Maybe many semis will be forced off of the roads, leaving the bulk of long haul shipping to the railroads, where it should be...
Why the big push to eliminate ICEs?
- Thread starter grampi
- Start date
- Status
wemay
Site Donor 2023
wemay
Site Donor 2023
Based on the assumption your statement is true...for argument's sake...
Yes, and due to coal plants being fixed locations, regulations aimed at improving these plants are more easily overseen than trying to control the emissions of millions of vehicles used throughout the country of varying age, working condition, and to a much lesser extent, tune.
Last edited:
And I believe I acknowledged that for the time being, until more renewables and nuclear are brought online, we are rearranging deck chairs... Don't look now, but some of those things are increasing in prevalence... (ok, not nuclear, but...)
Are you sure? I thought natural gas power plants were pretty clean, and then add in some amount of renewables. Not quite unicorn farts but not in the same realm as gasoline powered.
I don't think (?) that natural gas power plants have NOx emissions and who knows what else. Different fuel, different combustion, different emissions. Plus no cold start emissions (although maybe as a peaker comes online the emissions might be mind-boggling). And of course, the pollution can be removed from places of high population, too bad for those who live in the sticks, but...
Without a doubt it is transferring emissions but it may not be as simple as that.
I do believe there are articles comparing CO2 per mile between EV and gas powered vehicles, I recall seeing one recently, but I cannot find it at the moment. I do know one gallon of gasoline is 8,887 grams of CO2, so CO2/mile is as simple as dividing that by mpg. But finding what one's CO2/mile for EV requires knowing what their local power company makes for CO2 per kWhr, reduce it by transmission line losses and charging losses, and then use what the car says it uses for kWhr/mile. I think 300Whr is a typical per mile energy usage for EV's, so I'm guessing about 0.37kWhr back at the energy station (10% transmission line loss, 10% charging loss). This link shows 0.91lb/kWhr which converts to 413 grams of CO2 per kWhr. So one mile traveled at a claimed 300Whr per mile is about 153 grams of CO2 generated. 8,887 grams of CO2 per gallon of gasoline, divided by 153 grams of CO2, is 58. A car getting 58mpg is making 153gm of CO2 per mile. So if an EV was powered solely by natural gas, it would be equivalent to an ICE setup getting 58mpg.
Only if you are using really poor supplied grids.
All coal fired generation needs to be outlawed.
We feel guilty when Greta goes on a angry tirade. Better push for the change quickly, you wont like the next outburst.
My Prius prime has a 8.8 kWh battery good for 26 miles.
My current tank of fuel is giving me 225 MPG of gas plus whatever electricity I consume. One charge of my car is about a load of laundry through my dryer, so if I hang it on the line I get 26 "free" miles.
The first little bit of battery storage does the most diversion of gas-to-electric, so five Prius Primes will save society more liquid gasoline than one new Tesla. And liquid fuel still has its place on stuff like aircraft-- nothing else economical is as energy dense.
I go about three weeks and 1000+ miles between fillings of the tank. Plugging the cord in is no inconvenience.
Charging people for road use by the mile strikes me as a moral hazard that will benefit larger, less efficient vehicles if not carefully designed. Road wear goes up to the fourth power of axle weight, so something just a little heavier will tear up the roads twice as much.
My current tank of fuel is giving me 225 MPG of gas plus whatever electricity I consume. One charge of my car is about a load of laundry through my dryer, so if I hang it on the line I get 26 "free" miles.
The first little bit of battery storage does the most diversion of gas-to-electric, so five Prius Primes will save society more liquid gasoline than one new Tesla. And liquid fuel still has its place on stuff like aircraft-- nothing else economical is as energy dense.
I go about three weeks and 1000+ miles between fillings of the tank. Plugging the cord in is no inconvenience.
Charging people for road use by the mile strikes me as a moral hazard that will benefit larger, less efficient vehicles if not carefully designed. Road wear goes up to the fourth power of axle weight, so something just a little heavier will tear up the roads twice as much.
Not so. What the car says is nonsense, as it utterly ignores a stack of losses.
Trust an accurate power meter to tell how much power was purchased, and the odometer to determine how many miles were driven. I promise you the number is NOT the 300 watt hours per mile that the dashboard claims.
It's good to know that 59 to 61% of grid power goes into driving the wheels. (ignoring regenerative braking, as regen is not always used) For example, some drivers simply glide to a stop (this is most efficient) and some drivers spend a lot of time on the highway.
Just as an example, it's not unusual to see 550 watt hours delivered to go 1 high speed highway mile.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2021
- Messages
- 1,412
Most power plants use a mix of coal and natural gas.
Was looking that up yesterday. Average for the US 2019 it was 0.92 kg/kWh. For NZ same year 0.11 kg/kWh. Our coal and gas is only using for peaking and when lake levels are low.
I also can add that charging my EV at very low power levels (1.7kW) is only 86% efficient and battery cycle efficiency is 96%, so I factor the 16 kWh/100km dash reading by those to get 19.4 kWh/100km. I've measured those efficiencies, they're not guesses.
So, per km I have 0.11 kgCO2/kWh x 19.4 kWh/100 km divided by 100 km = 21 grams/km or 34 grams/mile. Obviously that doesn't consider transmission losses. For the US grid that's 176 grams/mile, not particularly great but not as bad as your 411 gram average for gasoline (EPA 2012-2016). I'll note that this does not include emissions getting that gasoline from the ground to the pump.
I did try to take into account transmission line and charging losses, that is how 300Whr become 370Whr (19% loss, 10% per loss source).
At your 550Whr claimed that may be more like 679Whr at the power plant. That works out to 280gm CO2 (if purely natural gas) which is equivalent to 32mpg of gasoline CO2 generation. More grams if coal is part of the electric mix, less if renewables are part of the mix.
How hard do you have to drive the car to hit 550Whr per mile, and what gasoline powered car could do 32mpg under the same driving?
Right, but coal is being phased out, and it appears that while renewables are being ramped, natural gas is also being ramped up. You're right, it makes it hard to say exactly what the CO2/kWhr is, one has to know what their local power source is using in order to determine what their EV is creating per mile. It's not straight forward.
In quick calculations, it would seem to me that once over 40mpg or so for ICE (hybrid or otherwise), the gains (err reductions) for EV starts to become questionable, given our high usage of non-renewable power sources for electrical generation. It has value but it is not overwhelming. But the EV may work quite well for those with short driving cycles that work well with the EV limitations.
What I think will be interesting is what may come out of the F150 EV. What does it use per mile, either as a commuting vehicle or as a working vehicle. Will it really result in less CO2 per mile? Sometimes one does not know until it is tried and found to be lacking.
Power plants are centralized and regulated. Cars are all over. Power plants away from an urban center can't be compared to getting fuel at local gas stations in the urban center. No matter what power plant, the argument doen't make sense. If hydro and other clean sources the argument is even less sensible. If people are so worried about electricity and pollution from it, their life styles aren't showing it. Turn off the a/c, turn off the electronics, electric stoves, and electric clothes dryers. You are polluting the air.
Don't worry, the taxes per mile will be in excess of the fuel taxes. Those aren't going away no matter what is promised at the outset.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Excellent follow-up.
Most of the uranium extraction done today looks something like this:
Which is Cameco's McArthur River mine (currently suspended).
They are currently using Cigar Lake in Northern Saskatchewan, which has the highest grade uranium deposits in the world.
There are various methods of recovering uranium, these are not pit mines but rather utilize:
Boxhole Boring:
Cameco said:
in-situ recovery:
Cameco said:
Jet Boring (what they use at Cigar Lake):
Cameco said:
These, and the other methods are discussed on the Cameco website:
https://www.cameco.com/businesses/mining-methods
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2020
- Messages
- 452
When you consider the rare metals need to mass produce the motors and batteries for these EVs (cobalt, lithium, and others)
and that much of those resources are in very limited quantities and in hostile parts of the world there is NO way they can become the norm, it isn't possible, and the fact that the electrical grid in the USA is not capable of handling large numbers of EVs being charged, and practical things like limited range and long charging times compared to just taking minutes to gas up an ICE.....
We're being sold a bill of goods that is not going to be viable. Consumers are not convinced or really interested in EVs either.
Makes you wonder, doesn't it?
and that much of those resources are in very limited quantities and in hostile parts of the world there is NO way they can become the norm, it isn't possible, and the fact that the electrical grid in the USA is not capable of handling large numbers of EVs being charged, and practical things like limited range and long charging times compared to just taking minutes to gas up an ICE.....
We're being sold a bill of goods that is not going to be viable. Consumers are not convinced or really interested in EVs either.
Makes you wonder, doesn't it?
Intermodal
- Status
