EVs are 61% cleaner than gas in Minnesota

Status
Not open for further replies.

wemay

Thread starter
Joined
Apr 4, 2012
Messages
16,113
Location
Kendall, FL
True as well. But with every technological change (for lack of saying advancement), comes it's own set of challenges that takes years, in many cases, to bare fruit.
 

CT8

Joined
Oct 9, 2014
Messages
15,365
Location
Idaho
Originally Posted By: Shannow
True, but the energy to power these vehicles needs to come from somewhere.
The power will appear like magic.
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,824
Location
Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted By: MotoTribologist
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Do they include the mining and manufacture of the battery banks in this or just the vehicle itself? I don't see it mentioned in the article shrug So my guess is no.... Nor do they factor in the periodic replacement of that battery bank.
The chart clearly accounts for vehicle and battery manufacturing. Hint: it's the blue part. wink
It does not specifically state that it accounts for battery manufacture when I read through it shrug The batteries are usually sourced from another party anyways.
 

JHZR2

Staff member
Joined
Dec 14, 2002
Messages
49,468
Location
New Jersey
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Do they include the mining and manufacture of the battery banks in this or just the vehicle itself? I don't see it mentioned in the article shrug So my guess is no.... Nor do they factor in the periodic replacement of that battery bank.
Can you define what is the highly polluting item from battery manufacture? Batteries are made of the following: -Steel can if cylindrical cells - same as steel in cars -Mylar pouches if prismatic cells - like balloons -Lithium ions - Yes, mined, but is this mining worse than any other raw material or pulling and processing more crude constantly over the vehicle lifecycle? -Graphite - Benign -Copper - very common -Aluminum - very common -Cobalt - used in steel like in a traditional vehicle -Manganese - used in alloys like in a traditional vehicle -Nickel - used in alloys like in a traditional vehicle -Carbonate solvents - minimal quantity specialty hydrocarbon -Polymeric separator - similar to plastic bags The entire hybrid weight gain for my HAH is 350 lb. Of that, most is the actual drivetrain and inverter, not the battery. So even if the battery is 50 lb of raw materials overall, most of it either hydrocarbons or basic materials (steel, carbon and aluminum current collectors). So an EV has what? 400 lb of battery? How much fuel is 400 lb? 6 lb/gal? So like 66 gallons of gas? How much waste sulfur, sulfuric acid and other chemical sludges, spent catalysts, etc are spent in making that? Meanwhile, how much of a battery is recyclable? Lead acid batteries are >90% recyclable, and it looks like Li-ion will be similar. There's no secret materials in Li-ion batteries. Yes, if youre talking an EV and a plug in, the energy has to be made by something (which is much more well regulated, scrubbed, and controlled). Yes, there are rare earths in the motor generators, but their use is central to so much of modern society, not just EVs... and alternates to those (which are typically NOT rare, though named as such) are being developed too. Its not clear that the propaganda on either side is in any way correct.
 

CT8

Joined
Oct 9, 2014
Messages
15,365
Location
Idaho
Electric cars are in their infancy. There are so many benefits for electric vehicles in certain applications. The power plant can put the pollution out of site and out of mind. For the non discerning greenie. I would like to think the best energy source would bu used for any given area. City vehicles electric or natural gas .Over the road vehicles diesel or gas etc.
 
Joined
Dec 12, 2002
Messages
43,661
Location
'Stralia
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
How much fuel is 400 lb? 6 lb/gal? So like 66 gallons of gas? How much waste sulfur, sulfuric acid and other chemical sludges, spent catalysts, etc are spent in making that?
Going to go that far, then the EVs need the environmental cost of the land and solar cells and their production the 25% capacity factor windfarms that require multiple times nameplate ratings to replace coal/nukes/gas (and now hydro according to Australia's green element isn't "green"), and the grid scale storage media. Seriously, if all that's needed to support EVs, then it needs to be factored into their lifecycle.
 
Joined
Dec 12, 2002
Messages
43,661
Location
'Stralia
Originally Posted By: Silk
Rivers are handy things to have....
Agreed, but Oz's greens now having demonised coal in any way shape and form have turned on hydro.
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,824
Location
Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Do they include the mining and manufacture of the battery banks in this or just the vehicle itself? I don't see it mentioned in the article shrug So my guess is no.... Nor do they factor in the periodic replacement of that battery bank.
Can you define what is the highly polluting item from battery manufacture?
I was thinking specifically as to the mining of the Lithium for the large battery banks, something that will only get worse as popularity increases shrug
 
Joined
Dec 12, 2002
Messages
43,661
Location
'Stralia
Another issue that I've got (with the Tesla version of the model) is that once the packs are used in the vehicles, they are "relifed" in the power walls. Now in my mind, the advantage of the Li packs is lightness in transport applications to avoid lugging around lead acid like the old days. The last thing my house needs is mobility, so tying a bunch of Li packs to my house versus V flow batteries etc. doesn't make the same sort of sense. But it requires even more Li to be harvested, then locked away from recycling for another decade or so (home owners will ride them to the ground rather than stump up another $10k in 6-7 years time. Home storage doesn't need, and probably shouldn't have lithium.
 
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
5,569
Location
New Zealand
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Oz's greens now having demonised coal in any way shape and form have turned on hydro.
Yeah, the days of the governmant saying,''We're going to flood this valley, gouge this hill of and make a dam, we'll give you Govnmt valuation on you property.'' is long gone.
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Messages
1,198
Location
NJ, USA
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: MotoTribologist
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Do they include the mining and manufacture of the battery banks in this or just the vehicle itself? I don't see it mentioned in the article shrug So my guess is no.... Nor do they factor in the periodic replacement of that battery bank.
The chart clearly accounts for vehicle and battery manufacturing. Hint: it's the blue part. wink
It does not specifically state that it accounts for battery manufacture when I read through it shrug The batteries are usually sourced from another party anyways.
1. "And although it currently takes more energy to manufacture an electric vehicle and its battery than to build a gasoline automobile, as you can see in the above graph, the emissions from combusting gasoline vastly outweigh those from vehicle manufacturing." 2. "With 100% renewable energy, EVs only result in an average of 21 g/mile of GHGs, coming solely from vehicle and battery manufacturing." 3. "and many will result in only 3.4 tons of GHGs (from vehicle manufacturing)." There are three specific statements about the effect battery manufacturing has on the output.
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
10,924
Location
Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
A gas car will probably use more mass of just engine oil over its life time than an EV will use batteries... The mass of fuel is huge, even my 30mpg car, for 20k miles is almost 5000lbs/year... Electric charge on the other hand, can be made in your backyard.
Solar is $1,000/KW installed down here...3KW on the roof gets you about 15KWh a day...a Tesla would need 6 days charging at that rate...or a $20K solar array, and I don't think many australian's have that roof space. My FIL has about 6KW before he ran out of roof.
A Tesla is still a 4600lb luxobarge running on 10" wide tires. Also I rarely drive 300km on a work day, so I only need to charge for 90-100km of 55mph use. Many people commute much less distance. Also as an engineer you must see what will eventually happen. Automated cars will result in nearly 0 car accidents so cars will be made lighter and more efficient, and also driven more efficiently when they can communicate and cooperate. Solar panels and storage will continue to get cheaper, and houses and appliances will use much less electricity making self sufficiency the norm. Giant coal mines and power plants and all the infrastructure to funnel a tiny 5-7 kwh a day to a house when there's many times that hitting the roof for free seems like a waste of money and resources once the tech catches up. Don't you think that this is going to be the future? Its just a matter of when its going to happen. I still think there will plugin hybrids available for longer trips, and of course heavy trucks to ship stuff around, but for most people in most usage, an electric car isn't going to be a hardship.
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,824
Location
Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted By: MotoTribologist
1. "And although it currently takes more energy to manufacture an electric vehicle and its battery than to build a gasoline automobile, as you can see in the above graph, the emissions from combusting gasoline vastly outweigh those from vehicle manufacturing."
- Addresses energy use with the statement, that it is included in energy used to manufacture the battery. Not about pollution created, nor about the extraction of the materials used for the battery, which creates pollution and burns fossil fuels. It also omits the finite lifespan of the battery module and its replacement at some point, though that may hinge on what they feel is the lifespan for both vehicles.
Originally Posted By: MotoTribologist
2. "With 100% renewable energy, EVs only result in an average of 21 g/mile of GHGs, coming solely from vehicle and battery manufacturing."
This statement hinges on EVs being built with power coming exclusively from Wind/Solar, though it is clearer than the previous one on GHG's. I would like to see the actual data to see what is factored into "battery manufacturing", are we talking simply about the battery assembly, being put together? are we talking about sourcing the cells and other components, then putting them together? or are we talking about mining the Lithium, the manufacture of the components used, the procurement of those components and then the transport and assembly of those components into the battery module? The final figure would vary massively depending on how that's defined.
Originally Posted By: MotoTribologist
3. "and many will result in only 3.4 tons of GHGs (from vehicle manufacturing)."
And this one speaks only to vehicle manufacture, so I think #2 is your best example.
Originally Posted By: MotoTribologist
There are three specific statements about the effect battery manufacturing has on the output.
Two specific statements that mention it, but no actual break-down of what they are defining as battery manufacturing unless you are able to find that information for us to discuss? There's a lot of ambiguity here and my concern is a bias toward painting the impact of EV's as more green than they are. The idea of using "green" energy to charge them is novel, but those "green" energy sources currently in vogue are also not overly green in their manufacture or installation. Nor is the fact that they continue to require being propped up by a traditional base-load source due to their unreliability and inability to be responsive. Thank you for going to the effort of finding those statements though!
 

JHZR2

Staff member
Joined
Dec 14, 2002
Messages
49,468
Location
New Jersey
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
How much fuel is 400 lb? 6 lb/gal? So like 66 gallons of gas? How much waste sulfur, sulfuric acid and other chemical sludges, spent catalysts, etc are spent in making that?
Going to go that far, then the EVs need the environmental cost of the land and solar cells and their production the 25% capacity factor windfarms that require multiple times nameplate ratings to replace coal/nukes/gas (and now hydro according to Australia's green element isn't "green"), and the grid scale storage media. Seriously, if all that's needed to support EVs, then it needs to be factored into their lifecycle.
You missed my point. We can leave it at coal for all it matter. Point is that crude has byproducts too. Yes, they too are scrubbed at an industrial process, but it is still produced. Indeed, the manufacture of the electricity has pollution associated. But the real question is if the manufacture of batteries (as was what I addressed), which are full of fairly benign and common materials, which last for a decade or more and thousands of cycles, make any more pollution than all the extra fuel that would be otherwised burned, and the related costs of hydrotreating, cracking, distillation, distribution, etc. I highly doubt that the liquid fuels are cleaner in any way...
 

JHZR2

Staff member
Joined
Dec 14, 2002
Messages
49,468
Location
New Jersey
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Do they include the mining and manufacture of the battery banks in this or just the vehicle itself? I don't see it mentioned in the article shrug So my guess is no.... Nor do they factor in the periodic replacement of that battery bank.
Can you define what is the highly polluting item from battery manufacture?
I was thinking specifically as to the mining of the Lithium for the large battery banks, something that will only get worse as popularity increases shrug
And that's worse than drilling and harvesting crude, refining crudes and disposing of sulfur, and the near-similar set of raw materials needed to build any car?
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Messages
1,198
Location
NJ, USA
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: MotoTribologist
1. "And although it currently takes more energy to manufacture an electric vehicle and its battery than to build a gasoline automobile, as you can see in the above graph, the emissions from combusting gasoline vastly outweigh those from vehicle manufacturing."
- Addresses energy use with the statement, that it is included in energy used to manufacture the battery. Not about pollution created, nor about the extraction of the materials used for the battery, which creates pollution and burns fossil fuels. It also omits the finite lifespan of the battery module and its replacement at some point, though that may hinge on what they feel is the lifespan for both vehicles.
Originally Posted By: MotoTribologist
2. "With 100% renewable energy, EVs only result in an average of 21 g/mile of GHGs, coming solely from vehicle and battery manufacturing."
This statement hinges on EVs being built with power coming exclusively from Wind/Solar, though it is clearer than the previous one on GHG's. I would like to see the actual data to see what is factored into "battery manufacturing", are we talking simply about the battery assembly, being put together? are we talking about sourcing the cells and other components, then putting them together? or are we talking about mining the Lithium, the manufacture of the components used, the procurement of those components and then the transport and assembly of those components into the battery module? The final figure would vary massively depending on how that's defined.
Originally Posted By: MotoTribologist
3. "and many will result in only 3.4 tons of GHGs (from vehicle manufacturing)."
And this one speaks only to vehicle manufacture, so I think #2 is your best example.
Originally Posted By: MotoTribologist
There are three specific statements about the effect battery manufacturing has on the output.
Two specific statements that mention it, but no actual break-down of what they are defining as battery manufacturing unless you are able to find that information for us to discuss? There's a lot of ambiguity here and my concern is a bias toward painting the impact of EV's as more green than they are. The idea of using "green" energy to charge them is novel, but those "green" energy sources currently in vogue are also not overly green in their manufacture or installation. Nor is the fact that they continue to require being propped up by a traditional base-load source due to their unreliability and inability to be responsive. Thank you for going to the effort of finding those statements though!
The 3.4 tons reference is to both vehicle and battery manufacturing and they are paraphrasing in that sentence. It mentions that number multiple times. Here is a lifecycle analysis from the Argonne GREET model Argonne GREET Battery Lifecycle Analysis. It goes into the exact details you are claiming they did not account for. I am not sure that this specific model is what was used for this data, but I doubt they would have used a less comprehensive one. So after reading it for yourself, and commenting on the quotes I pulled from it that 100% disprove your statement of them not addressing battery manufacturing's effect, you are going to dig your heels in and continue to say that they do not factor in the manufacturing of batteries into their calculation? If that is the way this is going to be then I'll just stop now and move on.
 
Last edited:

CT8

Joined
Oct 9, 2014
Messages
15,365
Location
Idaho
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Another issue that I've got (with the Tesla version of the model) is that once the packs are used in the vehicles, they are "relifed" in the power walls. Now in my mind, the advantage of the Li packs is lightness in transport applications to avoid lugging around lead acid like the old days. The last thing my house needs is mobility, so tying a bunch of Li packs to my house versus V flow batteries etc. doesn't make the same sort of sense. But it requires even more Li to be harvested, then locked away from recycling for another decade or so (home owners will ride them to the ground rather than stump up another $10k in 6-7 years time. Home storage doesn't need, and probably shouldn't have lithium.
There are companies pushing the Li battery packs around here , Northern California to be charged at night to beat the new time of use meters.
 
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
8,047
Location
down in the park
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Silk
Rivers are handy things to have....
Agreed, but Oz's greens now having demonised coal in any way shape and form have turned on hydro.
I can understand manmade lakes eating up land area (and vegetation), but what part of hydro isn't green enough for them exactly?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top