Still want an EV? (NO POLITICS)

[Car-Addicted]

Originally Posted by gblansten

With peek oil I am picturing someone going, "hey, is that barrel looking at me?"

Fixed, Picky, Picky Picky

[gblansten]

Originally Posted by Car-Addicted

Fixed, Picky, Picky Picky

I kid.

[M5Rick]

Barrels huh? All I see is barrels of ta x money flushed down in the restroom on this crazy EV path to add to huge debt on this blinded path by gov. believing overpaid greenie scientists who are just flicking a dice and smiling all the way to the bank.

[Car-Addicted]

Here is some real news and not some children's fake graph.

Asian black mass payables weaken again and South Korean battery recyclers cut output
Poor margins have been a fixture in the Asian black mass markets over recent months, but the latest moves by Korean recyclers suggest that the situation is becoming more severe.

“Many recyclers in Korea are operating at just 50% capacity. Metal prices have stayed soft for several weeks now. The current situation is that the more black mass we process, the higher the loss we suffer,” a key South Korean black mass consumer said this week.

“I heard offers for nickel cobalt manganese [NCM] black mass but there is no interest. In Korea, most recyclers are considering production cuts [because there is] no demand,” a Korean trading source said.

A sustained drop in lithium carbonate prices was also hampering demand for black mass, given the dwindling margins available to battery metal recyclers.

https://www.fastmarkets.com/insights...rs-cut-output/

When the wet dreams of green grifters depend on profitabilty and not government largest the wheels quickly come off the grift train.

[Car-Addicted]

The Ugly Reality of EV Battery Waste and Its Impact on the Planet
The impact of battery waste on the environment is significant. When batteries are not disposed of properly, they can release harmful chemicals into the environment. These chemicals can leach into soil and water, contaminating natural habitats and harming wildlife.

In addition, the production of EV batteries requires a significant amount of energy. The mining and extraction of the metals used in the batteries can also be energy-intensive and can result in the release of greenhouse gases and other harmful pollutants.

If the environmental and economic costs of manufacturing and disposal of EV batteries were factored into the total cost of ownership of EVs, consumers would realize the actual cost of EVs is much higher than touted. Despite the high costs, the deployment of these batteries is currently massively embraced, thus creating an even higher environmental cost.

https://energy5.com/the-shocking-tru...ttery-disposal

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by Car-Addicted

The Ugly Reality of EV Battery Waste and Its Impact on the Planet
The impact of battery waste on the environment is significant. When batteries are not disposed of properly, they can release harmful chemicals into the environment. These chemicals can leach into soil and water, contaminating natural habitats and harming wildlife.

In addition, the production of EV batteries requires a significant amount of energy. The mining and extraction of the metals used in the batteries can also be energy-intensive and can result in the release of greenhouse gases and other harmful pollutants.

If the environmental and economic costs of manufacturing and disposal of EV batteries were factored into the total cost of ownership of EVs, consumers would realize the actual cost of EVs is much higher than touted. Despite the high costs, the deployment of these batteries is currently massively embraced, thus creating an even higher environmental cost.

https://energy5.com/the-shocking-tru...ttery-disposal

The continued support of the thread with your important real-time knowledge together with the linked proof is much appreciated by me, Car-Addicted.

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by Murf the Surf

The point is the folks pushing the green agenda would have you believe that EV is going to save the planet when it is clear that zero tail pipe emissions is far different than zero carbon footprint. It's pretty clear to anyone paying attention and applying a little bit of common sense that EV's have significant challenges and aren't being bought because of those challenges and the realization that they aren't actually making things better, just swapping one problem for many others. The devil you know.....

Of course not forgetting you too Murf the Surf, Efthreeoh and all you others who are contributing.

[Murf the Surf]

Originally Posted by SoCal_NSX

this is not reality though...it has been proven in study after study already that even after battery production is taken into account and all the other aspects that over time EV's are far better than ICE when it comes to CO2 levels. Any one that tells you otherwise is being paid by Exxon.




most nonbiased independent studies suggest EV's are much better for the environment

I don't really care, I have both types of cars and love them all and none of us will live long enough to see the last ICE vehicles on the road, but....

Climate change is real and if we can help slow it down we should...it is common sense, not a conspiracy

"Operation - Power Supply"? I guess that means where the electricity comes from for the EV, great if it's nuclear or renewables (I'll come back to this) but how much electricity is being generated by coal? We know for example in China and India most of the electricity is coming from coal so how green is the EV then? With respect to renewables, my wife is reading Apocalypse Never. It seems that for the USA to convert to purely Wind and Solar would cost an estimate of $120Trillion and would require the use of up to 50% of the US landmass. A solar or wind farm requires 450 times more land than LNG or nuclear powered electricity plant and still wouldn't produce as much electricity.

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by Car-Addicted

Bias Rating: LEFT-CENTER
Quartz is owned by G/O Media Inc., a media company that runs Gizmodo, Deadspin, Jezebel, The Onion, The Root, and other sister websites. G/O was formed in early 2019 when Great Hill Partners, a private equity firm, purchased the websites from Univision. Advertising and subscription fees generate revenue.
When it comes to sourcing, they typically utilize credible sources such as c-span.org, New York Times, Huffington Post, and USA Today.

SoCal_NSX, better run quick the clown car is leaving the station.

The Root?
Oh my. Talk about bottom dwellers.
Shirley they aren't still operating.


7.5 billion for new charge stations. Not ONE done.
Flipping mobsters I tell ya.

[kyriian]

Originally Posted by Murf the Surf

"Operation - Power Supply"? I guess that means where the electricity comes from for the EV, great if it's nuclear or renewables (I'll come back to this) but how much electricity is being generated by coal? We know for example in China and India most of the electricity is coming from coal so how green is the EV then? With respect to renewables, my wife is reading Apocalypse Never. It seems that for the USA to convert to purely Wind and Solar would cost an estimate of $120Trillion and would require the use of up to 50% of the US landmass. A solar or wind farm requires 450 times more land than LNG or nuclear powered electricity plant and still wouldn't produce as much electricity.

Fairly certain all that 450 times land is going to involve even a little clearcutting some old growth forests and probably destroying any natural habitats for thousands and thousands of wild life

But hey there is no emission for your EV I guess.

[Car-Addicted]

A couple thoughts on the latest barrage of posts:
First the planet has endured climate change since the big bang. Facts are that earth has had environments so toxic that it wouldn't support life, and yet the Eco system manages to evolve? It is the greatest hubris of man to think they can significantly effect the planet.
Second, life has a carbon footprint and carbon neutral ignores physics.
Third I can't remember anyone on this thread suggesting that EV's should be out outlawed. I think if you want a EV should be able to buy one. I also think if I want to buy a ICE I should be able to buy one.
Forth, EV folks need to take responsibility for their adoption. It IS NOT a environment friendly choice. There are a lot of problems with this technology being forced on the market before it's time. With out globalist and government pressure the EV market would likely be under 5%.
Fifth, we need to acknowledge that fossil fuels and capitalism has improved the lives of millions of people all over the world and elimination of either fossil fuels and capitalism will cause the deaths of millions of humans.

[dfox]

quite the circle jerk going on in here. Keep it up.

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by dfox

quite the circle jerk going on in here. Keep it up.

That's what we're doing.

[Torgus]

Originally Posted by Murf the Surf

"Operation - Power Supply"? I guess that means where the electricity comes from for the EV, great if it's nuclear or renewables (I'll come back to this) but how much electricity is being generated by coal? We know for example in China and India most of the electricity is coming from coal so how green is the EV then? With respect to renewables, my wife is reading Apocalypse Never. It seems that for the USA to convert to purely Wind and Solar would cost an estimate of $120Trillion and would require the use of up to 50% of the US landmass. A solar or wind farm requires 450 times more land than LNG or nuclear powered electricity plant and still wouldn't produce as much electricity.

50% of the us land mass? WTF? Whoever wrote that book is an idiot then. Solar is by no means the end all be all for renewables but that stat is 100$ made up to fearmonger you and your wife and anyone who reads it.



If you reference the 2013 report by NREL (National Renewable Energy Labs)
that used a 350w modules states that you need 3.4 acres of panels to produce one Gigawatt hour for a year.

The US needs four petawatt hours annually, meaning 13,600,000 acres/ 21,250 square miles or panels (Nussey, 2018). It may seem excessive initially, but not when you consider it.

For instance, this is only 145 miles aside from the country’s 3,797,000 square miles, translating to half a percent of the country’s size.

That is based of of using a 350w module. The average module used now in utility scale solar installations is 500W. This means the energy density is even higher.

Ong, S., Campbell, C., Denholm, P., Margolis, R., & Heath, G. (2013, June). Land-Use Requirements for Solar Power Plants in the United States. NREL. Retrieved March 23, 2023, from <https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/56290.pdf>




If solar modules were all 25% efficient we could reduce the land use to only ~10,000 square miles, almost Lake Erie’s size. Solar module efficiency increases every year.

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by Car-Addicted

A couple thoughts on the latest barrage of posts:
First the planet has endured climate change since the big bang. Facts are that earth has had environments so toxic that it wouldn't support life, and yet the Eco system manages to evolve? It is the greatest hubris of man to think they can significantly effect the planet.
Second, life has a carbon footprint and carbon neutral ignores physics.
Third I can't remember anyone on this thread suggesting that EV's should be out outlawed. I think if you want a EV should be able to buy one. I also think if I want to buy a ICE I should be able to buy one.
Forth, EV folks need to take responsibility for their adoption. It IS NOT a environment friendly choice. There are a lot of problems with this technology being forced on the market before it's time. With out globalist and government pressure the EV market would likely be under 5%.
Fifth, we need to acknowledge that fossil fuels and capitalism has improved the lives of millions of people all over the world and elimination of either fossil fuels and capitalism will cause the deaths of millions of humans.

Everything you noted above is not black or white, right or wrong, etc. It's the same damn issue with politics, religion, capitalism, socialism, etc. If you feel very strong about one side of the argument, then you're going to be heavily biased to one side of the issue. The reality and factual history is that politics, religion, capitalism, and socialism have resulted in billions of deaths throughout written history. Every side is guilty and shares in the blame.

The best answer I have to the EV vs ICE debate is it's complicated, we need to have open minds, be open to compromise, and humans can and should do better when it comes to the environment through reduced emissions, reduce/reuse/recycle, etc.

Humans are not completely responsible for climate change, but we have certainly contributed to it. How much? That can never be determined but we should definitely do better which we are for the most part. The biggest environmental hurdles will be China and other developing countries and weaning US buyers from inefficient, heavily polluting trucks and SUVs or at getting those buyers to pay more of their share with gas guzzler taxes by removing the CAFE loopholes regarding light trucks/SUVs.

[Alfisti]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Where does the magic solar power come from at night?

Oh come on man. That's not a serious question is it?

[Torgus]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Where does the magic solar power come from at night?

Really buddy? That is the best you could come up with? Did you read my response? 2nd sentence: "Solar is by no means the end all be all for renewables" We all know solar does not produce power at night. The good news is humanity consumes MUCH less power at night generally vs during the daylight hours.

At night wind blows more than during the day. You can use wind power at night to offset the lack of solar generation, in theory.

Solar + Wind + other renewables are nice. DERs have their place on our national grid.

What we should really embrace is NUCLEAR. We have to have a nuclear backbone, we should have GWs more of production. Nuke plants can take 20 years to build. We need to start now. Use SHVDC cables to connect the grids. Problem with Nukes is NIMBY. The reality is our National Grid is EXTREMLY weak. We should redo it with multiple nukes per ISO/RTO region. Then fill out the rest with DERs.

We need to save the OIL! Leave it in the ground. Let everyone else use it all up. The faster we transition to 75% nuke 25% DERs the better. Or whatever the ratio ends up being. We still need oil to produce certain items.

[Murf the Surf]

Originally Posted by Torgus

Really buddy? That is the best you could come up with? Did you read my response? 2nd sentence: "Solar is by no means the end all be all for renewables" We all know solar does not produce power at night. The good news is humanity consumes MUCH less power at night generally vs during the daylight hours.

At night wind blows more than during the day. You can use wind power at night to offset the lack of solar generation, in theory.

Solar + Wind + other renewables are nice. DERs have their place on our national grid.

What we should really embrace is NUCLEAR. We have to have a nuclear backbone, we should have GWs more of production. Nuke plants can take 20 years to build. We need to start now. Use SHVDC cables to connect the grids. Problem with Nukes is NIMBY. The reality is our National Grid is EXTREMLY weak. We should redo it with multiple nukes per ISO/RTO region. Then fill out the rest with DERs.

We need to save the OIL! Leave it in the ground. Let everyone else use it all up. The faster we transition to 75% nuke 25% DERs the better. Or whatever the ratio ends up being.

In order for the renewables that are being proposed there will also need to be a staggering amount of batteries to store the hydro for when there is no production. Does anyone actually believe this is a viable solution?

[tturedraider]

Originally Posted by Car-Addicted

A couple thoughts on the latest barrage of posts:
First, the planet has endured climate change since the big bang. Facts are that earth has had environments so toxic that it wouldn't support life, and yet the Eco system manages to evolve? It is the greatest hubris of man to think they can significantly effect the planet.
Second, life has a carbon footprint and carbon neutral ignores physics.
Third, I can't remember anyone on this thread suggesting that EV's should be out outlawed. I think if you want a EV should be able to buy one. I also think if I want to buy a ICE I should be able to buy one.
Fourth, EV folks need to take responsibility for their adoption. It IS NOT an environment friendly choice. There are a lot of problems with this technology being forced on the market before it's time. With out globalist and government pressure the EV market would likely be under 5%.
Fifth, we need to acknowledge that fossil fuels and capitalism has improved the lives of millions of people all over the world and elimination of either fossil fuels and capitalism will cause the deaths of millions of humans.

Originally Posted by dfox

quite the circle jerk going on in here. Keep it up.

This is your response to the above post?? Can’t manage a single counterpoint to support your views?

Originally Posted by XutvJet

Everything you noted above is not black or white, right or wrong, etc. It's the same damn issue with politics, religion, capitalism, socialism, etc. If you feel very strong about one side of the argument, then you're going to be heavily biased to one side of the issue. The reality and factual history is that politics, religion, capitalism, and socialism have resulted in billions of deaths throughout written history. Every side is guilty and shares in the blame.

The best answer I have to the EV vs ICE debate is it's complicated, we need to have open minds, be open to compromise, and humans can and should do better when it comes to the environment through reduced emissions, reduce/reuse/recycle, etc.

Humans are not completely responsible for climate change, but we have certainly contributed to it. How much? That can never be determined but we should definitely do better which we are for the most part. The biggest environmental hurdles will be China and other developing countries and weaning US buyers from inefficient, heavily polluting trucks and SUVs or at getting those buyers to pay more of their share with gas guzzler taxes by removing the CAFE loopholes regarding light trucks/SUVs.

At least this guy has some reasonable responses.

(with the exception of including capitalism in the same category of things that have caused “billions” of deaths throughout history. First of all, capitalism has only been on the scene for about 250 years and second of all, the advances capitalism has brought to the world have saved the lives of millions and improved the living conditions of millions and millions and lifted untold numbers out of poverty.)

[M5Rick]

Think it's time I stated my stand on the EV vs ICE situation and although I may come over as slightly anti EV I am all for EV's being offered for sale but only when all gub ment interference with restrictive time limit for sale of new ICE cars, with unfair money penalties in place for manufacturers if they don't sell a percentage of EV's is curtailed. As soon as this nonsense is downgraded then I would be happy to consider a small runabout ev for shopping and short journeys. There, got it off my back.

[Alfisti]

Originally Posted by Murf the Surf

In order for the renewables that are being proposed there will also need to be staggering batteries to store the hydro for when there is no production. Does anyone actually believe this is a viable solution?

YOu really need to see how well this is working in the UK. Smaller scale but the beauty with solar is it can all be localised. 100% of the solution, no, but to write it off is foolish. UK weather couldn't be worse for solar either BTW.

[Torgus]

Originally Posted by Murf the Surf

In order for the renewables that are being proposed there will also need to be staggering batteries to store the hydro for when there is no production. Does anyone actually believe this is a viable solution?

Not me. DERs are part of our future grid regardless of what anyone wants. They make sense and can help out in certain situations etc.

If you look at degradation curves of stationary Lipo batteries having to replace them at year 25 is a non starter for me. I know they still have some juice left but not much at year 25. Especially if you don't keep the SOC high and limit DoD.