Electric vehicles (EVs), their emissions, and future viability

[oilhammer]

.... If not, I'm moving to Canada.

Bahahhahhaaa!!!! How many times have we heard that line?

 

[turbobrick240]

Bahahhahhaaa!!!! How many times have we heard that line?

Probably too often . Just venting really. I'm pretty confident that we can salvage our democracy. But nervous, nonetheless.

 

[IndigoBlueWagon]

The idea of providing free fuel for transportation is intriguing, but I struggle with auto manufacturers profiting (and collecting subsidies) from EV production while consumers have a government sponsored incentive to buy the cars. If we're serious about carbon reduction perhaps the EV porition of auto production should be non-profit. Or they should operate with zero federal assistance.

 

[vandermic07]

I think we should convert flood control dams to hydroE. We have a ton of man made dams 40+ ft deep that are just holding water. why not generate power? They have been working on them and fixing them up over the last few years here in PA.
Im by no means an expert in this field but it seems to be a viable option. The land damage has already been done 60+ years ago. It would be a compromise with all the environmentalists who dont want new hydro.

Sounds like green power to me?

 

[nwdiver]

If we're serious about carbon reduction perhaps the EV porition of auto production should be non-profit. Or they should operate with zero federal assistance.

If we're serious about carbon reduction we need to make carbon reduction profitable.

 

[kjclow]

I think we should convert flood control dams to hydroE. We have a ton of man made dams 40+ ft deep that are just holding water. why not generate power? They have been working on them and fixing them up over the last few years here in PA.
Im by no means an expert in this field but it seems to be a viable option. The land damage has already been done 60+ years ago. It would be a compromise with all the environmentalists who dont want new hydro.

Sounds like green power to me?

We have two hydro dams and two nuclear power plants in the Charlotte area. The hydro dams are only used for peak power backup. Of course when we typically need them is the middle of a long dry summer. There's not enough water in the lakes to fully power the nuclear reactors but then there is also not enough water to release through the dam.

 

[IndigoBlueWagon]

If we're serious about carbon reduction we need to make carbon reduction profitable.

Based on Elon Musk's net worth we appear to have been successful at that.

 

[nwdiver]

Based on Elon Musk's net worth we appear to have been successful at that.

... and my brokerage account. The ~$3k I invested in 2012 is now worth ~$180k.

Sadly wall street isn't main street and it's main street where it really matters. The other OEMs need to stop kicking and screaming and fully get on board. Step 1 would be to stop wasting resources on building new ICE. Rule 1 of holes when you're stuck in one is to stop digging.

 

[IndigoBlueWagon]

Sadly wall street isn't main street and it's main street where it really matters.

Not sure what this means.

 

[nwdiver]

Not sure what this means.

It means that $$$ is largely fake and what really matters is how we allocate real resources like man-hours and all the stuff that goes into manufacturing a car (which is determined by $$$).

It means we need to stop wasting man-hours and steel on digging the hole deeper with new ICE... TSLA is already worth more than the other LAMEs (Legacy Auto Manufacturing Enterprises) combined and they still haven't taken the hint. Stop digging.

 

[turbobrick240]

I won't even say what Elon has done for my net worth- but it is absolutely ridiculous. And very much appreciated. I'm equally appreciative of what he is doing for the whole of humanity. Not a bad trade for the unfortunate Twitter habit.

 

[nwdiver]

I won't even say what Elon has done for my net worth- but it is absolutely ridiculous. And very much appreciated.

Clearly ridiculous in a good way. I doubt all the people that went bankrupt shorting TSLA appreciate it

Not that it's been a smooth ride. Going from $400 to $180 was a bit nail-biting. So was $900 to $350. But the long term $30 to $1800 is worth the bumps. $10k by 2030?

 

[Rob Mayercik]

Step 1 would be to stop wasting resources on building new ICE.

Sigh, I can't believe I'm going to wade into this, but...

You seem to be utterly and uncompromisingly fixated on a "scorched earth upgrade" - immediately ceasing ICE production NOW and only EV going forward.

You also seem to be convinced that a single solution (EVs) can be made to work for everyone, everywhere, all the time, now and forever more.

If that was the case, all we'd need to disassemble our cars would be slotted screwdrivers (for example). And yet we have slotted, phillips, JIS, torx, pozi-drive, security torx, triple-square, hex, star, etc., etc., etc.

No one solution is ever going to work for everyone, everywhere, all the time. Our world is imperfect, and as such you simply can't expect everyone to fit into the same narrow little box.

Oh, and you do realize your EVs are not petroleum-free, right? For one thing, your wheel bearings are still packed with petroleum grease like ours, I'll wager.

 

[nwdiver]

No one solution is ever going to work for everyone, everywhere, all the time. Our world is imperfect, and as such you simply can't expect everyone to fit into the same narrow little box.

EVs can come in all shapes and sizes. For the 0.0001% niche case that for some really weird reason you need a liquid fuel you don't need mass production for that.... I have no doubt that ICE will be around for centuries as a rich persons play thing... we still have horses.

Oh, and you do realize your EVs are not petroleum-free, right? For one thing, your wheel bearings are still packed with petroleum grease like ours, I'll wager.

.... one more reason to stop burning petroleum for fuel.... it's beyond insane.

I've never understood the 'logic' of this argument... EVs use some petroleum => we should keep burning more of it? ....... please explain. Shouldn't it's value as a lubricant be an argument for NOT burning it as fuel????

 

[kjclow]

Where to start? So far I've been reading these last few days with amusement, however, the comment about not burning crude oil so we can make lubricants is just slightly off base. Do you have any idea just how many things you touch every moment of everyday are made from crude oil? Even in your Tesla? Unless you live completely off the grid, use animals for transportation and farming, made all of your own tools to build the house that you also hand hewed the wood for, then you are relying on crude oil and it's deriviatives. Oh, and let's not even mention clothing.

There is no way to refine crude without producing gasoline and distillate fuels. What are we to do with that material if we suddenly switched everything over to electric? It may happen that the majority of personal cars switch over to electric in the next 40 years but I doubt it. In other words, not in my lifetime. At least not with significant changes in battery and charging technology. With both of my kids around 30, they currently have no interest in paying for an e-car because of the msrp difference. They are both trying to pay off college and have enough money to get a house. Any car payment is not in the budget, let alone one that is 20% higher just for the "convience" of having a cord. 20% mentioned earlier as the acceptable upcharge for an electric.

 

[nwdiver]

There is no way to refine crude without producing gasoline and distillate fuels.

??? Um yeah there is. Ever hear of cracking? Turns out that chemists have figured out how to turn one hydro-carbon into pretty much any other hydro-carbon. We can turn 'diesel' into plastics or plastics into diesel or diesel into gasoline...

Yeah... petroleum is SUPER valuable for countless reasons. All the more reason it's beyond insane to use it as fuel. Burning oil for fuel is just as insane as burning your furniture for heat.

Most recent projection I've heard is that new EVs should be cheaper than new ICE by 2023. And if your kids are struggling to afford a new car then they're probably gonna buy used anyway => wouldn't be effected if you couldn't buy a new POS ICE anyway.... that's my point. Really no reason to keep digging the hole deeper with new ICE...

 

[turbobrick240]

We can absolutely make all the petrochemical products we need without gasoline and diesel as byproducts. Most of those synthesis processes have been well known since the 1930's. Plus we're going to need aviation fuel for some time into the future. It's a finite resource in addition to the earth scorching effect the overabundance of CO2 in our atmosphere is creating. Our descendants just might need an emergency reserve of energy at some point in the future.

 

[nwdiver]

We can absolutely make all the petrochemical products we need without gasoline and diesel as byproducts. Most of those synthesis processes have been well known since the 1930's. Plus we're going to need aviation fuel for some time into the future. It's a finite resource in addition to the earth scorching effect the overabundance of CO2 in our atmosphere is creating. Our descendants just might need an emergency reserve of energy at some point in the future.

Yep; Oil is one of the most unique and ubiquitous base materials we have available for so.... SO many things. Soaps, medicines, clothes, cosmetics, carpets, computers, lubricants, tires, solar panels, dog toys... the list is ~endless; The VERY last thing we should be doing with such a valuable resource is burning it. INSANITY!!! Truly is the fuel of fools.

 

[turbobrick240]

Not that it's been a smooth ride. Going from $400 to $180 was a bit nail-biting. So was $900 to $350. But the long term $30 to $1800 is worth the bumps. $10k by 2030?

At this rate..... 2024! Per aspera ad astra.

 

[Tin Man]

Distillation into different length hydrocarbon units is always the first step and leads to various fractions that include gasoline and diesel. Cracking is making long chains into smaller more useful chains. Its ludicrous to think that economically creating longer chains from gasoline so as to use it for non-combustion is possible. We would be doing this already since Europe has historically had a surplus of gasoline it sells to the Eastern US.

But, in the minds of some, its all possible with unlimited funding with no consequence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_refining_processes

 

[kjclow]

??? Um yeah there is. Ever hear of cracking? Turns out that chemists have figured out how to turn one hydro-carbon into pretty much any other hydro-carbon. We can turn 'diesel' into plastics or plastics into diesel or diesel into gasoline...

Since i work for one of the largest chemical corporations in the world and we have crackers on three continents, yes, I've heard of them. It is fairly easy and commen to take longer hydrocarbon chains and break them into smaller and small chains. Thus the reason that most of the refineries in North America can push more distillate fuels into gasoline. Most of your common plastics are much longer chain compounds and have to be compounded. The basic building blocks, even with cracking, are limited in amount and usability. Turning plastcis back into deisel is a completely different chemical function. Not easy and not cheap.

 

[kjclow]

We can absolutely make all the petrochemical products we need without gasoline and diesel as byproducts. Most of those synthesis processes have been well known since the 1930's. Plus we're going to need aviation fuel for some time into the future. It's a finite resource in addition to the earth scorching effect the overabundance of CO2 in our atmosphere is creating. Our descendants just might need an emergency reserve of energy at some point in the future.

Biosourcing the building blocks is currently 3-4x the cost of refining those same chemicals from crude. With the exception of biodiesel from soy oil.

 

[nwdiver]

Distillation into different length hydrocarbon units is always the first step and leads to various fractions that include gasoline and diesel. Cracking is making long chains into smaller more useful chains. Its ludicrous to think that economically creating longer chains from gasoline so as to use it for non-combustion is possible. We would be doing this already since Europe has historically had a surplus of gasoline it sells to the Eastern US.

But, in the minds of some, its all possible with unlimited funding with no consequence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_refining_processes

What do you suppose is going be more difficult? Creating these polymers from oil or creating the polymers from CO2 and H2 because previous generations were complete morons and burned the oil? This isn't about you... TRY to think beyond your own misguided selfish ideology. Wouldn't the wiser choice be to... NOT burn the valuable raw material???? We have FAR... FAAAR better options than using oil for energy. We should probably.... probably use them.....

It's becoming exponentially more pathetic to use oil as an energy source with every passing year... Only morons and monsters use fools fuel where alternatives exist.

What was that you were saying about 'costs and consequences'... there's two sides of that coin...
'Widespread electric vehicle adoption would save billions of dollars, thousands of lives'

 

[Tin Man]

What do you suppose is going be more difficult? Creating these polymers from oil or creating the polymers from CO2 and H2 because previous generations were complete morons and burned the oil? This isn't about you... TRY to think beyond your own misguided selfish ideology. Wouldn't the wiser choice be to... NOT burn the valuable raw material???? We have FAR... FAAAR better options than using oil for energy. We should probably.... probably use them.....

It's becoming exponentially more pathetic to use oil as an energy source with every passing year... Only morons and monsters use fools fuel where alternatives exist.

What was that you were saying about 'costs and consequences'... there's two sides of that coin...
'Widespread electric vehicle adoption would save billions of dollars, thousands of lives'

Your abusive posts need to end.

 

[Rob Mayercik]

EVs can come in all shapes and sizes. For the 0.0001% niche case that for some really weird reason you need a liquid fuel you don't need mass production for that.... I have no doubt that ICE will be around for centuries as a rich persons play thing... we still have horses.



.... one more reason to stop burning petroleum for fuel.... it's beyond insane.

I've never understood the 'logic' of this argument... EVs use some petroleum => we should keep burning more of it? ....... please explain. Shouldn't it's value as a lubricant be an argument for NOT burning it as fuel????

Look, the point I was trying to make was that it seemed like all your arguments boiled down to "OIL BAD, EV OR NOTHING". It smacked of the same smug, self-righteous "everyone has to fit into the same narrow box or they're an outcast" mentality I remember experiencing in school as an academically-advanced kid who played in the band and didn't have any interest in athletics. it annoyed me then, and it annoys me now.

If you want an EV, that's fine. Stop trying to ram them down MY throat if I say I don't want one.

You want to get rid of petroleum as an ICE fuel? Then start pushing industry and government to get cracking (see what I did there? ) on mass-producing biofuels that work for both gasoline and diesel engines that don't divert foodstocks like corn/soybeans.

 

[turbobrick240]

Biosourcing the building blocks is currently 3-4x the cost of refining those same chemicals from crude. With the exception of biodiesel from soy oil.

I was actually referring to petrochemicals derived from petroleum. But yes, the same processes more or less can be used to produce the olefins and aromatics chemical building blocks from natural gas and biomass sources.

Let's say there was a massive volcanic eruption in 200 years that darkened the skies and made crop production difficult for a decade or more. If we have burned up all of the petroleum resource, there might be mass starvation and death. Just a hypothetical, but I'd rather not gamble on it. Aside from that, global warming is the real and immediate threat.

 

[nwdiver]

Look, the point I was trying to make was that it seemed like all your arguments boiled down to "OIL BAD, EV OR NOTHING". It smacked of the same smug, self-righteous "everyone has to fit into the same narrow box or they're an outcast" mentality I remember experiencing in school as an academically-advanced kid who played in the band and didn't have any interest in athletics. it annoyed me then, and it annoys me now.

If you want an EV, that's fine. Stop trying to ram them down MY throat if I say I don't want one.

You want to get rid of petroleum as an ICE fuel? Then start pushing industry and government to get cracking (see what I did there? ) on mass-producing biofuels that work for both gasoline and diesel engines that don't divert foodstocks like corn/soybeans.

Biofuels are never going to be a viable alternative for ground transportation because physics. EVs work because they use ~70% less energy per mile. EVs work because you can get enough energy for an EV annually from <200 sq ft of PV. You need >20,000 sq ft of biofuel feed to get enough biofuel to run an ICE for a year. EVs work because they can buffer the grid and use solar or wind capacity that would be wasted due to lack of demand.

I couldn't care less if you drive an EV, not ramming anything down your throat. Just stop burning oil for fuel, stop ramming CO2 >400ppm down ours.....

IMHO EVs are the best alternative to fools fuel but you can always ride a bike or walk.... I really don't care... just stop with the fools fuel.

 

[IndigoBlueWagon]

Three things that will continue to run on fossil fuels: Trucks (yes, I know, but trucks), ships, and planes. So you're not getting rid of it. Trains, too, probalby.

 

[nwdiver]

Three things that will continue to run on fossil fuels: Trucks (yes, I know, but trucks), ships, and planes. So you're not getting rid of it. Trains, too, probalby.

It's up to the morons that infest this planet. The only thing that physics says needs liquid fuel with our current technology is aircraft.

 

[Rob Mayercik]

Biofuels are never going to be a viable alternative for ground transportation because physics. EVs work because they use ~70% less energy per mile.

"Because physics"? You call that a counter-argument? I never said or implied biofuels were EQUAL to petroleum fuels, I just said I wanted them WIDELY AVAILABLE. Every gallon of biofuel burned is still a gallon of petroleum fuel NOT burned, whether it carries you 45 miles or 40 miles.

I couldn't care less if you drive an EV, not ramming anything down your throat. Just stop burning oil for fuel, stop ramming CO2 >400ppm down ours.....

Well, if I can't drive an ICE-powered car because it "rams CO2 >400ppm down your throat", there's nothing left BUT an EV.

Since we're back to the same thing again (EV or nothing) and it seems unlikely that we're going to find a middle ground, I am going to "agree to disagree" and call this little corner of the thread concluded.