Are fully electric cars really “coal cars”, “fracnatgas cars”, “uranium cars” or…

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dostradamas

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Apr 23, 2021
Posts
1,001
Age
49
Location
Oregon
SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
 

Attachments

  • shhhh.jpg
    shhhh.jpg
    99.7 KB · Views: 7

otterhound

Poster Extraordinaire
Joined
Dec 14, 2008
Posts
9,370
Location
Manheim Pa.
When I was much younger , I actually believed that Mr Ed could talk . There are so many inconsistencies being put forth here , I felt compelled to post the Mr Ed thing . Bye bye .
 

telemnemonics

Telefied
Ad Free Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Posts
33,050
Age
62
Location
Maine
My finger pointing at the pop culture discussion of EV cars as better for the environment vs more of the same for the environment; is that almost all of us having these discussions are the small portion of the worlds pop that is wealthy and privileged thus presumes that because we chose a theoretically environmentally sound energy source, we can continue to consume 100x the resources per person as the poor majority is allotted.

Why are we in an energy crisis?
Because the world NEEDS to consume so much energy?

No.
Luxury, waste, and excess are what caused the problem.
And the leaders in solving the problem are still promoting luxury waste and excessive consumption with their environmentally responsible tech.
Sure they generally offer a cheap model, but even a Prius to commute from your 1000sf air conditioned private dwelling to your air conditioned wall street serving corporate job so you can save up and fly on jets for swimming and skiing, is just keeping up with the consumers jones to consume for pleasure and consume for boredom and consume because we earned it and throw away food and appliances and clothing when they are no longer pleasing to us.

Looking to corporate leaders for solutions to problems that if genuinely solved at the core, will end their reign over wealth driven commerce?
Band aids on gunshot wounds

...but of course we must ask them to fix their problem now that they have no choice because those of us in a position to ask couldn't possibly live without several homes and vacation spots and luxury items and monthly new toys and fine dining etc etc...

And yeah I'm addicted to luxury too.
We are basically trapped in our need for and expectation of comforts.
 

imwjl

Doctor of Teleocity
Joined
Mar 21, 2007
Posts
11,871
Location
My mom's basement.
15-20 minute stops to recharge on a long trip??? Yeah, right...

How about a simpler solution? Gas up & go. Life's too frickin short!

I was jealous when I had to gas the car and then park it to get to the toilets and something to eat while the pal with a Model 3 just left the car at the SuperCharger for the same amount of time. Worse yet, he didn't have to stop and get gas when we started the trip.

Otherwise you're just not making sense. Gasoline cars are not going away except for where new models will be superior. Somewhere here I posted the finance news article gathering from each car maker what their long range plans are. It's not even replacing 1/2 the petroleum fuel vehicles in my lifetime.

We live between two places - one a metro area and one very rural. Do you have some sort of notion that rural areas are losing their transportation? I can't believe that knowing how much of the earth is rural.
 

Tuneup

Tele-Holic
Joined
Jan 6, 2019
Posts
986
Age
42
Location
USA
…am I barking up the wrong tree ?

I guess “hydro cars” , “sun cars” and “wind cars” could be others but my point is :

Across this big land of ours , nat gas, then coal, then nuclear is what powers most “electric” cars.

We knew that but do we think about that ?

(Sorry but that’s as deep as I go on Monday mornings…🤔🤤)
The batteries.... for example one cell phone battery can pollute a small lake or over an acre of ground... and that stuff sticks around.
So imagine what the cars battery packs could pollute, in the end electric cars are a joke.
 

Blrfl

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
May 3, 2018
Posts
1,844
Location
Northern Virginia
Fact 2: The process of charging a battery, then extracting the charge for a useful purpose, loses at least 50% of the input in the process. So running 100 Amp-hours into a battery to charge it, results in 50 Amp-hours, or less, that is useable in a machine or device.

If you're going to hold that figure out as a fact, I'd love to see a citation for it. The Department of Energy puts charging loss for batteries at 16%. Even if you lose the same amount pulling the energy back out, that's still not 50%.

You may have heard the 50% figure for capacitors. That number is correct if you connect one to a simple voltage source because there has to be a resistor in the circuit to limit current, and the math works out that about 50% being dissipated as heat. Connect the same capacitor to a current source and you can charge it at a loss of near zero. It does require a more-complex charging circuit, but that really isn't much of a trade-off.
 

SRHmusic

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Oct 19, 2020
Posts
1,665
Location
North Carolina, USA
I tried to resist... These days, especially on the internet, it is fashionable to make definitive statements, as if they were proven fact; but with zero information on where, or how, or by whom, they have actually been proven to be true. It has become nearly impossible to sort fact from BS, or even from purposely deceptive falsehoods.

Here's a couple facts: (and yes, I'm too lazy to source them either; I invite you to look it up. I did work for a solar company for 4 years, and have designed and installed dozens of solar and hydro systems.) Fact 1: Distributed electricity, from big power plants, loses nearly 70% of the energy produced, to heat and other distribution losses. So, for every 10 Watts produced, only 3 Watts get to the end user. Fact 2: The process of charging a battery, then extracting the charge for a useful purpose, loses at least 50% of the input in the process. So running 100 Amp-hours into a battery to charge it, results in 50 Amp-hours, or less, that is useable in a machine or device.




So... saying an electric car is "like 70%" efficient, completely ignores the calculation of 50% of 30%, or 15% efficiency in the power production/distribution/charging cycles. So, 70% efficient efficiency in an EV is more like 70% of 15%, somewhere around 10%.

A regular car, using fossil fuel at 20%-40% efficiency, wastes less fuel than an EV using fossil fuel produced electricity at 10% overall efficiency. Part of the situation is the weight of the batteries, typically over a thousand pounds, which takes significant energy to move around. (https://duckduckgo.com/?q=convert+500Kg+to+pounds&t=brave&ia=answer)

Imagine trying to push a 1000 pound wagon up a hill for a mile, right? A couple ounces of gasoline does it easily.

Solar and wind are fine, but do not work when the sun isn't shining, or the wind isn't blowing.
Not sure where you found 10% efficiency for powerplants? I have looked up the numbers. Coal plants are often cited at 35% efficiency or higher, gas and combined cycle plants at 50% and higher, and internal combustion engines at 25% or less ("thermal efficiency," for heat engines). There are some transmission and charging losses, but not enough to make up the difference, about 1 to 2% in transmission losses, 20% in charging losses. And the share of coal plants is dropping. Well to wheel efficiency comparisons have been done many times. I'll go look for a more complete and thorough summary. (MIT and Argone National Lab have thick papers to read...) The vehicle weight is a good point, but regen braking can offset that.
 

Duck Herder

Tele-Meister
Joined
Dec 27, 2021
Posts
265
Age
21
Location
Pacific Northwest, Skagit County
…am I barking up the wrong tree ?

I guess “hydro cars” , “sun cars” and “wind cars” could be others but my point is :

Across this big land of ours , nat gas, then coal, then nuclear is what powers most “electric” cars.

We knew that but do we think about that ?

(Sorry but that’s as deep as I go on Monday mornings…🤔🤤)
Cows make protien from grass without any external power input, etc. Just doing my part to sequester carbon dioxide using solar energy. 👍
 

Nogoodnamesleft

Tele-Holic
Silver Supporter
Joined
Aug 19, 2020
Posts
773
Age
50
Location
Canaduh
My finger pointing at the pop culture discussion of EV cars as better for the environment vs more of the same for the environment; is that almost all of us having these discussions are the small portion of the worlds pop that is wealthy and privileged thus presumes that because we chose a theoretically environmentally sound energy source, we can continue to consume 100x the resources per person as the poor majority is allotted.

Why are we in an energy crisis?
Because the world NEEDS to consume so much energy?

No.
Luxury, waste, and excess are what caused the problem.
And the leaders in solving the problem are still promoting luxury waste and excessive consumption with their environmentally responsible tech.
Sure they generally offer a cheap model, but even a Prius to commute from your 1000sf air conditioned private dwelling to your air conditioned wall street serving corporate job so you can save up and fly on jets for swimming and skiing, is just keeping up with the consumers jones to consume for pleasure and consume for boredom and consume because we earned it and throw away food and appliances and clothing when they are no longer pleasing to us.

Looking to corporate leaders for solutions to problems that if genuinely solved at the core, will end their reign over wealth driven commerce?
Band aids on gunshot wounds

...but of course we must ask them to fix their problem now that they have no choice because those of us in a position to ask couldn't possibly live without several homes and vacation spots and luxury items and monthly new toys and fine dining etc etc...

And yeah I'm addicted to luxury too.
We are basically trapped in our need for and expectation of comforts.
This is what I was trying to say too, however I wasn't anywhere near as eloquent.

I've been watching a series where in a dystopian future, water is provided in a regulated credit based system. I can see that happening with energy too. Unless we all go Mad Max in the future.
 

Cosmic Cowboy

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Posts
1,113
Location
New Mexico
We need to do better as stewards of the planet, and renewable is the way... however all the carbon talk is a means to control economies at a super-national level by the wealthiest of the banking and financing elite.

It's known the planet has been much warmer than it currently is, with more carbon in the atmosphere than we have today...So this carbon situation is method to tax and control through cap and trade. Paying (carbon) taxes to worlds' super wealthy is not gonna save the planet.
 
Last edited:

jvin248

Doctor of Teleocity
Joined
Apr 18, 2014
Posts
11,203
Location
Lions & Tigers oh Mi !
.

Correct ... electric cars are powered from whatever the grid is supplying them with.

However, few suburbanites can go in their back yard to drill an oil well and fewer yet have the space to house a whole refinery in their garage to make gasoline. Converting your yard to planting corn, then setting up a fuel still is currently a legal issue. You can apparently grow pot many places but better not make moonshine for your car. So that leaves the nation dependent on the oil industry and all the international shenanigans that initiates.

Suburbanites can mount solar panels on their roof, build a carport, or somewhere in their back yard and tie those into the grid or battery banks when not at home or directly to their car when they are. Your car can be the battery for a whole-house 'backup generator'. Those panels are durable enough to last two to three decades, at which time technology will have improved and more power can be collected from the same space.

If you are an infrequent driver, like they say we'll all be in retirement, then your solar array might even supplement your social security payments. A retired guy might even make a business out of selling energy to the power company. #makethemeterspinbackward.

.
 

JustABluesGuy

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Sep 2, 2016
Posts
3,889
Location
Somewhere
…am I barking up the wrong tree ?

I guess “hydro cars” , “sun cars” and “wind cars” could be others but my point is :

Across this big land of ours , nat gas, then coal, then nuclear is what powers most “electric” cars.

We knew that but do we think about that ?

(Sorry but that’s as deep as I go on Monday mornings…🤔🤤)

It’s a bit difficult for one person to change the source of our the electrical power grid.

One could produce their own solar power to charge their electric car and then only drive it locally, avoiding the issue altogether.
 
Last edited:

telemnemonics

Telefied
Ad Free Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Posts
33,050
Age
62
Location
Maine
No one is trapped, people make choices, living with less materialism is easier and less troubling emotionally and mentally.
The trap is most effective when we think it is freedom:
Addiction to comforts conveniences and luxuries?
Which ones can we choose to eschew?
Personal transportation
Electricity in the home?
Hot & cold running water & sewer?
Computers and cell phones?
Multiple garments to look different each day?
Jewelry and home decoration?
Vacation travel?
Alcohol and nightlife?
Steaks & brats?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.




Top