Electric cars, unclean at any speed

[UFO]

Originally Posted by t vago

It's amazing how people will not look at the forest because they're too drawn into the individual tress.

Sorry, but pound-for-pound, nothing beats the energy density of gasoline or diesel fuel, at the cost of said fuels. Unless and until some way can be found to beat this energy density, electric vehicles are going to continue to be expensive playthings.

We cannot continue to use these fuels regardless of their perceived advantages. At least if we want to continue our lifestyle into the future. That's why I do what I can by using biodiesel as much as possible and keeping an eye on all-electric technology.

[Frank Lee]

Originally Posted by ConnClark

As of 2009 hydro only supplied about 6.9% of the US electrical generating capacity (and that percentage is dropping). All other renewables (Wind, Solar, Geothermal, etc..) composed about 3.6% . Nuclear power supplies about 20% of US needs. When you consider there are no more rivers that can be dammed, people oppose nuke, the fact that wind and solar aren't consistent and cost a lot, and by 2027 we will only have a fusion reactor that will run for 1000 seconds at a time, there isn't anyway we are going to ween ourselves from fossil fuel energy production anytime soon .

People are so fixated on the supply side. Household electricity use has skyrocketed- why not cut that back down to a reasonable level instead of whining about more coal, more nukes, more everything on the supply side?

[ConnClark]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

People are so fixated on the supply side. Household electricity use has skyrocketed- why not cut that back down to a reasonable level instead of whining about more coal, more nukes, more everything on the supply side?

And adding an electric car to charge in every home is going to reduce demand how?

[Frank Lee]

Who says EVERY home will have an EV charging?

If households cut their non-EV charging electricity use down, that leaves room for plenty of EV charging to do at the current (pun!) level.

The title reminds me of another douche- Nader- singling out a perfectly good automobile for dissing when one of his big hang-ups, the non-collapsible steering column, was common throughout the industry.

[t vago]

Originally Posted by UFO

We cannot continue to use these fuels regardless of their perceived advantages. At least if we want to continue our lifestyle into the future. That's why I do what I can by using biodiesel as much as possible and keeping an eye on all-electric technology.

This carries the assumption that nobody will ever figure out how to cheaply reformulate gasoline (or other fuels) from atmospheric CO2, water, and sunlight.

[sheepdog 44]

Put simply, if electric cars are the problem as the author states, would we be better off without them? Just look at the last 100 years of human history without electric cars! Have gas cars, the production of gas cars, and the distribution and refining of gasoline helped the environment one bit? The problems he sees with electric cars is mis-attributed from the infrastructure of everything we make. From energy use to mass production.

I just think he came to a very unimaginative conclusion really. So will riding bikes and walking while still burning gas be the solution to save the environment? It's not exactly the most informed opinion.

[ConnClark]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

Who says EVERY home will have an EV charging?

If households cut their non-EV charging electricity use down, that leaves room for plenty of EV charging to do at the current (pun!) level.

Average house hold electrical usage a year is 11,280 kWh. That equates to about 31 kW hours a day

How much electricity does an American home use? - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

So driving an electric car for about one hour a day will double a household's energy usage.

How do you propose to increase electrical efficiency in home to cover that?

[t vago]

Originally Posted by ConnClark

Average house hold electrical usage a year is 11,280 kWh. That equates to about 31 kW hours a day

How much electricity does an American home use? - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

So driving an electric car for about one hour a day will double a household's energy usage.

How do you propose to increase electrical efficiency in home to cover that?

But.. but.. but... Renewable energy! And solar panels! And pollution! And... and... and... corporations! And... um... Greenhouse gases! Yah! Greenhouse gases! And...

Like I said... Nobody bothered to look past the trees, to see the forest.

[sheepdog 44]

Originally Posted by ConnClark

Average house hold electrical usage a year is 11,280 kWh. That equates to about 31 kW hours a day

So driving an electric car for about one hour a day will double a household's energy usage.

How do you propose to increase electrical efficiency in home to cover that?

A Leaf uses a 24 kwh pack for about 71miles of range. Thats 24kwh + 31kwh = 59 kw hours of total energy usage. Thats a 90% increase, with driving 71 miles a day which is a ridiculous commute over 2 hours.

A compact gas car with reasonable efficiency gets 35mpg average. A gallon of gas contains 36.6kwh, and the car would use 2 gallons for the 71 miles. Thats a gas use of 73.1 kw + 31 kwh of the house = 104.1 kw hours of energy use, a 335% increase from the energy used to power your home, and a 76% increase in energy use from the combined energy of driving an electric car and powering a house!

Gas and Coal are both finite fossil fuel power sources. Where will the efficiency come from? from not burning twice as much energy in gasoline as can be obtained from the electrical grid. From using half as much fossil fuels from a coal plant, polluting half as much as a gas car.

There are valid arguments against Electric Vehicles that i agree with, even being an advocate for EV's. Price, battery pack lifespan, better use of pure EV batteries in many hybrids with small packs to displace the most gasoline used.

[NachtRitter]

Originally Posted by t vago

This carries the assumption that nobody will ever figure out how to cheaply reformulate gasoline (or other fuels) from atmospheric CO2, water, and sunlight.

I didn't see in the article anything about it being cheap compared to alternatives. Nor did I see anything that said the production volume would be anywhere near what we currently consume. I did see that Steinfeld estimated that 'by 2020 we should be able to witness the first industrial solar fuel plants coming into operation.' I would take that with a grain of salt since scientists have a very poor track record estimating when (or if) something is going to be commercially viable. I'd be more inclined to guess 20 to 30 years before something like this can make a difference, and in the meantime, alternatives will continue to improve as well.

That's not to say it shouldn't be done... we ought to have as many alternatives to non-renewable fuels available as possible. Not everybody has to have an EV; in many cases, for many people, it wouldn't make sense. By the same token, not everyone has to have an ICE, nor does everyone have to have a hybrid. I don't even know why people argue so fiercely about it... there are definitely distinct advantages to EVs but they aren't (yet, and may never be) right for everyone.