.

Ah Efficiency - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

www.sciencedirect.com

So you have to generate 120% (minimum) of the same calories as you would with a gasoline engine of the same horsepower, and most electrical generation is just as messy as internal combustion.

And then you have to take all that required energy and add it to your existing grid, which is really bad news, especially in a place like California or Texas, where the grid is already strained to the breaking point.

Current EV’s do not use not lead-acid batteries. They are powered by Lithium-ion batteries.

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Batteries for Electric Vehicles

afdc.energy.gov

 

[eohrnberger]

I think we need to replace every coal and gas plant in the country with two nuclear plants.

Not a bad idea but . . .
The US has been shutting down / converting coal energy plants for quite a number of years already, converting them over to much cleaner natural gas.
China is still standing up a new coal energy plant at quite a clip, like a new one every week the last I heard.

Me thinks that your focus need be on China and their building of coal energy plants at the rate they are, but I'd still welcome more nuclear in the mix here in the US - just as long as spent fuel storage at Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository is permitted.