Electric Car Carbon Footprint

fromMA · Post by **fromMA** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 6:39 am

I'm not a scientist and dont know if this article is true. It is from a reliable source. Could it be true and if so, are we fooling ourselves into thinking that as of now electric is the answer?

http://www.economist.com/daily/columns/ ... id=8686992

fromMA · Post by **fromMA** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 6:43 am

Oh and if youre inclined, read the last paragraph of the story to show what Im talking about

skeetsh00ter · Post by **skeetsh00ter** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 6:49 am

yeah, i've heard someone mention that before. i guess like anything we have to wait for the technology to get better before we see anything miraculous.

MikeVDS · Post by **MikeVDS** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 7:50 am

Driving an electric vehicle today really does nothing for the environment today. Leaving waste batteries out of the equation completely, the electricity generated is from other polluting sources, plus there are inefficiencies converting to electricity, transporting it and charging the batteries. So 0 emissions really means you're emitting it at the power plant, instead of at your car.

What it does do is put more money toward funding potentially clean vehicles. More electric cars used, more money into battery technology. Electricity can be generated in clean ways, but if we cannot use it for applications like driving, even when we do get it clean, it's still not as useful as gasoline. So if we have great batteries and start generating more clean electricity, it will then be where we see the benefits of driving electric today. By using the technology, you're putting your money into that potential market.

If you want to help today, ride a bike and eat eco friendly food. But IMO encouraging better technology does much more than lifestyle choice ever will.

Gravity Mike · Post by **Gravity Mike** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 9:45 am

I don't know if those specific claims of that article are true, but what is true is that the 'footprint' of althernative energies is more complex that the simple-minded analysis given by popular environmentalists.

It is true that despite the conversion inefficiencies, electric cars release less greenhouse gasses into the environment because large scale electricity producers are cleaner (per unit energy) than an average car. This does not take the energy to produce the car (as the above article states) into account.

Solar panels: it takes 7 years of utilization to reclaim the energy it took to manufacture them. This means if you buy solar panels just for one week at the burn each year - you should have bought a generator.

Hydrogen cells: Use of this technology has even more delivery inefficiencies than electric cars.

bio-diesel: to recycle what would otherwise be waste, great. Otherwise we're now putting transportation needs of the rich (us) against food needs of the poor. Look at the tortilla protests in Mexico recently.

My suggestion: have one child, or none. This is the best thing you can personally do to help the environment IMO. Our sheer numbers are the core of the problem. Everything else is just delaying the inevitable. 80% of the world is in poverty. We want to help them to live like us, right? Well, that's the same (from a resource perspective) as quintupling the world population. Do you think there's enough resources in the world to support 6 billion Americans (lifestyle speaking)? No way. We're already overpopulated by this definition. Having one child and reducing the world population will not only help the environment, but help the impoverished to achieve better living standards, and reduce world conflict (because resources are ultimately what's behind them, even if religion/politcal differences appear to be the reason).

Gravity Mike

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 10:41 am

The electric car is a nonstarter.
There have been fuel cells that convert fuel to electricity.
I can no longer locate them.
They may have technical drawbacks or just be too expensive.

That's what we need.

Until then, we should just max out the efficiency available.

Ugly Dougly · Post by **Ugly Dougly** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 11:15 am

MikeVDS wrote:So 0 emissions really means you're emitting it at the power plant, instead of at your car.

Depends on the power plant now doesn't it?

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 11:30 am

They call it pollution shifting.
And charging efficiency is still quite low.

Steven bradford · Post by **Steven bradford** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 2:41 pm

So people who get their energy from hydro, nuclear, etc shouldn't buy electric cars.

What is the point of trading one simple minded assumption for another?

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 3:12 pm

Steven bradford wrote:So people who get their energy from hydro, nuclear, etc shouldn't buy electric cars.

What is the point of trading one simple minded assumption for another?

You lost me about assumptions.

No one should buy an electric car now because it isn't efficient from an energy or a cost standpoint.

If you have a true hydro source and using it won't shift more load onto coal,
then pollution shifting isn't an additional problem for you.
There is still everything else to consider.
Electrical waste is usually 70% with an electric car.
Don't forget to factor that in.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 5:42 pm

You know what amazes me, GM said this could not be done:

Yet it is here. Battery and other problems have been figured out.

Read the site.

http://www.teslamotors.com/learn_more/foreign_oil.php

Other problems can also be solved. First things first, getting rid of the idea that it cant be done. It can be done and will be done.

there's pleanty of money to be made.

MikeVDS · Post by **MikeVDS** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 6:48 pm

Depends on the power plant now doesn't it?

True, assuming you buy it from green power. I know you can pay more for green power in certain areas, but I'm not sure that means much except where your money goes. If the grid needs more power because of demand I don't think they power up extra wind turbines or solar panels.

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 10:11 pm

How much did you pay for your Tesla?
How far does it go in a day?
How often are batteries replaced?
Is it a matched battery set like on the Heinzmann bikes?
You can buy the same car from Lotus and drop in a diesel engine (already done-simple swap) and get very high mileage.
They have maxed out weight and it has decent aerodynamics which works for gas power too (it is built as a petrol Lotus Elise).

I look forward to seeing the Tesla next year when you drive it to burning man.
How long would it take to go the thousands of miles I have to go in an electric?
Will it pull a small trailer like my Volvo?
What does a battery set cost?
The Tesla probably is the best electric commercially available.
Can you justify buying one?
I can't.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 11:10 pm

Nope, I'm gonna wait till the following year when they release the 40,000 dollar version.
Plus it will be a 4 door. I like having friends ride with me.
as to your other questions, the desiel thing, why in the world would you want to? There is nothing clean about deisel.
Everything else is listed in their site. You should read it.
Answered a lot of questions for me.

Gravity Mike · Post by **Gravity Mike** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 11:18 pm

gyre wrote:The electric car is a nonstarter.
There have been fuel cells that convert fuel to electricity.
I can no longer locate them.
They may have technical drawbacks or just be too expensive.

That's what we need.

Until then, we should just max out the efficiency available.

And where does this fuel come from? Electricity, and the electricity from nuclear/coal/gas/whatever...

More lost in conversion and delivery with fuel cells than with straight battery/electric, plain and simple is you consider the complete energy cycle required to support the fuel cell car. It was a topic in one of lasts years Scientific Americans.

Gravity

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 11:23 pm

Gravity Mike wrote:
gyre wrote:The electric car is a nonstarter.
There have been fuel cells that convert fuel to electricity.
I can no longer locate them.
They may have technical drawbacks or just be too expensive.

That's what we need.

Until then, we should just max out the efficiency available.
And where does this fuel come from? Electricity, and the electricity from nuclear/coal/gas/whatever...

More lost in conversion and delivery with fuel cells than with straight battery/electric, plain and simple is you consider the complete energy cycle required to support the fuel cell car. It was a topic in one of lasts years Scientific Americans.

Gravity

therein lies the problem.

You folks believe the bullshit these corporate dumb dumbs feed you.

Americans/Man have a problem when it comes to logic and reality.

There is no reason to use coal and fossil fuels. There are many ways to make/harness and distribute energy.

This argument has been made before on this board.

If I feel like it and have the time, I'll post a link.

Toolmaker · Post by **Toolmaker** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 11:25 pm

$100,000 is a little out of my price range. Pretty car though.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 11:27 pm

Toolmaker wrote:$100,000 is a little out of my price range. Pretty car though.

WHAT????

did it say on the site that they had 100,000 dollar versions?
Last I knew, the versions coming out this year were to be 300,000.00.

100,000 is cheap.

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 11:46 pm

The diesel in a light package like that gets superlative mileage.
There is infrastructure offering diesel fuel also.

My Volvo will have cost me about $5000 when I have all maintenance and so on completed.
I will then have to do major work about 100,000 miles or more later.
The engine is good for another 900,000 miles or more, barring catastrophe.
Used parts are very widely available.
I plan on tweaking the aero which is not great on this car.
Eventually I will add a modern engine computer.
I should gain 5-15 mpg on the highway that way.
Probably $2500 at the high end for the computer.

So barring a crash, no recycling/manufacturing to factor in for some time.
You can't say that of any new car.

I am looking at electric bikes with great interest.
The light weight can make electric justifiable.
A three wheeler can have significant range.

On the playa, I am already trying to have an electric vehicle made.
Custom building and the short usage period can make electric the perfect choice out there.
Electric can be easy to package for a small vehicle.
You wouldn't believe how heavy a useful electric bike ends up though.
I drove one this year with a small battery option for a bit.
Comparable to a small motorcycle.
If not for the batteries....
Then all you need is a generator to drive the batteries.
I'll have access to a clean one but most are pretty dirty out there.

Before you buy a Tesla, consider maxing out a petrol vehicle.
Very high efficiency is available, especially with streamlining, in line seating and so on.
Every electric I've ridden in worked because of light weight, not because they were electric, sad to say.
The newer pulse wave modulation controllers are a big step forward, true.
Find me that fuel cell I've seen before that used fuel to derive electricity and I'll change over today.
There was a motorcyle that ran with this, but it was a prototype and costly.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 11:50 pm

gyre,

did you even read the specs on the site of Tesla?

How far does a deisel go between refills?

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 11:51 pm

Gravity Mike wrote:
gyre wrote:The electric car is a nonstarter.
There have been fuel cells that convert fuel to electricity.
I can no longer locate them.
They may have technical drawbacks or just be too expensive.

That's what we need.

Until then, we should just max out the efficiency available.
And where does this fuel come from? Electricity, and the electricity from nuclear/coal/gas/whatever...

More lost in conversion and delivery with fuel cells than with straight battery/electric, plain and simple is you consider the complete energy cycle required to support the fuel cell car. It was a topic in one of lasts years Scientific Americans.

Gravity

What kind of fuel cell are you talking about?
I'm referring to fuel cells that generate electricity from fossil fuel, etc.

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 11:56 pm

DVD Burner wrote:gyre,

did you even read the specs on the site of Tesla?

How far does a deisel go between refills?

The Izusu I passed on and now regret was not a turbo and still did about 350 miles on a tank.
But my point was more about recharge time.
The best high speed charger for a bike I've seen still took an hour.
I can fill up my car faster than I can stand in line to pay.
And then back to the highway.

Archantael · Post by **Archantael** » Sun Feb 11, 2007 12:21 am

Until an electric / alternative powerplant type car can haul 4 people at 75 mph for 250 miles on a single charge, and the vehicle can be re-charged in 10 minutes or less, I'm simply not interested. Oh, and I want something that I can park in a driveway at 8300 ft in the Rockies, have it get extremely cold, then go out and it turns on and is ready to go without fuss. It should also be able to take me across Highway 99 by Edwards AFB in the summer with the temp at 112 degrees without fuss too. Oh, and I'd like to have enough trunk / storage capacity to be able to take more than a duffel bag with me. And it should be able to do 0-60 without needing a tailwind and a downhill grade to do it in under 14 seconds. And it needs to be crashworthy, and safe. Safe in this case using the worst case scenario is that if the vehicle is wrecked, I want something that is designed so a person can be extracated by an emergency worker using the jaws of life and not run the risk of electrocution or fire because they cut into a hidden cable or shorted a battery.

Summarizing that..... until something comes along that's a viable alternative to the vehicle I absolutely have to have right now....and that can do all of the above, I'm not going to be interested regardless of the carbon footprint mumbo-jumbo.

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Sun Feb 11, 2007 12:47 am

We got into a discussion of some alternatives in the Flammable Gasses thread.
Mdm has some good ideas.

http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic.php?t=16483

CapSmashy · Post by **CapSmashy** » Sun Feb 11, 2007 10:09 am

DVD Burner wrote:gyre,

did you even read the specs on the site of Tesla?

How far does a deisel go between refills?

I read them. Not real impressed considering the price tag.

My TDI Beetle with 160k miles is still knocking down 45 to 47 mpg and giving me 500 to 550 miles between fillups.

Toolmaker · Post by **Toolmaker** » Sun Feb 11, 2007 10:33 am

DVD Burner wrote:
Toolmaker wrote:$100,000 is a little out of my price range. Pretty car though.

WHAT????

did it say on the site that they had 100,000 dollar versions?
Last I knew, the versions coming out this year were to be 300,000.00.

100,000 is cheap.

Click the link for reserving your 2008.. they want 30-50K deposit and the total price for the car is listed on the right. For that kind of money I can make my own electric car. 250 mile range isn't all that great but better than previous electrics. One I finish converting the diesel truck I will be able to make my own fuel if need be. If we could use hemp we would have better luck with biofuel than the current cornstalk methods.

2007 versions are sold out.. some folks may be selling theirs for 300K now. Now onto parts.. if you are rich fine.. have the broken car sit for a few weeks or months waiting for the part. Most Americans are not rich enough to have a 100K ride, hence the big sales numbers of the 10-15K cars. I have enough problems making the Aveo payments and I will never afford to buy a car like that as long as my country continues to abandon the working folks like myself.

How eco firendly is this car REALLY? How much of it is plastic? Granted the batteries may last 100,000 miles but how nasty is the shit in those batteries? I like the E-Car MDM posted in another thread much better.. Benz engine and you can park it anywhere.

MikeVDS · Post by **MikeVDS** » Sun Feb 11, 2007 10:44 am

I believe the batteries are Lithium Ion, which I do not know for a fact but I've read that that are not considered hazardous waste.

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Sun Feb 11, 2007 12:16 pm

The Lotus is primarily aluminum and plastic.
The Elise weighs under 2000 pounds.
Repairs can be high.
I think they sell for about $50000 new.
I like the Exige race version myself.
Anything you want to know and some Tesla discussion-

http://www.elisetalk.com/

I wanted to say that if they made a lithium pack that large that works, that is quite a feat.
There are plenty of warnings about them in electric bike discussions.
I have a lot of these single batteries and they begin failing in a year of cycling.
350 is the figure I've been given.

Gravity Mike · Post by **Gravity Mike** » Sun Feb 11, 2007 9:06 pm

gyre wrote:
Gravity Mike wrote:
gyre wrote:The electric car is a nonstarter.
There have been fuel cells that convert fuel to electricity.
I can no longer locate them.
They may have technical drawbacks or just be too expensive.

That's what we need.

Until then, we should just max out the efficiency available.
And where does this fuel come from? Electricity, and the electricity from nuclear/coal/gas/whatever...

More lost in conversion and delivery with fuel cells than with straight battery/electric, plain and simple is you consider the complete energy cycle required to support the fuel cell car. It was a topic in one of lasts years Scientific Americans.

Gravity
What kind of fuel cell are you talking about?
I'm referring to fuel cells that generate electricity from fossil fuel, etc.

Yeah, that's a fuel cell. Consumer reports and Scientific American each did articles during 2006 concerning the myths of hydrogen fuel cells. Look them up if your interested, don't take my word.

Of course, I think it's a promising technology, but it's relatively wasteful and we still need to generate the electricity to 'charge' the fuel cells.

Gravity

gyre · Post by **gyre** » Sun Feb 11, 2007 9:29 pm

I'm lost.
The fuel cell I'm talking about processes or burns hydrocarbons and produces electricity.
I think you are talking about a different type of fuel cell.
I can not find the one I am interested in for sale.
As far as I know hydrogen is not involved.
Are you talking about a hydrogen storage cell?

On this search I did find some that run on gasoline.

http://www.fuelcells.org/basics/types.html