Have EVs Reached A Short-Term Peak?

[Bamaro]

Study finds EVs quickly overcome their energy-intensive build to be cleaner than gas cars​

DETROIT (AP) — Making electric vehicles and their batteries is a dirty process that uses a lot of energy. But a new study says that EVs quickly make up for that with less overall emissions through two years of use than a gas-powered vehicle.

The study also estimated that gas-powered vehicles cause at least twice as much environmental damage over their lifetimes as EVs, and said the benefits of EVs can be expected to increase in coming decades as clean sources of power, such as solar and wind, are brought onto the grid.

The work by researchers from Northern Arizona University and Duke University, published Wednesday in the journal PLOS Climate, offers insight into a transportation sector that makes up a big part of U.S. emissions. It also comes as some EV skeptics have raised concerns about whether the environmental impact of battery production, including mining, makes it worthwhile to switch to electric.

MSN

 

[CrimsonJazz]

BREAKING: In a massive hit, Ford, $F, is writing down $19.5 billion in EV investments.

Ford also says it will stop producing the electric version of the F-150.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2000673886178865652

 

[4Q Basket Case]

The full-electric technology just isn't there yet. Re-charging infrastructure isn't sufficiently built out. Too often, chargers that are in place aren't working. It still takes too long to long to refuel. Which makes time in line to get to an operable charger and the re-charging time itself sometimes measured in hours.

The planning for a road trip is tedious and depends on the hope that the stations you plan to use actually work when you get there.

Range is iffy. If it's too hot, range is less than claimed. If it's too cold, range is less than claimed. If you run the AC, range goes down. Unlike an ICE, there is no heat from the engine to run a heater. So the battery has to power that too. So if you run the heat range goes down. And running the climate control compounds the erosion of range caused by the ambient temperature that's causing the driver to use heat or AC in the first place.

All that feeds range anxiety.

Then there's the debate around whether they're really environmentally friendly. First, you have to get the stuff to build the car out of the ground. How's the energy for that generated? Then you have to process the various ores to get usable material. How much energy does that processing take? How is that energy generated, and what happens to the leftover slag?

Note that the majority of processing takes place in China. Which isn't exactly known for energy efficiency, clean generation of energy, or clean disposal of waste.

Without doubt when the car is actually on the road, it is cleaner than an ICE. But (1) that's not an answer to the question, and (2) it also doesn't take into account how the energy to charge the car is generated. So how much cleaner is it really?

If you just use the car to putter around town and charge it overnight at a station in your garage, range anxiety isn't really a problem. But then you have to pay for the charging station and associated wiring. And if you live in a city and park on the street, you don't have the luxury of your own private charger.

Eventually, I think we'll get there. Eventually, batteries will be produced cleanly, re-charging will take 5 minutes, what are now gasoline stations will have chargers, and the electricity will be generated by nuclear power (the irony there is sweet). But I'm about to turn 67, and I don't think it'll happen in my lifetime.

 

[Bamaro]

We need more PHEVs

 

[mdb-tpet]

The full-electric technology just isn't there yet. Re-charging infrastructure isn't sufficiently built out. Too often, chargers that are in place aren't working. It still takes too long to long to refuel. Which makes time in line to get to an operable charger and the re-charging time itself sometimes measured in hours.

The planning for a road trip is tedious and depends on the hope that the stations you plan to use actually work when you get there.

Range is iffy. If it's too hot, range is less than claimed. If it's too cold, range is less than claimed. If you run the AC, range goes down. Unlike an ICE, there is no heat from the engine to run a heater. So the battery has to power that too. So if you run the heat range goes down. And running the climate control compounds the erosion of range caused by the ambient temperature that's causing the driver to use heat or AC.

All that feeds range anxiety.

Then there's the debate around whether they're really environmentally friendly. First, you have to get the stuff to build the car out of the ground. How's the energy for that generated? Then you have to process the various ores to get usable material. How much energy does that processing take? How is that energy generated, and what happens to the leftover slag?

Note that the majority of processing takes place in China. Which isn't exactly known for energy efficiency, clean generation of energy, or clean disposal of waste.

Without doubt when the car is actually on the road, it is cleaner than an ICE. But (1) that's not an answer to the question, and (2) it also doesn't take into account how the energy to charge the car is generated. So how much cleaner is it really?

If you just use the car to putter around town and charge it overnight at a station in your garage, range anxiety isn't really a problem. But then you have to pay for the charging station and associated wiring. And if you live in a city and park on the street, you don't have the luxury of your own private charger.

Eventually, I think we'll get there. Eventually, batteries will be produced cleanly, re-charging will take 5 minutes, what are now gasoline stations will have chargers, and everything will be powered by nuclear power (the irony there is sweet). But I'm about to turn 67, and I don't think it'll happen in my lifetime.

I've said this before, but EVs only solve ONE of the problems with cars (fuel), meaning the real drive to them is weak at best. Also, throw in a seemingly unhinged/distracted/ketamine doped CEO who alienated over off half of his customers and who was previously highly responsible for building the EV market in the US. So, we're still left with crummy infrastructure for transportation using a war causing/petrostate creating chemical to power our cars. Again.

We need high speed rail, subways, better buses, great sidewalks with walkable cities, bicycle infrastructure, greenways for kids to bike on safely, and trails for MTB/nature access. Or just a real transportation system. Instead we have miles and miles of hot, dead, black tar and asphalt moats around everystore miles apart from each other all but forcing people to drive everywhere. It's enough to make me want to seriously consider moving to a country that gets that people are not cars, and not every trip should require finding a parking space.

 

[UAH]

The full-electric technology just isn't there yet. Re-charging infrastructure isn't sufficiently built out. Too often, chargers that are in place aren't working. It still takes too long to long to refuel. Which makes time in line to get to an operable charger and the re-charging time itself sometimes measured in hours.

The planning for a road trip is tedious and depends on the hope that the stations you plan to use actually work when you get there.

Range is iffy. If it's too hot, range is less than claimed. If it's too cold, range is less than claimed. If you run the AC, range goes down. Unlike an ICE, there is no heat from the engine to run a heater. So the battery has to power that too. So if you run the heat range goes down. And running the climate control compounds the erosion of range caused by the ambient temperature that's causing the driver to use heat or AC.

All that feeds range anxiety.

Then there's the debate around whether they're really environmentally friendly. First, you have to get the stuff to build the car out of the ground. How's the energy for that generated? Then you have to process the various ores to get usable material. How much energy does that processing take? How is that energy generated, and what happens to the leftover slag?

Note that the majority of processing takes place in China. Which isn't exactly known for energy efficiency, clean generation of energy, or clean disposal of waste.

Without doubt when the car is actually on the road, it is cleaner than an ICE. But (1) that's not an answer to the question, and (2) it also doesn't take into account how the energy to charge the car is generated. So how much cleaner is it really?

If you just use the car to putter around town and charge it overnight at a station in your garage, range anxiety isn't really a problem. But then you have to pay for the charging station and associated wiring. And if you live in a city and park on the street, you don't have the luxury of your own private charger.

Eventually, I think we'll get there. Eventually, batteries will be produced cleanly, re-charging will take 5 minutes, what are now gasoline stations will have chargers, and everything will be powered by nuclear power (the irony there is sweet). But I'm about to turn 67, and I don't think it'll happen in my lifetime.

I agree that it makes no sense to purchase an electric car and then charge it with electricity generated at a coal fired plant. This is similar to eviromentalist decrying the use of peat moss and advocating for use of coconut coir that must be transported from the South Pacific region. All of this deserves an honest assessment. I have always felt that enviromental advocates utilize their SUV's and air travel to bemoan the developing world having cars and utilizing air travel also. It is all too similar to our willingness to constantly focus on the loss of the rain forest in South America while we drain and develop swamp land forest and farms to support urban sprawl in virtually every growth region in the US.

The mining of materials for batteries has to be included as well and balanced against the cost for coal mining and oil exploration.

Saying all of that I do see a lot of developments of clean energy in solar, wind and tidal development around the world. I also realize that China in manufacturing cost effective electric vehicles and massively reducing charge times and increasing range of EV's.

 

[CrimsonNagus]

I used to be enamored by EVs, but the prices never came close to what I am willing to spend on a car, no more than $300 a month. The car I drive now was $22K, the one before was $16K. EVs were never going to get into my price range.

 

[mdb-tpet]

I agree that it makes no sense to purchase an electric car and then charge it with electricity generated at a coal fired plant. This is similar to eviromentalist decrying the use of peat moss and advocating for use of coconut coir that must be transported from the South Pacific region. All of this deserves an honest assessment. I have always felt that enviromental advocates utilize their SUV's and air travel to bemoan the developing world having cars and utilizing air travel also. It is all too similar to our willingness to constantly focus on the loss of the rain forest in South America while we drain and develop swamp land forest and farms to support urban sprawl in virtually every growth region in the US.

The mining of materials for batteries has to be included as well and balanced against the cost for coal mining and oil exploration.

Saying all of that I do see a lot of developments of clean energy in solar, wind and tidal development around the world. I also realize that China in manufacturing cost effective electric vehicles and massively reducing charge times and increasing range of EV's.

It's not hard to power an EV by solar panels in a majority of the US. At our house, for over half of the year, make a lot more power than we need for our house AND fully power our car. So I find the coal argument is weak, especially for areas that don't run on coal. If you put Solar on your roof, it will pay for itself in less than 10 years usually, leaving you with a net cost reduction for power as well.

The cost of mining goes for both types of cars, and lithium is proving to be very recyclable, just like steel. There are dozens of studies showing the environmental breakeven point for EVs vs. gas cars is usually within the 2-5 year ownership point depending on the car. https://www.reuters.com/business/au...become-cleaner-than-gasoline-cars-2021-06-29/

Plus, anybody within 250 miles of a data center is about to get a rude power bill price spike as the data centers get sweetheart prices for power and schluff off the cost of the more expensive power plants that will come back online to meet their peak demand. So home solar power is starting to look REALLY smart. But don't worry, we have elected a strong government to protect the citizens from corporate price gouging...

 

[JDCrimson]

I talked with a friend who owns a F150 Lightening for 3 years. He said he gets about 300 miles per charge in town and 280 miles on the interstate. He said it added about $75 a month to his power bill. He staff he was saving a fortune on his in town driving. Has another vehicle for longer trips but also rents a car for the longer trip.

 

[arthurdawg]

The full-electric technology just isn't there yet. Re-charging infrastructure isn't sufficiently built out. Too often, chargers that are in place aren't working. It still takes too long to long to refuel. Which makes time in line to get to an operable charger and the re-charging time itself sometimes measured in hours.

The planning for a road trip is tedious and depends on the hope that the stations you plan to use actually work when you get there.

Range is iffy. If it's too hot, range is less than claimed. If it's too cold, range is less than claimed. If you run the AC, range goes down. Unlike an ICE, there is no heat from the engine to run a heater. So the battery has to power that too. So if you run the heat range goes down. And running the climate control compounds the erosion of range caused by the ambient temperature that's causing the driver to use heat or AC in the first place.

All that feeds range anxiety.

Then there's the debate around whether they're really environmentally friendly. First, you have to get the stuff to build the car out of the ground. How's the energy for that generated? Then you have to process the various ores to get usable material. How much energy does that processing take? How is that energy generated, and what happens to the leftover slag?

Note that the majority of processing takes place in China. Which isn't exactly known for energy efficiency, clean generation of energy, or clean disposal of waste.

Without doubt when the car is actually on the road, it is cleaner than an ICE. But (1) that's not an answer to the question, and (2) it also doesn't take into account how the energy to charge the car is generated. So how much cleaner is it really?

If you just use the car to putter around town and charge it overnight at a station in your garage, range anxiety isn't really a problem. But then you have to pay for the charging station and associated wiring. And if you live in a city and park on the street, you don't have the luxury of your own private charger.

Eventually, I think we'll get there. Eventually, batteries will be produced cleanly, re-charging will take 5 minutes, what are now gasoline stations will have chargers, and the electricity will be generated by nuclear power (the irony there is sweet). But I'm about to turn 67, and I don't think it'll happen in my lifetime.

I have an old college pal who is extremely liberal, huge environmental guy. But also a very smart environmental guy who deep dives the issues and has the science degrees to back it up.

He feels EVs add very little.

I think they are fine if you are using them for local transport and particularly if you have room to install solar yourself though. Several partners have electrics for local use and love them.

Maybe more hybrids...

 

[UAH]

It's not hard to power an EV by solar panels in a majority of the US. At our house, for over half of the year, make a lot more power than we need for our house AND fully power our car. So I find the coal argument is weak, especially for areas that don't run on coal. If you put Solar on your roof, it will pay for itself in less than 10 years usually, leaving you with a net cost reduction for power as well.

The cost of mining goes for both types of cars, and lithium is proving to be very recyclable, just like steel. There are dozens of studies showing the environmental breakeven point for EVs vs. gas cars is usually within the 2-5 year ownership point depending on the car. https://www.reuters.com/business/au...become-cleaner-than-gasoline-cars-2021-06-29/

Plus, anybody within 250 miles of a data center is about to get a rude power bill price spike as the data centers get sweetheart prices for power and schluff off the cost of the more expensive power plants that will come back online to meet their peak demand. So home solar power is starting to look REALLY smart. But don't worry, we have elected a strong government to protect the citizens from corporate price gouging...

I agree that the spike in electricity and natural gas prices coupled with our antiquated distribution system will make solar much more attractive from a pay back standpoint. As a first step I am trying to force myself to develop a solar station for charging batteries for back up power. It has proven difficult for me to identify the right battery(s) back up and solar arrangement to get underway. Due to age I have a limited time horizon but would expect this country to be pressed into much more efficient ways to heat and cool our homes.