EV Cradle to Grave emissions

[OVERKILL]

And, "IF" for example we consider nuclear as a fuel consumed, then EV's can fall short of modern hybrids with regard to fuel used per mile.

In general, a Camry Hybrid is a more efficient choice when it comes to energy consumption.

The numbers for nuclear account for fuel consumed. It's that uranium is 20,000x more energy dense that makes the difference. There's no way you are falling short with an EV powered by nuclear vs a hybrid, as the numbers show.

 

[Dave9]

This is why it is beneficial to read the entire report rather than just the graphic I included in the OP.

Nope, using dirty data to try to deceive, is fraud, incredulous in the scientific community, and downright stinks to anyone who had enough of an attention span to pay attention to what they did.

There is no "entire report" reading that redeems something that wrong. It's a sign the entire process was corrupt.

Up to you to decide if they were just idiots or deliberately corrupt in false misrepresentation.

 

[OVERKILL]

Nope, using dirty data to try to deceive, is fraud, incredulous in the scientific community, and downright stinks to anyone who had enough of an attention span to pay attention to what they did.

There is no "entire report" reading that redeems something that wrong. It's a sign the entire process was corrupt.

Up to you to decide if they were just idiots or deliberately corrupt in false misrepresentation.

Cool story. So you didn't read either of them then.

 

[Jack Watts]

Cool story. So you didn't read either of them then.

welcome to the internet...

some people look at data and try to figure out what's not there and needs to be

some people look at data to fit what they believe...

I think the paper does a reasonable job of calculating "all in" costs at a superficial level. As Jeff mentions though, and are a lot of attendant costs associated with all forms of energy, and some are a lot more significant than others (and the emissions impact of foreign wars to keep production and shipping lines open really can't be ignored).

 

[JeffKeryk]

What's funny is that some countries also banned he nuclear power (that has zero carbon footprint). Policies were made based o scare tactics and feelings.

Yep. Can be pretty scary. I hear there are a lotta glowing examples in Ukraine...
Nuclear and Radiation Accidents

 

[Job]

I never think about air pollution when I use my toaster. I suppose those concerned citizens are doing all they can to use as little as possible. No a/c, no power tools, no cell phones, no big box stores. It all adds up to a lot of air pollution.

 

[OVERKILL]

welcome to the internet...

some people look at data and try to figure out what's not there and needs to be

some people look at data to fit what they believe...

I think the paper does a reasonable job of calculating "all in" costs at a superficial level. As Jeff mentions though, and are a lot of attendant costs associated with all forms of energy, and some are a lot more significant than others (and the emissions impact of foreign wars to keep production and shipping lines open really can't be ignored).

I'm in agreement. The massive IPCC document I attached to the post you quoted does a very good job of delving into the details as to what they factor in when calculating lifecycle. So decommissioning for example is included, methane emitted from flooded land with hydro; stuff beyond just the materials and their origins as well as their processing when used to construct the facility. Of course no model is perfect. But no, the cost of conflict (in terms of environmental impact) is not included and that would be interesting to see how that would look if it was attempted. It would definitely negatively impact emission for oil and gas, but coal is very often locally sourced, so it wouldn't be, at least not at the same scale.

 

[OVERKILL]

Yep. Can be pretty scary. I hear there are a lotta glowing examples in Ukraine...
Nuclear and Radiation Accidents

Chernobyl is a fascinating study on what happens when you manufacture a reactor for the purpose of creating weapons material and skimp on containment and then hand it over to incompetent operators.

There are people that have never left BTW, lots of people live in the exclusion zone, which is a fascinating study in itself. The other reactors remained in operation well into the 2000's at the site, which most people don't know. There are still a number of RBMK reactors in operation, despite the disaster, but they were all upgrade to have secondary containment.

When you look at what happened at TMI or Fukushima in comparison, you can see what a massive difference even primitive gen I containment made. TMI bricked itself and Fukushima has created an expensive clean-up at the plant. Everybody else was using secondary containment WAY before the Soviets birthed the RBMK design.

 

[JeffKeryk]

Of course no model is perfect.

Most important point in this post. Do not believe a model, but don't disbelieve it.
The Sales Capacity by Tenure model I coded, over 5 years, continued to improve based on what we learned.
After we completed the ability to do Linear Regression over a rolling 4 quarters of sales data (millions of rows of bad data), we were able to improve it by adding additional, real world adjustments.

A good model is critical start, but is wrong or at best incomplete. It forms the foundation enabling better analysis.

 

[Dave9]

Cool story. So you didn't read either of them then.

I read enough to see they were trying to prop up the false premise that the picture posted, represents.

Can't have it both ways, the picture says it all about their agenda, that they went in with a bias and refused to be scientific while hoping nobody would notice.

 

[wpod]

The problem we have is most people form opinions on what the Tv tells them to form their opinions on. When I lived in Palo Cedro California there was a wood waste fired electrical power plant in Anderson Calif as well as hydro power from dams. Coal is great if it is local, Gas turbines are nice as they are some what quick to put into service when more power is needed.. Solar,, when the sun is ideal etc. Electric cars take lots of current to recharge and when the power grid can't keep up on a hot or Freezing days what else can be said for recharging the EVs.

 

[kstanf150]

So from an environmental impact on what will happen when over 1,000,000 EV batteries a year are to be disposed of in the future
What’s going to happen ?

 

[OVERKILL]

The problem we have is most people form opinions on what the Tv tells them to form their opinions on. When I lived in Palo Cedro California there was a wood waste fired electrical power plant in Anderson Calif as well as hydro power from dams. Coal is great if it is local, Gas turbines are nice as they are some what quick to put into service when more power is needed.. Solar,, when the sun is ideal etc. Electric cars take lots of current to recharge and when the power grid can't keep up on a hot or Freezing days what else can be said for recharging the EVs.

Definitely no point in putting the cart before the horse here. If the grid infrastructure doesn't exist, or the grid isn't sufficiently clean, per what I noted in the OP, then there's no advantage to mass consumption of EV's beyond reducing localized air pollution. You absolutely must have abundant low emissions power and a reliable grid for EV's to make sense. We have that here in Ontario and Quebec does as well, but places like Nova Scotia and Alberta don't.

 

[OVERKILL]

So from an environmental impact on what will happen when over 1,000,000 EV batteries a year are to be disposed of in the future
What’s going to happen ?

This is how i know you didn't read the report.

When you get to page 20, the following section is present:

 

[kstanf150]

Your right
I didn’t read all that boring crap

But
A very small percentage of the population will recycle

Drive through rural America and you’ll find hundred of Thousands of old cars piled up in yards and field still today

nothing will change in the next 20-30 years

 

[OVERKILL]

Your right
I didn’t read all that boring crap

Then I'll kindly ask you don't post on topics I create if you aren't going to do me the courtesy of actually reading the material presented.

The psychology here is interesting though. Somebody sees a subject, glances at the OP, realizes it's long and there's lots of attached data, says "screw that" and yet is now compelled to opine on the topic from a position of willful ignorance. What eludes me here is the motivation, particularly after shamelessly copping to it. Clearly, this isn't going to aide in enhancing credibility and if the subject doesn't interest the party enough to actually read through the material, why bother commenting at all

But
A very small percentage of the population will recycle

Drive through rural America and you’ll find hundred of Thousands of old cars piled up in yards and field still today

nothing will change in the next 20-30 years

Most cars end up in wrecking yards and Joe-Bob with his 15 f-bodies is a dying breed. The pool of kids growing up getting excited about cars is shrinking, and who can blame them, cars are extremely complicated now and you aren't putting a YSI on a Tesla Model 3. Future enthusiasts are going to be techy and batteries are high value (unlike an '85 Camaro with a 305) so the vast majority of them are going to end up in a wrecking yard where the battery will be salvaged and sold to be reprocessed while the rest of the car is processed just like ICE's.

It's the same reason when you stroll through a wrecking yard and nothing has a battery in it, and lead acid batteries are worth FAR less than Lithium Ion batteries. We don't need to worry about PEOPLE doing the recycling, they'll send the car for scrap and the wrecking yard will take care of salvaging the battery for reprocessing/recycling because there will be money in doing so, just like there is with lead acid.

If the battery is replaced while the car is still in service, there will be a core charge (It's $1,300 for a Prius battery already) which ensures that the battery is recovered and processed appropriately.

 

[kstanf150]

I hope you really don’t believe that
Most will not recycle

recycling of anything nowadays is minimal at best

 

[OVERKILL]

I hope you really don’t believe that
Most will not recycle

recycling of anything nowadays is minimal at best

Explain to me what part you are struggling with. We aren't talking about pop cans here, we are talking about extremely expensive batteries that carry significant value to recyclers.

I've been to MANY wrecking yards. None of the cars ever have their batteries in them because they are pulled to be recycled, as the yard is paid for them by the recycling companies. It will be the same with EV's except the batteries are even higher value.

 

[Jack Watts]

Explain to me what part you are struggling with. We aren't talking about pop cans here, we are talking about extremely expensive batteries that carry significant value to recyclers.

I've been to MANY wrecking yards. None of the cars ever have their batteries in them because they are pulled to be recycled, as the yard is paid for them by the recycling companies. It will be the same with EV's except the batteries are even higher value.

Overkill,

My heartfelt suggestion: take a deep breath, give this a read, and then consider whether rational responses are going to change kstan's mind: https://youarenotsosmart.com/2011/06/10/the-backfire-effect/

Back to the subject at hand, of course people are obviously going to recycle really expensive batteries--because there's a lot of incentive to do so.

 

[JeffKeryk]

I like the idea of repurposing old (but still powerful) EV batteries for uses that do not need as much energy as an EV.
A home solar power system like mine could store energy from a repurposed Model S battery.