11573 replies to this topic

[LeoVictoria]

Tesla doesn't market its cars to environmentalists. It's one of the things I appreciated about the approach. It's just a better vehicle platform....

 

Yep.  If you make a car for environmentalists that will be a Prius.  It sells, but not that well, and only if gas prices are high.  EVs will take over the market because they are better, not because anyone gives a crap about the environment.   That is just, as Bob Ross would say, a happy little accident.

[LJ]

Yep.  If you make a car for environmentalists that will be a Prius.  It sells, but not that well, and only if gas prices are high.  EVs will take over the market because they are better, not because anyone gives a crap about the environment.   That is just, as Bob Ross would say, a happy little accident.

I agree, but only if they are price competitive with an ICE vehicle. You shouldn't have to pay a premium to get a much more simply made vehicle.

[Victoria Watcher]

they also need to overcome the perceived danger of running out of power. some percentage of people will always be concerned about being half way to Kelowna when the thing hits empty battery. somehow we’ve come to trust our gas guages (and plentiful gas stations along the route). not sure yet we trust the battery indicator so fully.

[Mike K.]

That’s exactly the sort of fanboy content I’m talking about. Everything about the EV is best-case scenario, everything about the ICE equivalent is worst case scenario or conjecture.

Not surprisingly nowhere in these articles do we see the simplest of facts:
- CO2 to produce X ICE car
- CO2 to produce an exactly equivalent X EV

Here’s the stuff the fanboys won’t mention:

“The production of lithium-ion batteries for light electric vehicles releases on average 150-200 kilos of carbon dioxide equivalents per kilowatt-hour battery. One of the smallest electric cars on the market, Nissan Leaf, uses batteries of approx. 30 kWh; many new models have batteries of 60 and 100 kWh. An electric car with a 100kWh battery has thus emitted 15-20 tons of carbon dioxide even before the vehicle ignition is turned on.” - Swedish Environment Institute (http://www.ivl.se/do... batteries .pdf)

In that report it outlines that 2.7 years of driving an equivalent ICE is required to overcome the footprint of the Leaf, and a staggering 8.2 to overcome that of the Tesla S. And that’s in Sweden where the power grid is less dependent on fossil fuels than in many jurisdictions.

Anyone claiming it takes 4,900 miles of driving, or whatever, to negate the footprint of producing an EV is relying on junk science. And that’s all before we even get into the topic of the environmental destruction caused by mining the various ingredients for the battery cocktails and the untold story of their long term environmental impacts.

[Victoria Watcher]

surely “mining” the crude for the gasoline is damaging too.

[Mike K.]

Absolutely it is but nobody is trying to pretend the effects don’t exist.

[dasmo]

Here is an awesome excerpt from that report for us Tesla fanboys!
“The largest part of the energy use in the production of lithium-ion batteries comes from electricity use. Because of this the electricity mix is a critical factor for the greenhouse gas emissions from production. The largest short term potential to impact the electricity mix in the production stage will come from placement of the production plants, as the emissions from the electricity can vary a lot between countries. Alternatively the battery plant can ensure access to fossil-free energy by buying or producing green electricity.”
Like a factory in the desert powered by solar energy?

[LeoVictoria]

I agree, but only if they are price competitive with an ICE vehicle. You shouldn't have to pay a premium to get a much more simply made vehicle.

 

Yup.   Mass adoption requires the price premium to be much lower than it is now.   

[LeoVictoria]

That’s exactly the sort of fanboy content I’m talking about. Everything about the EV is best-case scenario, everything about the ICE equivalent is worst case scenario or conjecture.

Not surprisingly nowhere in these articles do we see the simplest of facts:
- CO2 to produce X ICE car
- CO2 to produce an exactly equivalent X EV

 

That is in the report, as usual you simply didn't read it.

Emissions to produce a vehicle are X.  Emissions to produce a battery electric vehicle are X + emissions to produce battery.   It's actually a bit less than that since you lose some mechanical parts but that is a conservative assumption.

The the only factor here is emissions to produce the battery.   

"For a midsize 84-mile-range BEV, manufacturing emissions are approximately 15 percent, or 1 ton of CO2e higher than those of a comparable conventional gasoline vehicle. .   For a full-size 265-mile-range BEV, manufacturing emissions are approximately 68 percent, or 6 tons of CO2e higher than a comparable conventional gasoline vehicle. "

 

Their midsize EV is a Leaf, compared to similar gas car like a Mazda 3 or Golf.

Their full size EV is a Model S, compared to a car similar to Equus or A8.

 

Page 16 is where that discussion starts.

https://www.ucsusa.o...ll-report.pdf  

[Mike K.]

Well I read the link, lol. I didn’t realize there was another report linked from there.

So we’ve got quite a discrepancy between the Swedes and the Americans, where the Swedes estimate over eight years of driving to overcome the difference for a Model S.

[LeoVictoria]

“The production of lithium-ion batteries for light electric vehicles releases on average 150-200 kilos of carbon dioxide equivalents per kilowatt-hour battery. One of the smallest electric cars on the market, Nissan Leaf, uses batteries of approx. 30 kWh; many new models have batteries of 60 and 100 kWh. An electric car with a 100kWh battery has thus emitted 15-20 tons of carbon dioxide even before the vehicle ignition is turned on.” - Swedish Environment Institute (http://www.ivl.se/do... batteries .pdf)

In that report it outlines that 2.7 years of driving an equivalent ICE is required to overcome the footprint of the Leaf, and a staggering 8.2 to overcome that of the Tesla S. And that’s in Sweden where the power grid is less dependent on fossil fuels than in many jurisdictions.

Anyone claiming it takes 4,900 miles of driving, or whatever, to negate the footprint of producing an EV is relying on junk science. And that’s all before we even get into the topic of the environmental destruction caused by mining the various ingredients for the battery cocktails and the untold story of their long term environmental impacts.

 

Now for your study.   The years to break even are not accurate (at least for here) given that:

1. The diesel they compare to is what they call "environmentally friendly diesel" which includes 40-50% carbon neutral hydrocarbons.  Perhaps that diesel exists in Sweden, but it does not exist here.  

2.  They assume diesel generated zero emissions to get to the pump.  No emissions taken into account from oil extraction / refining / transportation.  

3.  Annual mileage assumption is 12,000km.  Canadians drive 15,000

4. Assumes 50% fossil fuel mix for the battery plant.  Both Tesla's factory and Nissan's factory in Tennessee run on a cleaner grid than that.  

 

However the big difference seems to be the estimate of energy to manufacture.  They cite some studies that give a range of estimates from 371MJ/kWh to 568MJ/kWh.     It's unclear exactly what value the UCA used for their estimates, but they cite the same sources and use the same GREET method for estimating.  Would have to find another paper that reviews the two to really figure out who is closer.

Edited by LeoVictoria, 17 January 2019 - 09:54 PM.

[LeoVictoria]

Ford measured "140 kg CO2-eq per kWh or 11 kg CO2-eq per kg of battery"   for the production of their own Focus Electric.    https://pubs.acs.org...acs.est.6b00830

 

That is 3.4 tons for the battery pack, or using Mike's number of 4.6 tons produced by the average car driver per year, a payback of 9 months for the embodied CO2 cost of Leaf type car.  

 

How it scales to a different vehicle like a Model 3 is a little unclear, but the Tesla Model 3 battery weighs 478kg.   478kg * 11 kg CO2/kg = 5.3 tons for the Model 3 or 14 months of driving before the EV is cleaner than gas car.

Edited by LeoVictoria, 17 January 2019 - 10:12 PM.

[dasmo]

I know y’all ignore me but it was actually relevant to this conversation what I highlighted....

[Mike K.]

Don’t worry, dasmo, the environmental equation is indeed secondary, but only when it’s not (like the province’s sudden push for EV’s as environmentally friendly).

I don’t put any faith in any studies at this time. The discrepancies are too vast, the data too limited and far too exposed to manipulation and conjecture. The only way we’ll know for sure what the real deal is is when we have more of these vehicles feeding real world tests on a meaningful scale.

[lanforod]

My gut feeling is that in the long run, EVs are going to be better for the planet. That's without looking at the numbers at all. Mike's gut feeling seems to be the opposite.

Lots of people just don't like change, so will continue to tout gas/ICE cars and look for skewed data to support their beliefs. 

 

If an EV was on par cost wise for a gas car today (i'm talking sub-compact), I'd own one. Simply comes down to economics at this point.

 

Dasmo, your point regarding production of the batteries is a factor, but that isn't really what Mike is getting at in terms of pollution from battery creation, I don't think. The largest part of that pollution comes from the mining, IIRC, not from the production at the battery plant.

 

We don't even have enough of the raw materials needed in the world to switch every vehicle to EV. Lithium production needs to grow a lot, we need to find more cobalt, etc.

[Mike K.]

Tesla’s stock is tanking today on the announcement that 7% of its workforce needs to be cut. Ordinarily this type of move elicits support from investors, but the concern is demand for the vehicles is waning and Tesla needs to build a cheap, mass consumer alternative and do so ASAP.

My beef is while we harp on fossil fuel extraction, the dirty mining for EV batteries is quietly swept under the carpet. The industry is a blood industry already nicknamed Blood Batteries but the fanboys don’t mind because their idols say the future will be kinder and gentler. Well, sure, but for now the situation is pretty dark.

[Victoria Watcher]

What are the advantages of an ev?

big question right? but one approach in marketing then has to be to prove the extra sticker price is worthwhile. one way that might be achieved is selling them with a free maintenance package. or selling them with “free” mileage included and I mean the electricity to run them is included.

imagine if you could have your home fast charger included in the price AND the charger is metrred back to Tesla.

so you pay $40,000 for the car but for the first 8 years you pay absolutely nothing for fuel or maintenance.

[Victoria Watcher]

Tesla’s stock is tanking today on the announcement that 7% of its workforce needs to be cut. Ordinarily this type of move elicits support from investors, but the concern is demand for the vehicles is waning and Tesla needs to build a cheap, mass consumer alternative and do so ASAP.

the big automakers lose money on those types of vehicles. why should Tesla go that route?

[dasmo]

The Human condition is hypocritical Mike. All things we humans do destroy something in order to create. It's a process of evolution to maybe achieve sustainability but deep down we know it's not really possible long long term. This is why Elon also has Space X so we can eventually move off planet.    

 

What you really need to do is to compare the two routes holistically. So Gas VS EV from an embodied energy perspective to manufacture the car, the political humanitarian perspective, then a pollution standpoint of running the two types,  the embodied energy and political / humanitarian impact of the fuel creation and delivery and finally the end of life impact of both products. 

 

Or just debate Mac VS PC style because it's easier and just as much fun!  

[DustMagnet]

Apparently Ford is readying hybrid and fully electric versions of the venerable F150 in part because they are concerned that Tesla (among others) are enough of an upcoming threat in that market.

 

But, I expect them to be priced to not sell like hotcakes, pardon my pessimism.