Unintended harm of subsidizing electric cars
- Thread starter SoNic67
- Start date
- Status
Charging an electric vehicle in colder environments can emit more CO2 than driving an equivalent gasoline car.
One main reason is that battery charging is less efficient in cold temperatures, with energy losses between 15% and 20% at 19°F. Furthermore, EV heating and cooling is drawn from the same battery as EV propulsion, so when the temperature is cold, the battery range can be reduced by as much as 25% to 60%. In places such as Minneapolis, where winters are cold and coal is the marginal source of electricity generation, driving a mile in an electric vehicle can be worse for the climate than driving a gasoline car.
New electric vehicles do not necessarily replace driving in gasoline-powered cars.
In areas where electricity is generated from fossil fuels, EV subsidies send the wrong signal: “Here’s $7,500 to buy a car that you should feel free to charge using cheap coal electricity.” Drivers respond to these signals, both in terms of the cars they buy and the amount they drive.
Charging at night uses coal, not solar.
One main reason is that battery charging is less efficient in cold temperatures, with energy losses between 15% and 20% at 19°F. Furthermore, EV heating and cooling is drawn from the same battery as EV propulsion, so when the temperature is cold, the battery range can be reduced by as much as 25% to 60%. In places such as Minneapolis, where winters are cold and coal is the marginal source of electricity generation, driving a mile in an electric vehicle can be worse for the climate than driving a gasoline car.
New electric vehicles do not necessarily replace driving in gasoline-powered cars.
In areas where electricity is generated from fossil fuels, EV subsidies send the wrong signal: “Here’s $7,500 to buy a car that you should feel free to charge using cheap coal electricity.” Drivers respond to these signals, both in terms of the cars they buy and the amount they drive.
Charging at night uses coal, not solar.
Similar to the unintended harm from subsidizing oil companies to the tune of $20 billion a year.
No technology is perfect.
No technology is a panacea.
You also 'forgot' to mention that your linked article assumes both very cold environments and coal generated electricity used to address marginal load demand (the most expensive kind of demand to meet. Nobody that is sane likes to turn coal furnaces on and off, its too expensive).
It's a good thing that coal usage is on the decline then, wouldn't you agree?
And coal is expensive anyway. Where'd the authors get the idea it generated electricity inexpensively? Especially when used to address marginal load like they claim here. The limited circumstances under which they draw their conclusions are not representative of the whole of the marketplace. The mental gymnastics used to justify their position are to be admired if only for effort alone.
In other words they are cherry picking data and selecting special circumstances and then drawing broad conclusions based on those cherry picked assumptions.
Sad.
No technology is perfect.
No technology is a panacea.
You also 'forgot' to mention that your linked article assumes both very cold environments and coal generated electricity used to address marginal load demand (the most expensive kind of demand to meet. Nobody that is sane likes to turn coal furnaces on and off, its too expensive).
It's a good thing that coal usage is on the decline then, wouldn't you agree?
And coal is expensive anyway. Where'd the authors get the idea it generated electricity inexpensively? Especially when used to address marginal load like they claim here. The limited circumstances under which they draw their conclusions are not representative of the whole of the marketplace. The mental gymnastics used to justify their position are to be admired if only for effort alone.
In other words they are cherry picking data and selecting special circumstances and then drawing broad conclusions based on those cherry picked assumptions.
Sad.
Last edited:
Agree. For starters I can think of $2T starting in 2003.
gas $3.19 gallon and increasing here everyday since Nov. 2019, over $5 a gallon Cali
The unintended ignorance of subsidizing electric cars. If we could just get past the canard that CO2 is a pollutant and a chimera threatening every living thing on the planet, all of this debate would evaporate. People could drive what ever they pleased for as long as they pleased.
Last edited:
Science degree from Walmart? Enjoy your wildfires and record-breaking heat.
So, what you are saying is the source of electricity in the US is the problem. Maybe you guys should fix that first?
For sure. Too many people think that electricity comes from rainbows and unicorn farts. There are places in the US where plugging in three more Tesla's will cause brown outs (a slight exaggeration).
Even though an electrically heated home uses 10-1000x more energy than a EV car literally nobody seems to care about that,
Seems like if the points made are actual issues someone would be concerned that literally every new home is build with electrically heated water and air
It doesn't matter what you pick, someone will figure out a way to make it bad or bad for you.
I think you are grossly miss-estimating here. A typical home in the US uses a bit more than a 1000 kilowatt hours a month. Charging a Tesla for 2000 miles of driving (typical monthly miles for a household) will use about 500 kilowatt hours (24kWh per mile).
Last edited:
the math there is bad.
its closer to .33 kwh per mile. not 24.. also not sure how you got 24kWh per mile when you say 500kWh is 2000miles.
Also I dont think 24000 miles a year is average.. closer to 1000-1400
Who would get that from Walmart?
Everyone knows the best degrees are purchased at Costco, assuming you need a twelve-pack of degrees.
I think some people are just salty that BITOG will have to change to a new URL in a few years, BobIsTheBatteryGuy,com
Basically you are subsidizing a car for people who dont need the subsidy. In our state we also offer heavily discounted registrations and renewals for people that don't need the subsidy.
Unintended harm to my ego!
Sixteen years ago I was pleased to have a 12 second quarter mile car(mid 1.7 second 60ft times) on 91 octane that was a true daily driver. Times change.
Still waiting for the weight to decrease, and the range to increase.
Sixteen years ago I was pleased to have a 12 second quarter mile car(mid 1.7 second 60ft times) on 91 octane that was a true daily driver. Times change.
Still waiting for the weight to decrease, and the range to increase.
Heat/cooling for homes and transportation aren't going anywhere anytime soon. Pick the most efficient, least polluting (in terms of CO2, particulates, etc.) means to that end and go with it. EVs are not perfect, but all the research I've done (and math doesn't lie) tells me EVs are the future. Internal combustion engines have had 100+ years of development to get where they are now, there's no reason the issues with EVs can't be ironed out in time.
I love my IC vehicles as much as the next guy, but I have zero qualms with buying an electric vehicle for my daily driver provided they're reasonably reliable.
I love my IC vehicles as much as the next guy, but I have zero qualms with buying an electric vehicle for my daily driver provided they're reasonably reliable.
JHZR2
Staff member
Very true. Both are a human need.
But losses and air leaks aside, I heat my house and my water at 97% efficiency using a modulating condensing boiler. and I have access to a very robust and reliable distribution network to meet that need.
Batteries aren’t 97% efficient at heating the car cabin even with a 100% efficient resistive heater. They aren’t charged with a robust and reliable network when future demand is considered. A massive investment is needed to make that happen. And so they sell expensive product, with tax subsidy, to people who don’t need it, and are getting out of paying their obligation in taxes and in infrastructure investment to support their vehicle.
Id like to see a $10k early adopter fee for everyone who wants to push EVs. Let all the enviro people put their money where their mouth is. I doubt any of these pro environment, pro high tax folks have ever given back their subsidy. That or a mandatory solar panel installation of x. Even wi5 solar warts, it’s easy to implement and offset at least some energy.
- Status
