Why electric cars are not green machines?

[begreen]

Perhaps look overseas where national interests take precedence and culture wars are less of an issue?

EV Vs Hybrid Vs ICE: Are Electric Cars Worth It? | Mer UK

Internal combustion engine vehicles still make up the majority of UK car sales. Are the benefits of PHEVs & EVs enough to make UK driver's switch? Read more.

uk.mer.eco

 

[StoveInNH]

Perhaps look overseas where national interests take precedence and culture wars are less of an issue?

EV Vs Hybrid Vs ICE: Are Electric Cars Worth It? | Mer UK

Internal combustion engine vehicles still make up the majority of UK car sales. Are the benefits of PHEVs & EVs enough to make UK driver's switch? Read more.

uk.mer.eco

To confirm, that report is known to be unbiased, from an unbiased organization, that doesn't take money from political parties. Correct?

 

[begreen]

I can't say that. It simply presents a pov from the UK.
Personally, I think all the hand-wringing about losing ICE vehicles is overwrought. They are super practical in urban and suburban environments with economic, health, and environmental positives. And they are nice to drive. The lower noise of electric motors is a huge plus along with a lot less brake dust in the air. That said, all vehicles will not be electric. Hybrids will still exist and I suspect hydrogen-based ICE vehicles will gain popularity in certain segments. It's good to stay mindful of the environmental impacts of any technology. Ultimately, we need to conserve more and consume less if we are going to slow down planetary climate change. Making vehicles much more energy efficient is a win regardless of technology.

 

[StoveInNH]

I can't say that. It simply presents a pov from the UK.
Personally, I think all the hand-wringing about losing ICE vehicles is overwrought. They are super practical in urban and suburban environments with economic, health, and environmental positives. And they are nice to drive. The lower noise of electric motors is a huge plus along with a lot less brake dust in the air. That said, all vehicles will not be electric. Hybrids will still exist and I suspect hydrogen-based ICE vehicles will gain popularity in certain segments. It's good to stay mindful of the environmental impacts of any technology. Ultimately, we need to conserve more and consume less if we are going to slow down planetary climate change. Making vehicles more energy efficient is a win regardless of technology.

Hmm. Seems hypocritical to label one research piece, that doesn't fit your narrative, as biased, while quoting another, with potentially equal bias.

The fact that the research was not done in the US is irrelevant.

 

[woodgeek]

Which report covers all of the data in an unbiased fashion from an unbiased organization?

There are many peer-reviewed academic studies that are funded by the public. I found a 2020 one in Nature in 30 seconds of googling. The scientists are working out of the UK and Holland, basically down the street from your Daily Mail guys.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-020-0488-7.pdf

It considers a few scenarios, and asks specifically how green are EVs in different countries, making estimates for their lifetime emissions running on grids in those countries. In one case, it assumes the current trajectory, with projected greening of the grid. Then it assumes the grids are frozen at their current CO2 emissions. And it also assumes a better, 2°C scenario.

The paper is from 2020. The IRA passage in the US now puts the US numbers closer to the 2°C scenario. EU passed similar legislation after the IRA, so they are probably closer to the 2°C numbers too.

Note that in Figure 3, the first chart is just CO2 per mile, currently, ignoring the manufacturing emissions. The three scenarios to the right are lifecycle estimates that DO include manufacturing inputs, in 2030 (current cars), and 2050 (future cars).

Summary: 2°C scenarios suggest lifetime emissions for BEVs is about 50% of ICE in US, only 30% in EU. Frozen grids (not current policy in US or EU) EVs are more like 70-80% in US, and 50% in EU. Gains in India and China are somewhat worse that in the US/EU. China EVs are a wash in the most pessimistic frozen grid scenario, and only 20-30% green in the 2020 business as usual trajectory.

If you don't trust publically funded academics or scientific journals or peer review, you can skip it and keep asking unbiased.

 

[StoveInNH]

There are many peer-reviewed academic studies that are funded by the public. I found a 2020 one in Nature in 30 seconds of googling. The scientists are working out of the UK and Holland, basically down the street from your Daily Mail guys.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-020-0488-7.pdf

It considers a few scenarios, and asks specifically how green are EVs in different countries, making estimates for their lifetime emissions running on grids in those countries. In one case, it assumes the current trajectory, with projected greening of the grid. Then it assumes the grids are frozen at their current CO2 emissions. And it also assumes a better, 2°C scenario.

The paper is from 2020. The IRA passage in the US now puts the US numbers closer to the 2°C scenario. EU passed similar legislation after the IRA, so they are probably closer to the 2°C numbers too.

Note that in Figure 3, the first chart is just CO2 per mile, currently, ignoring the manufacturing emissions. The three scenarios to the right are lifecycle estimates that DO include manufacturing inputs, in 2030 (current cars), and 2050 (future cars).

Summary: 2°C scenarios suggest lifetime emissions for BEVs is about 50% of ICE in US, only 30% in EU. Frozen grids (not current policy in US or EU) EVs are more like 70-80% in US, and 50% in EU. Gains in India and China are somewhat worse that in the US/EU. China EVs are a wash in the most pessimistic frozen grid scenario, and only 20-30% green in the 2020 business as usual trajectory.

If you don't trust publically funded academics or scientific journals or peer review, you can skip it and keep asking unbiased.

Before I read this . . . You don't have ANY problem with moderators calling an article that doesn't fit their narrative biased, then quoting another article that they haven't looked into the bias of? Seriously?

Just be fair. This is a forum. An open dialog. Moderators should NOT be biased. And using their bias to push their narrative. And these ones are.

 

[woodgeek]

Dude, you have opinions. The mods have opinions. I have opinions.

I think the mods want to see where info is coming from, and if an article is an 'opinion' piece without and sources to back up its claims, it is considered less reliable.

For the record, I would put more liberal journo sources (NYT, WaPo) in the same category as Fox or Daily Mail. Not reliable.

 

[Ashful]

ICE vs. EV is becoming the new religion, à la Republican vs. Democrat, with clear party lines drawn toward each. What a shame.

History will not look fondly upon this time, and the claims made by some who choose to ignore simple math, or play fast and loose with hard numbers.

 

[StoveInNH]

Dude, you have opinions. The mods have opinions. I have opinions.

I think the mods want to see where info is coming from, and if an article is an 'opinion' piece without and sources to back up its claims, it is considered less reliable.

Massive difference . . . My opinions don't result in posts being deleted or edited.

Massive difference.

When you weild authority, you need to do so fair and unbiased. Some mods here do not believe that. You know that's the case.

And I know that I'm free to go elsewhere to find my information and not use this forum. It's my choice to stay here. I do find a lot of value here but I don't appreciate the heavy-handed moderation. I wish you wouldn't appreciate it either.

If the forum was called the "Politically Left Leaning Hearth" that would be different. The intent of the forum would be clear at that point. But it's not.

Either way, thanks for the dialog. I appreciate the time.

I'm going outside to work on my ICE.

 

[StoveInNH]

ICE vs. EV is becoming the new religion, à la Republican vs. Democrat, with clear party lines drawn toward each. What a shame.

History will not look fondly upon this time, and the claims made by some who choose to ignore simple math, or play fast and loose with hard numbers.

Which side is ignoring simple math?

 

[bholler]

Which side is ignoring simple math?

The simple fact is electric motors are just much more efficient at using a given amount of power to move things than ice motors.

Are they ready for everyone to be able to switch? Absolutely not. But does that mean we should stop developing them now because of that? Again Absolutely not. At this point they don't make sense for me but they do for many people. And as battery tech develops they will only get better

 

[StoveInNH]

The simple fact is electric motors are just much more efficient at using a given amount of power to move things than ice motors.

Are they ready for everyone to be able to switch? Absolutely not. But does that mean we should stop developing them now because of that? Again Absolutely not. At this point they don't make sense for me but they do for many people. And as battery tech develops they will only get better

That's a tiny, oversimplified side of things. There's more at play here. Oil, lithium, pollution etc. It is NOT simple math. At all.

 

[bholler]

That's a tiny, oversimplified side of things. There's more at play here. Oil, lithium, pollution etc. It is NOT simple math. At all.

Yes of course it's an over simplification. But when it comes down to it that is the most important part. And there are many people working to develop better battery tech. It will come. Look at how long it took to develop ice vehicles to the point they are. Now look at how long evs have been seriously worked on. Give them some time.

 

[woodgeek]

Massive difference . . . My opinions don't result in posts being deleted or edited.

Massive difference.

When you weild authority, you need to do so fair and unbiased. Some mods here do not believe that. You know that's the case.

And I know that I'm free to go elsewhere to find my information and not use this forum. It's my choice to stay here. I do find a lot of value here but I don't appreciate the heavy-handed moderation. I wish you wouldn't appreciate it either.

If the forum was called the "Politically Left Leaning Hearth" that would be different. The intent of the forum would be clear at that point. But it's not.

Either way, thanks for the dialog. I appreciate the time.

I'm going outside to work on my ICE.

Have you figured out that this forum is left leaning, or that you are far to the right of the posters here?

I try to be careful to make s distinction between what are my personal opinions and what I think is factually based. The latter needs to come from a reliable source, such as a peer reviewed pub or a summary of a peer reviewed pub.

I have said many things over the years that the mods have disagreed with. But it hasn't got me banned yet!

I'm still curious to know what you think about the paper I linked hat covered the same topic as your Daily Mail article.

If the upshot is that EVs currently sold in the US are expected to have about 50% of the lifetimes CO2 emissions, then does that support your argument? 50% of a chit-ton of CO2 from cars currently is still a lot of CO2. I don't consider EVs 'green' for this reason. There are projections they will be greener in 2040 or 2050, but that are just ... projections.

In comparison current tech LED bulbs have 90% lower CO2 emissions over their rated life than the equivalent incandescent. 90% reduction is pretty sweet. I think we can have LEDs and not destroy the planet.

Do you think LED bulbs are a green technology? Do you believe the 90% reduction estimates?

Here are a couple older articles from Daily Mail about LED and CFL bulbs...

Whose bright idea was this? New 'green' light bulbs will cost you $50 EACH (and you'll HAVE to buy them after 100-watt bulbs are banned)

Those stock-piling the traditional 100-watt bulbs ahead of the U.S. Government ban in January may not want to stop just yet.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Environmentally friendly light bulbs can give you skin cancer

Energy-saving light bulbs can be bad for your skin, doctors are warning. The fluorescent devices produce a more intense light and can aggravate a range of existing problems, especially in those with light-sensitive conditions

www.dailymail.co.uk

One in four 'long-life' bulbs doesn't last as long as makers claim

Some did not even reach the EU's new minimum of 6,000 hours which comes into force in March. LED bulbs from Ikea and Technical Consumer Products (TCP) performed worst, according to Which?

www.dailymail.co.uk

I don't think those articles have aged well. Do you?

 

[Ashful]

Which side is ignoring simple math?

Both, actually. But in this particular case, anyone trying to place the total lifetime greenhouse gas emissions of an EV anywhere near on-par with an ICE, is being pretty selective in their accounting of all factors involved. And don't accuse me of a "leaning left", I'm a registered Republican.

 

[StoveInNH]

Both, actually. But in this particular case, anyone trying to place the total lifetime greenhouse gas emissions of an EV anywhere near on-par with an ICE, is being pretty selective in their accounting of all factors involved. And don't accuse me of a "leaning left", I'm a registered Republican.

The original article I posted discusses much more than that.

I'll feel free to make my own judgements as to the leaning of this forum based on its content.

 

[bholler]

The original article I posted discusses much more than that.

I'll feel free to make my own judgements as to the leaning of this forum based on its content.

Im sorry but the original article really contains very little data and doesn't cite any studies or sources for the little data it does provide.

 

[StoveInNH]

Im sorry but the original article really contains very little data and doesn't cite any studies or sources for the little data it does provide.

Many news articles don't contain sources. I still enjoyed the content and it made me think a bit.

But I'll be on the lookout for articles posted on this site that don't contain sources. I know you will, too.

 

[SpaceBus]

Many news articles don't contain sources. I still enjoyed the content and it made me think a bit.

But I'll be on the lookout for articles posted on this site that don't contain sources. I know you will, too.

You can post all the opinion you want, we are entitled to point out what is opinion and what is peer reviewed research.

 

[StoveInNH]

You can post all the opinion you want, we are entitled to point out what is opinion and what is peer reviewed research.

You can! Please be sure to do so for all users, not just us "far right" folks.

 

[bholler]

Many news articles don't contain sources. I still enjoyed the content and it made me think a bit.

But I'll be on the lookout for articles posted on this site that don't contain sources. I know you will, too.

I call out questionable data lots of times on both sides of any argument. Honestly their whole argument that cars will never reach the point of being environmentally beneficial because they will be traded in then not resold certainly doesn't hold true here.

 

[SpaceBus]

You can! Please be sure to do so for all users, not just us "far right" folks.

I am entitled to do so whenever I please, but I do point out inaccurate information whenever I see it. Unfortunately, I don't read every single thread.

 

[StoveInNH]

I call out questionable data lots of times on both sides of any argument. Honestly their whole argument that cars will never reach the point of being environmentally beneficial because they will be traded in then not resold certainly doesn't hold true here.

I think the issue is, they will be resold, but will need new/replacement batteries/cells which resets some of the "green clock"

I buy the argument. Tough to put figures on it, but I buy the argument.

 

[StoveInNH]

I am entitled to do so whenever I please, but I do point out inaccurate information whenever I see it. Unfortunately, I don't read every single thread.

Me, too. Let's point out that content, without bias, together.

 

[bholler]

I think the issue is, they will be resold, but will need new/replacement batteries/cells which resets some of the "green clock"

I buy the argument. Tough to put figures on it, but I buy the argument.

Why will they need new batteries? There isn't anything in that article saying that. And the data really doesn't show they typically need replaced that often. You just randomly assumed that based upon their warranty