EVs versus ICEs:Carbon footprint negligible

[Gary K]

The vast amount of power used to create lithion ion batteries makes EVs overall the equal of the internal combustion engine cars. In fact, to manufacture an EV takes anywhere from 20-50% more carbon to manufacture. In addition, the lithion ion batteries will only last for approximately 135000 miles of driving. Compared to the lifespan of the newer internal combustion engines of 300-400 thousand miles. The EV batteries are the majority of the carbon used in creating an EV and by far the greatest cost of the vehicle. This means an EV is going to have no resale value at all when compared to an internal combustion car at 100000 miles. My 1990 Honda with 310,000+ miles would basically be a total cost of ownership of approximately 1/3 the cost of an EV, and it's carbon footprint would be approximately 1/3 of an EV over both their lifetimes.

EV's are a con job. Let alone having to deal with the greatly reduced driving range of the vehicle. People just aren't going to pay for new batteries. They'll just discard the EV and buy another one if they still want an EV. And that's not what anyone would call ecologically friendly.

 

[chair]

1. Source?
2. The carbon footprint of batteries and solar cells is real, and often ignored. Note that it depends very much on where you get the energy to produce them from.
3. A car engine that lasts 300,000 miles? I am sure there are such cases, but the average lifetime is far less. About half.

How Long Do Cars Last?/ How Long Will My Car Last? | Gold Eagle Co.

The average car lifespan can vary depending on temperature, maintenance schedule, mileage, and many other factors. Learn how to extend your car’s lifespan in this article!

www.goldeagle.com

 

[Yorzhik]

The vast amount of power used to create lithion ion batteries makes EVs overall the equal of the internal combustion engine cars. In fact, to manufacture an EV takes anywhere from 20-50% more carbon to manufacture. In addition, the lithion ion batteries will only last for approximately 135000 miles of driving. Compared to the lifespan of the newer internal combustion engines of 300-400 thousand miles. The EV batteries are the majority of the carbon used in creating an EV and by far the greatest cost of the vehicle. This means an EV is going to have no resale value at all when compared to an internal combustion car at 100000 miles. My 1990 Honda with 310,000+ miles would basically be a total cost of ownership of approximately 1/3 the cost of an EV, and it's carbon footprint would be approximately 1/3 of an EV over both their lifetimes.

EV's are a con job. Let alone having to deal with the greatly reduced driving range of the vehicle. People just aren't going to pay for new batteries. They'll just discard the EV and buy another one if they still want an EV. And that's not what anyone would call ecologically friendly.

As noted by the post, it's all about the batteries. You'd prefer an electric car if the batteries were better. And by better I mean: cheaper, more energy per density, more energy per volume, lasted more charges, charged and discharged quickly, and made of non-hazardous materials. This better battery doesn't need to be better in every way on the list, but at least needs to meet a threshold of combined better properties that make sense to most consumers. The good thing is that batteries are getting better and better. The bad thing is that government funding is causing perverse incentives and cronyism that will delay the advent of the better battery.

 

[Right Divider]

... charged and discharged quickly, ...

Actually, you want fast charging and slow discharging.

 

[Yorzhik]

Actually, you want fast charging and slow discharging.

Certainly you don't want the battery to be used up quickly when it is in use. But what I meant was when a great deal of current is demanded from the battery by the battery application, that the battery can deliver the required current efficiently.

 

[Gary K]

1. Source?
2. The carbon footprint of batteries and solar cells is real, and often ignored. Note that it depends very much on where you get the energy to produce them from.
3. A car engine that lasts 300,000 miles? I am sure there are such cases, but the average lifetime is far less. About half.

How Long Do Cars Last?/ How Long Will My Car Last? | Gold Eagle Co.

The average car lifespan can vary depending on temperature, maintenance schedule, mileage, and many other factors. Learn how to extend your car’s lifespan in this article!

www.goldeagle.com

How does the source for the energy make a difference? We have only so much energy at any one time. So if a large part of solar, wind, etc... is spent manufacturing batteries there is far less of that type of power available for all other purposes and that so-called non-green power must be used for all other purposes. All you're doing is creating the fallacy that using one type of power for one usage has no effect on the power used for all other purposes. Plus, wind and solar are not reliable enough for manufacturing. You cannot run a manufacturing business on a fluctuating power supply.

Many ICE engines last for 300,000 or more miles. It all depends on how they are treated. If an engine has regular maintenance and is not abused the modern engine will last that long, easily. If we're talking diesel engines 500,000 to 1,000,000 miles is far from unknown. Once again, though, that relies on regular maintenance.

Sure you can destroy an ICE engine in 150,000 miles but any intelligent driver can reach the 300,000 mile mark. Cars with an excess of 100000 miles are sold on used car lots very regularly. And they still have a lot of value as demonstrated by their prices.

I don't remember where I found the article I took the info from. I'll have to look around and see if I can find it.

 

[Gary K]

Actually, you want fast charging and slow discharging.

No. I don't think so. What the goal of batteries is is rapid charging and greatly increased power capacity. We don't want slow discharging because that really limits the power available at any one time. Meaning that the battery is limited in it's application.

 

[Gary K]

As noted by the post, it's all about the batteries. You'd prefer an electric car if the batteries were better. And by better I mean: cheaper, more energy per density, more energy per volume, lasted more charges, charged and discharged quickly, and made of non-hazardous materials. This better battery doesn't need to be better in every way on the list, but at least needs to meet a threshold of combined better properties that make sense to most consumers. The good thing is that batteries are getting better and better. The bad thing is that government funding is causing perverse incentives and cronyism that will delay the advent of the better battery.

I don't know that you have any ideas as to my preferences for motive power.

I can't even imagine a battery that could charge as rapidly as I can fill a gas tank. I can fill a 20+ gallon gas tank in approximately 5 minutes. With a vehicle that gets 30+ mpg that's a 600 mile range when out on the road. Batteries would have to triple their capacity, plus increase their charging rate dramatically, to reach anywhere close to the ease and timeliness of traveling. Most of the mileage I have put on my vehicles over the decades has always come from road mileage, not city mileage.

Western US driving patterns are greatly different than eastern US driving patterns. In the east everything is crowded together. In the west most everything is separated by distance.

 

[Right Divider]

Certainly you don't want the battery to be used up quickly when it is in use. But what I meant was when a great deal of current is demanded from the battery by the battery application, that the battery can deliver the required current efficiently.

Got it... did not understand that from the way that you had worded it.

 

[Yorzhik]

I don't know that you have any ideas as to my preferences for motive power.

Just going off general perceptions. People that have driven both (not taking the problem of batteries into account), by far prefer EV's.

I can't even imagine a battery that could charge as rapidly as I can fill a gas tank.

That's a good point. However, most of the time you'd be plugging in at home over night and you wouldn't need to spend time at the electric station.

I can fill a 20+ gallon gas tank in approximately 5 minutes.

That's true. But for those times when you do have to spend time at the electric station, if batteries can ever get good enough, the best high current rates will give you about 300 miles in 20 minutes. And that's with charging we have now. Charging faster isn't unknown technology, it's just a cost/benefit decision. And 300 miles is a long time on the road that most people can live with today when there is no reason that can't get better tomorrow. I don't think we'll ever get as fast as a gas station, I think a threshold will be reached that people will consider fast enough.

With a vehicle that gets 30+ mpg that's a 600 mile range when out on the road. Batteries would have to triple their capacity, plus increase their charging rate dramatically, to reach anywhere close to the ease and timeliness of traveling. Most of the mileage I have put on my vehicles over the decades has always come from road mileage, not city mileage.

Western US driving patterns are greatly different than eastern US driving patterns. In the east everything is crowded together. In the west most everything is separated by distance.

Yeah, it's all about the battery. It's got to be about 2 times capacity and 2 times cheaper to go mainstream, and much better than that to "take over the world". The former is possibly in sight, the latter... always 10 years away.

 

[Gary K]

Just going off general perceptions. People that have driven both (not taking the problem of batteries into account), by far prefer EV's.


That's a good point. However, most of the time you'd be plugging in at home over night and you wouldn't need to spend time at the electric station.


That's true. But for those times when you do have to spend time at the electric station, if batteries can ever get good enough, the best high current rates will give you about 300 miles in 20 minutes. And that's with charging we have now. Charging faster isn't unknown technology, it's just a cost/benefit decision. And 300 miles is a long time on the road that most people can live with today when there is no reason that can't get better tomorrow. I don't think we'll ever get as fast as a gas station, I think a threshold will be reached that people will consider fast enough.


Yeah, it's all about the battery. It's got to be about 2 times capacity and 2 times cheaper to go mainstream, and much better than that to "take over the world". The former is possibly in sight, the latter... always 10 years away.

The scenario I had in mind is taking a trip of 500 to 700 miles. Out west that's driving across one state and part of another. With an ice engine and a decent sized fuel tank compared to an ev with current batteries what would be a 1 day drive with a ice engine would be a two day drive with an ev. A motel and extra meals adds a lot to the expense of the trip. That's a hidden expense of an ev. If you're going to take a trip across multiple states it adds up to even more expenses. That adds to the total cost of ownership of the ev.

 

[Yorzhik]

The scenario I had in mind is taking a trip of 500 to 700 miles. Out west that's driving across one state and part of another. With an ice engine and a decent sized fuel tank compared to an ev with current batteries what would be a 1 day drive with a ice engine would be a two day drive with an ev. A motel and extra meals adds a lot to the expense of the trip. That's a hidden expense of an ev. If you're going to take a trip across multiple states it adds up to even more expenses. That adds to the total cost of ownership of the ev.

And this is why EV's aren't ready to be in everyone's driveway. But as soon as the batteries are good enough and cheap enough, they will be. Although, even if they have a breakthrough on batteries, it still won't be mainstream for at least a few years. ICE technology will still be around for years, especially if they let the consumer be free to choose.