Interesting electrification analysis article

[SubieRubyRoo]

This was originally found on Americanthinker.com, by William Levin, titled, “The Electric Car Con Explained”. I would link to it, but had to remove the hyperlinks, a few lines and one paragraph that would run afoul of board rules. You can always use the data above to find the full article. Interesting what the data really appears to say about EVs/Electrification and the political boogeyman that’s being pushed:

(copy/paste removed - MOD)

Guys like @OVERKILL @MVAR and others in the power industry… does this jibe with known data you guys have seen?

 

[Danno]

Search for Tucker Carlson's interview with Dr. Soon.
This interview would support the last line of your quoted posting.

 

[Passport1]

If the canard of global warming (or whatever the meme is today) were disproven then the rationale for EVs is reduced to economy of operation. That is a reasonable inspection, i.e. how does a Tesla 3 compare in actual energy consumption to perhaps a Nissan Sentra or Toyota Corolla. The rest of us will be freed from an arbitrary diktat in the future that our choices in vehicles will be compulsory.

I think that is the root of our uneasiness.

 

[proveitwithdata]

Diversify your research for those interested. Its all about personalization of the data to see what works for you. This paradigm shift thats happening in the auto industry is a good time, to figure out what works, and what has not.

https://news.umich.edu/electric-vs-gasoline-vehicles-is-ev-ownership-competitive-in-your-area/
https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/are-electric-vehicles-definitely-better-climate-gas-powered-cars
https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_benefits.html

 

[KGMtech]

These discussions highlight the confusion that the average consumer has to either ignore or study, but the actual facts can be hard to confirm. So many EV pro or con articles carry the bias of the author too far, making the conclusions doubtful for me.

I do wonder about the extreme weight of current EV being a safety and infrastructure problem not considered in the design of our roads & bridges. Don't get me started about the higher weight also generating more micro plastic debris from their tires. Cars & trucks being the greatest source of micro plastic / rubber debris since 1900.

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Diversify your research for those interested. Its all about personalization of the data to see what works for you. This paradigm shift thats happening in the auto industry is a good time, to figure out what works, and what has not.

https://news.umich.edu/electric-vs-gasoline-vehicles-is-ev-ownership-competitive-in-your-area/
https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/are-electric-vehicles-definitely-better-climate-gas-powered-cars
https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_benefits.html

You expect me to believe Jennifer Granholm’s department when she can’t even keep track of her stock portfolio divestitures?

I’m not interested in forms of energy that require taxpayer funding to be initially feasible. That’s what venture capitalists are for: they take the risk, they reap the reward.

That firewall has a habit of stopping stupid or ineffective/inefficient ideas in their tracks, not after Solyndra went belly up with $300M of OUR money in their executives’ bank accounts…

 

[oil pan 4]

I own an electric car because it's cheap to run.
2 cents a mile for electricity, 40k to 50k miles on tires, 35k mile oil changes.
The climate grift is irrelevant.

 

[Kiwi_ME]

Thankfully that doesn't matter, the effect is the same.

The comments under that Levin article are just hilarious! Just what I needed for a Friday laugh.

 

[proveitwithdata]

You expect me to believe Jennifer Granholm’s department when she can’t even keep track of her stock portfolio divestitures?

I’m not interested in forms of energy that require taxpayer funding to be initially feasible. That’s what venture capitalists are for: they take the risk, they reap the reward.

That firewall has a habit of stopping stupid or ineffective/inefficient ideas in their tracks, not after Solyndra went belly up with $300M of OUR money in their executives’ bank accounts…

Major shifts, like renewables seem like they need a lot of capital investment, that historically have only come from a federal level. Unless there is a VC willing to takeover the reigns.

Nuclear power plants also benefit strongly from subsidies, Healey says, particularly from the Price-Anderson Act of 1957, which requires the federal government to indemnify utilities in case of a nuclear disaster. The study quotes utility officials speaking in the 1950s who warned that without federal accident indemnification the industry could not exist.Federal support during the first 15 years works out to $3.3 billion annually for nuclear energy and $1.8 billion annually for oil and gas, but an average of only $400 million a year in inflation-adjusted dollars for renewables.

Similarly, several measures to aid oil companies passed in the early 1900s remain of key importance to the industry, Healey notes. These include one provision passed in 1916 to speed up depreciation of drilling costs. A second one, the oil depletion allowance, which became law in 1926, gives oil companies a tax break for depleting an oil reservoir.

The aid runs deep and comes in many forms—state and federal tax breaks for mining and use; technological support for mining and exploration; national resource maps to encourage exploration and development; tariffs on foreign coal; and aid to steel smelters, railroads, and other industries that burn coal to encourage greater use and develop a steady market for coal.

 

[Gyro Gearloose]

I have crunched the CO2 comparison numbers between EV's and gas cars multiple times over the past several years and keep getting similar answers each time. In general the EV's have about half the CO2 emissions of gas cars because about 40% of the electric power is emission free, and the EV's are inherently more energy efficient per mile because they have regenerative braking.

The comparison has gotten much more apples to apples as of late because we now have a virtually identical vehicle being manufactured in both electric and gas form - the F150 lightning and F150 2.7 Eco Boost. Using the owner reported figures that the Lightning averages about 2.4 miles/kwh over the year, and the Eco Boost averages 22 mpg overall. The emission numbers would shake out thusly:

Lightning using the US electricity average emission rate of .86 lbs CO2 / kwh for all sources combined - 0.36 lbs CO2 / mile
Lightning on natural gas fired turbine utility averaging 40% thermal efficiency - 0.42 lbs CO2 / mile
Lightning in my immediate area which is 100% coal fired power - 0.84 lb CO2 / mile

Eco Boost F150 averaging 22 mpg on E10 - .86 lb CO2 / mile.

You might legitimately add about 5% to the Lightning numbers for electrical transmission and distribution losses, but then there is also a loss factor on the oil and gas gathering and processing. I've never been able to find the CO2 intensity for processing a gallon of gas however.

People also like to point out the energy needed for mining and processing battery materials but I've never seen any numbers on that at all and it would have to be distributed over the life of the car so that calculation would start to get real fuzzy.

 

[Cujet]

cars are not a major consumer of national energy. 14% is about right.

 

[Cujet]

I have crunched the CO2 comparison numbers between EV's and gas cars multiple times over the past several years and keep getting similar answers each time. In general the EV's have about half the CO2 emissions of gas cars because about 40% of the electric power is emission free, and the EV's are inherently more energy efficient per mile because they have regenerative braking.

The comparison has gotten much more apples to apples as of late because we now have a virtually identical vehicle being manufactured in both electric and gas form - the F150 lightning and F150 2.7 Eco Boost. Using the owner reported figures that the Lightning averages about 2.4 miles/kwh over the year, and the Eco Boost averages 22 mpg overall. The emission numbers would shake out thusly:

Lightning using the US electricity average emission rate of .86 lbs CO2 / kwh for all sources combined - 0.36 lbs CO2 / mile
Lightning on natural gas fired turbine utility averaging 40% thermal efficiency - 0.42 lbs CO2 / mile
Lightning in my immediate area which is 100% coal fired power - 0.84 lb CO2 / mile

Eco Boost F150 averaging 22 mpg on E10 - .86 lb CO2 / mile.

You might legitimately add about 5% to the Lightning numbers for electrical transmission and distribution losses, but then there is also a loss factor on the oil and gas gathering and processing. I've never been able to find the CO2 intensity for processing a gallon of gas however.

People also like to point out the energy needed for mining and processing battery materials but I've never seen any numbers on that at all and it would have to be distributed over the life of the car so that calculation would start to get real fuzzy.

The problem with the calculations is the classic mistake of using the battery output to calculate what the power plant must produce to charge the battery. There is a stack of losses here

 

[MVAR]

I’m settling down with my family for the evening so will be very quick.

Not going to touch the CO2 “issue/sham” because it’s a political hot potato with skewed data for public access. Similar to the government fish hatchery “survival” data that is released. I do understand wanting to shift air pollution outside of city/urban centers but have opinions that I won’t share here on the implementation.

The fact I will speak about is the cost of electricity will begin to skyrocket the more we “electrify” homes & the more EV penetration happens in established neighborhoods. Several Northern California areas can’t handle EV penetration of 15-20% without updates. Others can. With the current undergrounding of transmission & distribution lines, we will require additional reactive resources & additional lines just to be able to transport the same amount of MW. Cables can’t pass the same amount of power, they act as capacitors on the system due to the additional capacitive reactance & they have FAR longer restoration times due to inability to test without a manned inspection.

End users will eat the cost as that’s how utilities make money. They don’t make money on the energy sold to you, they are allocated a PUC set percentage of return on grid upgrades.

The more EV’s & the more NG appliances are swapped for electric, the more required updates will happen & the higher your rate will be.

Back in ‘17 or so, one of the Northern California utilities put a team together to find the cost to users of a 100% reliable grid (to end users not pathway outages) utilizing the “most green technology available”. The lowest projected cost was $5/kWh with that figure likely to nearly double. Customers that currently have $1000/mo summer bills would now have over $10,000/mo bills. Sounds insane & like something that would never happen but those would be the costs.

Also knowing the back orders on equipment right now, I’m not too hopeful. I’ve been waiting on a couple large transformers for nearly 5yrs now. Have had water level monitoring devices on order for over a year & am at the FERC minimum number of devices for a few reservoirs & plant afterbays with no spares remaining.

Once cost’s go through the roof or we experience severe grid instability (more likely), hopefully things will begin to return to a sane way. I’ve posted NERC reports informing government to stop with this asinine policy making & recommending policymakers work with industry to become educated on the problems they’ve created.

Think that’s all for tonight fellas. Have a good night everyone.

 

[Torrid]

Search for Tucker Carlson's interview with Dr. Soon.
This interview would support the last line of your quoted posting.

What a resoundingly credible political commentator with no axe to grind to cite.

Is this real life right now?

These discussions highlight the confusion that the average consumer has to either ignore or study, but the actual facts can be hard to confirm. So many EV pro or con articles carry the bias of the author too far, making the conclusions doubtful for me.

I do wonder about the extreme weight of current EV being a safety and infrastructure problem not considered in the design of our roads & bridges. Don't get me started about the higher weight also generating more micro plastic debris from their tires. Cars & trucks being the greatest source of micro plastic / rubber debris since 1900.

Stop buying massive heavy vehicles if you’re worried about road damage and tire wear. There’s even light EVs. I own one. Everyone thinks they need an SUV or a truck though and EV variations make it so much worse. The average car/truck is heavier than it’s ever been. What makes EVs heavy is the battery for range. You know what makes EVs lighter? Making them smaller so they don’t need as much battery to go the same distance. Large EVs are only better for transporting more air.

I have crunched the CO2 comparison numbers between EV's and gas cars multiple times over the past several years and keep getting similar answers each time. In general the EV's have about half the CO2 emissions of gas cars because about 40% of the electric power is emission free, and the EV's are inherently more energy efficient per mile because they have regenerative braking.

The comparison has gotten much more apples to apples as of late because we now have a virtually identical vehicle being manufactured in both electric and gas form - the F150 lightning and F150 2.7 Eco Boost. Using the owner reported figures that the Lightning averages about 2.4 miles/kwh over the year, and the Eco Boost averages 22 mpg overall. The emission numbers would shake out thusly:

Lightning using the US electricity average emission rate of .86 lbs CO2 / kwh for all sources combined - 0.36 lbs CO2 / mile
Lightning on natural gas fired turbine utility averaging 40% thermal efficiency - 0.42 lbs CO2 / mile
Lightning in my immediate area which is 100% coal fired power - 0.84 lb CO2 / mile

Eco Boost F150 averaging 22 mpg on E10 - .86 lb CO2 / mile.

You might legitimately add about 5% to the Lightning numbers for electrical transmission and distribution losses, but then there is also a loss factor on the oil and gas gathering and processing. I've never been able to find the CO2 intensity for processing a gallon of gas however.

People also like to point out the energy needed for mining and processing battery materials but I've never seen any numbers on that at all and it would have to be distributed over the life of the car so that calculation would start to get real fuzzy.

Watch it making sense there. We’ll all be called Elon loving virtue signaling liberals. I’m far from any of those things but I’m ready to embrace the title if it irritates the people that spew it in anger.

 

[Torrid]

If the canard of global warming (or whatever the meme is today) were disproven then the rationale for EVs is reduced to economy of operation. That is a reasonable inspection, i.e. how does a Tesla 3 compare in actual energy consumption to perhaps a Nissan Sentra or Toyota Corolla. The rest of us will be freed from an arbitrary diktat in the future that our choices in vehicles will be compulsory.

I think that is the root of our uneasiness.

It’s possible to cite what’s better for the environment, but the cost difference is hardly anything to bat an eye at to operate with such performance and the driving experience. If the energy is so much cheaper to use it really doesn’t matter how much it uses even if it’s the same amount. It isn’t which also makes it so much cheaper. The amount of gasoline more it took to drive a 20mpg vehicle the amount of miles I drive in a month would have paid the car payment on something like a Chevrolet Bolt compared to the home charging costs to drive a modest EV.

 

[Cujet]

The comparison has gotten much more apples to apples as of late because we now have a virtually identical vehicle being manufactured in both electric and gas form - the F150 lightning and F150 2.7 Eco Boost.

One often omitted aspect of EV "efficiency" is regenerative braking. Eliminate that by comparing high speed highway (or highway towing) and the EV uses more "Fuel" to push it down the road than the gas vehicle.

A model S will travel no more than 26 highway miles on a gallon of generator gas. Some tests have it at 12, and some in the mid teens.

 

[Torrid]

One often omitted aspect of EV "efficiency" is regenerative braking. Eliminate that by comparing high speed highway (or highway towing) and the EV uses more "Fuel" to push it down the road than the gas vehicle.

A model S will travel no more than 26 highway miles on a gallon of generator gas. Some tests have it at 12, and some in the mid teens.

But that’s not how electricity is generated. That’s much less efficient. It’s not really comparable in the same sense unless your requirement was to start with gasoline.

False equivalence, though it’s an interesting statistic.

 

[Kiwi_ME]

The author (Levin) is incorrect about the US contribution to global CO2 being only 14%. Because it's cumulative it's actually 25%, twice that of China. Then work that out per-capita.
But it's not 1980 anymore so it's far too late anyway. We've all made our bed and must lie in it.

 

[Cujet]

But that’s not how electricity is generated. That’s much less efficient. It’s not really comparable in the same sense unless your requirement was to start with gasoline.

False equivalence, though it’s an interesting statistic.

I clearly understand your point. But it good to note that overall grid efficiency remains in the mid 30% range.

It is stunningly easy to charge an EV with a 44% thermally efficient diesel genset. Better efficiency than the grid in overall terms. 26MPG highway is the result.

It is no surprise that charging a Tesla with the most efficient small gasoline generator, a Honda EU7000i results in mid teens highway MPG.

 

[proveitwithdata]

I clearly understand your point. But it good to note that overall grid efficiency remains in the mid 30% range.

It is stunningly easy to charge an EV with a 44% thermally efficient diesel genset. Better efficiency than the grid in overall terms. 26MPG highway is the result.

It is no surprise that charging a Tesla with the most efficient small gasoline generator, a Honda EU7000i results in mid teens highway MPG.

How efficient are solar panels these days? I wondered if they could be directly used to charge an ev battery?

My only point of reference is the new prius prime solar panel, that would take 1600 days for a breakeven point