- Joined
- Nov 5, 2010
- Messages
- 40,036
EVs can't work, and are just stepping stones to banning all personal transportation
- Thread starter Anti Federalist
- Start date
acptulsa
Member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2008
- Messages
- 75,536
CaptUSA
Member
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 18,932
Each is a tool and each has their own use.
If you want to talk solely energy efficiency from fuel to motion, it will depend on your generation mix, your distance from the power plant, your charger losses (which you don't account for), the weight you carry, how you fuel your vehicle, the ambient temperature, the topography, age of battery, vehicle tolerances, preconditioning routines, and most importantly, how you use the vehicle. Depending on those factors, you may find marginal efficiencies based on your vehicle type.
(By the way, the so-called renewable energy sources like wind and solar have the LOWEST efficiencies - sorry to inform the ideologues that created that chart. Really, that chart is bogus on nearly every front. You don't get 20% of the total energy back from regenerative braking. Battery charge efficiencies lose much more than 5%. Transport, storage, and distribution is WAY higher than 5%.)
Some early adopters may find use cases where they can make an EV a marginally more efficient use of energy. (not the 3.6X or 2X or whatever point of realization you're at now) That will NOT be the case for mass adoption. Trying to get those factors to align with how people use their vehicles will just not happen. Mass adoption means MORE use of energy - not less. Fleets have figured out that the TCO's for EV's are very challenging, but still some fleets are finding specific duty cycles where they work - others are losing money just to put some "green" window dressing out for idiots who believe the BS.
No one is saying that EV's don't have a use case - we are saying that you shouldn't be stealing money from other people in order to pay for them. I have a battery-powered trimmer I use around the property. But I don't expect to force my neighbor to offset its cost to me. In the end, I may use more total energy than my other tools, but it doesn't matter because it's more convenient and less mess. I don't think I'm doing the world a service by using it. I don't parade it around as if I'm a better person for using it.
GomerPile
Member
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2011
- Messages
- 115
I was joking, hydrogen has no practical use other than maybe rockets, and even then, it leaks everywhere. That chart shows that it's FAR better (like 47%) to just charge up a battery pack than it is to make hydrogen and burn it.
I disagree with you on solar. It's not about how efficient the panels are it's about how much energy you need to manufacture the things vs how much they deliver over their operational life (EROI). The sun is depositing energy whether we use it or not. It sucks we can only extract a fraction of it but it does not matter.
The EROI of US shale fields is like 6:1, and oil, in general, is 20:1, everyone seems happy with that. The EROI on PV panels is somewhere between 10-40%, adding battery storage decreases that, obviously. With oil/gas when it's used, it's gone forever. With PV panels, you have a pile of scrap that the aluminum, copper, and silver are recoverable with crude equipment. Other elements may be recoverable with more advanced methods.
To your point about the mix of power generation affecting overall EV efficiency. Well adding lots of rooftop or regional solar allows EV's to operate at peak efficiency in terms of overall energy consumption.
EDIT: Here's the latest study on EROI of PV (may be others I have not looked recently): https://astro1.panet.utoledo.edu/~r..._apul_(2015)_ren_and_sustain._energy_revs.pdf
I disagree with you on solar. It's not about how efficient the panels are it's about how much energy you need to manufacture the things vs how much they deliver over their operational life (EROI). The sun is depositing energy whether we use it or not. It sucks we can only extract a fraction of it but it does not matter.
The EROI of US shale fields is like 6:1, and oil, in general, is 20:1, everyone seems happy with that. The EROI on PV panels is somewhere between 10-40%, adding battery storage decreases that, obviously. With oil/gas when it's used, it's gone forever. With PV panels, you have a pile of scrap that the aluminum, copper, and silver are recoverable with crude equipment. Other elements may be recoverable with more advanced methods.
To your point about the mix of power generation affecting overall EV efficiency. Well adding lots of rooftop or regional solar allows EV's to operate at peak efficiency in terms of overall energy consumption.
EDIT: Here's the latest study on EROI of PV (may be others I have not looked recently): https://astro1.panet.utoledo.edu/~r..._apul_(2015)_ren_and_sustain._energy_revs.pdf
Each is a tool and each has their own use.
Last edited:
CaptUSA
Member
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 18,932
Yeah, I knew you weren't serious about hydrogen - thought I made that clear in my response to your push for EV's. But your chart is so full of holes and 1/2 truths that it makes it worthless and unworthy of even posting again.
You're using the wrong words. Solar does NOT increase peak efficiency, it lowers it. If it's connected into the grid, it lowers it even more since it's an intermittent source that needs backups, thereby increasing the costs and lowering the efficiency.
You can have an opinion to disagree with, but I'm talking about facts. The "efficiency" argument of EV's is bunk. So is the "environmental" argument. So are the "geopolitical" arguments. The only one that still holds weight is fuel diversification in transportation.
Ask yourself why is that not good enough??? Why all the lies, half-truths, and misleading charts???? Most people like options and choice. Why do the EV enthusiasts want to remove choices?? Why do they want other people to pay for their toys???? Why are you afraid to admit how much you've benefitted from stolen resources???
Oh yeah - because you believe it as a religion instead of an optional tool.
GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged
Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2020
- Messages
- 4,150
I have an EV and PV rooftop Solar that I purchased because of incentives and to help me control my expenses going into the future. We also have a Diesel F450, a Yukon Gas, a couple Mercedes gas, a Ford minivan gas. I am all about choice. I think the EV is great for commuting. EV's are definitely not for everyone. Great for us where we can just plug it in at home.
Snowball
Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2011
- Messages
- 5,242
Guys, they had carburator systems that got 75 miles per gallon in the 1950's. The lobbyists and auto companies rejected them.
My uncle knew a mechanic in the 50s who SENT his carburetor to Ford and it reduced fuel use by 3-4X. They said no.
They could have cars running on water or garbage, but they don't want them.
It's ALL a giant SCAM. We live in a SCAM SOCIETY.
My uncle knew a mechanic in the 50s who SENT his carburetor to Ford and it reduced fuel use by 3-4X. They said no.
They could have cars running on water or garbage, but they don't want them.
It's ALL a giant SCAM. We live in a SCAM SOCIETY.
GomerPile
Member
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2011
- Messages
- 115
I need you to explain this to me like I'm 4. Just this, not a bunch of other mombo jumbo.
CaptUSA
Member
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 18,932
Hmmm. Like a 4 year old. Ok.
Listen, Gomey. If a product is good, you don’t have to lie about it. Whether it’s an EV, “renewables”, or vaccines.
GomerPile
Member
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2011
- Messages
- 115
acptulsa
Member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2008
- Messages
- 75,536
You keep engaging in provocative behavior. Trollish, even.
Like when you were trying to get everyone to talk about magic generators, apparently by force. Well, this site doesn't tend to attract idiots. So if you expect likes and strokes for ultimately saying, I was the last mule too stubborn to quit so my brainless drivel was correct all along, prepare for disappointment.
By the way, we've been explaining to you like you're four ever since you popped back up. Didn't help.
Like when you were trying to get everyone to talk about magic generators, apparently by force. Well, this site doesn't tend to attract idiots. So if you expect likes and strokes for ultimately saying, I was the last mule too stubborn to quit so my brainless drivel was correct all along, prepare for disappointment.
By the way, we've been explaining to you like you're four ever since you popped back up. Didn't help.
Last edited:
GomerPile
Member
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2011
- Messages
- 115
acptulsa
Member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2008
- Messages
- 75,536
Really. You are what's called an "outlier", the "exception that proves the rule".
Anti Federalist
Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2007
- Messages
- 117,682
New York Gives Up on Electric Snow Plows: ‘Insufficient for the Demands of Winter'
https://www.breitbart.com/environme...ork-gives-thumbs-down-to-electric-snow-plows/
SIMON KENT 9 Nov 2023
New York is staying with traditional diesel-powered snow plows after rejecting electric vehicles proposed as a replacement.
Just over three years ago the New York Department of Sanitation sought several Mack electric trucks to be set up for double duty as part of a goal to become CO2-neutral.
New York differs from many cities in that its garbage trucks double as snow removal vehicles when and if required.
Primarily intended to clean streets and remove garbage, one of these Mack trucks had been fitted with a snow plow as part of an experiment. Essanews reports the move has been a failure. The reason was given as a simple lack of power:
The plow, dragging across the road and the snow buildup in front of it, created substantial resistance. Moreover, the plow required almost constant movement, eliminating the option for loading pauses.
Consequently, the electric vehicle’s power supply was insufficient for the demands of a New York winter, known for its heavy snowfall.
The report further detailed that after nearly two hours, the electric plow had to discontinue the route for recharging.
While the truck was efficient for garbage collection, its performance significantly dipped when faced with the snow removal tasks.
https://www.breitbart.com/environme...ork-gives-thumbs-down-to-electric-snow-plows/
SIMON KENT 9 Nov 2023
New York is staying with traditional diesel-powered snow plows after rejecting electric vehicles proposed as a replacement.
Just over three years ago the New York Department of Sanitation sought several Mack electric trucks to be set up for double duty as part of a goal to become CO2-neutral.
New York differs from many cities in that its garbage trucks double as snow removal vehicles when and if required.
Primarily intended to clean streets and remove garbage, one of these Mack trucks had been fitted with a snow plow as part of an experiment. Essanews reports the move has been a failure. The reason was given as a simple lack of power:
The plow, dragging across the road and the snow buildup in front of it, created substantial resistance. Moreover, the plow required almost constant movement, eliminating the option for loading pauses.
Consequently, the electric vehicle’s power supply was insufficient for the demands of a New York winter, known for its heavy snowfall.
The report further detailed that after nearly two hours, the electric plow had to discontinue the route for recharging.
While the truck was efficient for garbage collection, its performance significantly dipped when faced with the snow removal tasks.
acptulsa
Member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2008
- Messages
- 75,536
ClaytonB
Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2011
- Messages
- 10,280
CaptUSA
Member
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 18,932
(Timestamp is wrong in your typing, but correct if you click the link.)
It must be noted that investor-owned utilities have an obligation to serve, regardless of the power requirements. It's just a matter of how long it will take to build. For the case of commercial EV charging depots, the demands are HUGE. So, it will take years of planning, then permitting, then construction. A typical large industrial site could take 3-8 years to get it energized, depending on where it's located on the grid and the available Tx capacity. And that's if the materials for the substations are readily available and there is space. Now, if you have multiple sites in the planning stages simultaneously, they complicate themselves because the planners are not looking at single transmission lines, but rather system-wide impacts. This will take decades.
To Elon's point, he's right that the system is built to the peak demand. But he's selling Tesla batteries as the solution. That's even MORE expensive than just increasing the amount of generation. There are lower cost storage solutions (like pumped hydro), but there would still need to be a revolution in grid spending to accomplish this feat. You're talking about doubling or tripling the capacity of a 130-year old machine - the electric grid - in a few years??? Not gonna happen.
Patti and I are acquaintances (we connected years ago when she was at Consumers Energy - she had John Mackey's book Conscious Capitalism on her shelf and we struck up a conversation). Remember that her job now is to please the institutional investor community. Her engineers are more reasonable.
Similar threads
