Are electric Cars that much cleaner.

[Boza]

I was reading an intresting article on hybrids and electric vehicle's.
One of the main argument's was that when they need to be charged they still use electricity from traditional power stations putting out more co2's cause every time one of these cars is plugged in it requires more power from the station to generate the electricity needed to charge it thus putting out more pollutant's.
Also most of the battery's and component's that these vehicle use are not very clean in they're production sometimes the bettery's are shipped on a ship then trucked to the factory thus the process of manufacturing these vehicle's still produce's these battery's.
And at the end of there life cycle there will be more pollution to dispose or recycle these battery's.
So are electric car's that much cleaner or are they for hipster's and movie star's that want people to think they give a damn about the planet.

[Wretched]

I'd like to know more about whether they actually do put that much more load on the grid and hence forth more power generation is required. Someone would need to confirm but I'd imagine that generation from power stations cannot just be simply ramped up or down in an instant, that they need planning.

I would also imagine if the householder is acquiring the power from alternative sources (solar, hydro, wind, etc) it off sets any supplemented power from coal if required.

As for the energy required to build the cars, again depends on factories. But yes, like anything it requires power generation and pollutants, but whether it is adding any more to the atmosphere again needs to be confirmed. If the car maker uses alternative sources (BMW in the US for their paintshop use an onsite power station powered by Methane from a neighboring rubbish tip) then it offsets it again.

Battery recycling for Li Ion is in its infancy but likely to gain further interest as more and more of the larger automobile based packs are available.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...14993714000037

Electric cars are no doubt better for the environment themselves, in a city with large traffic volumes, gasoline vs electric you can see the difference with local pollutants.
A Telsa for example vs a BMW 535, the Telsa will always perform better regarding pollutants local to the car. I think that is what countries and people are trying to get at.
The major infrastructure of power stations and recycling will take some time (the former shift has already begun) but it won't take long.

[simon varley]

generating the electricity to charge the battery for 100kms should still generate much less CO2 than running an internal combustion engine for 100km due to the greater efficiencies of the power stations.

interestingly when you take a cradle to grave approach to environmental impact, the older Jeeps are alleged to be 'cleaner' because they are low tech, don't use any complex materials, and haven't needed new tooling for years. Even if they run 'dirty' V8s the impact of those pollutants on the total lifetime are pretty small

[Sabantien]

They're becoming cleaner in other countries because they're moving away from burning coal. That said, one thing it will lead to is less air pollution in cities.

[Junkyard-Dog]

Solar, wind and hydro-electricity are viable options these days. I already have solar and a wind-turbine... if I had running water on property I would have a hydro-electric turbine too.

It almost seems like some people WANT electric cars to fail because they're afraid of losing internal combustion engines.

[mik]

i Dont truly know , all those things cost a lot money , and also use a lot of resources that are usually dug out of ground using fossil fuels , much like the very dirty process of manufacturing batteries which the ev makers conveniently like to not mention ,
but they do like you to see the very pretty factories with robots and cool solar panels also manufactured using fossil materials and plenty of labor that supply x amount of electricity to build these things .
it looks good at face value when you read some articles, but how good is it when you look at how much deniro , labor and resources are actually used to get these things up and running .
how much fossil resources goes into the wiring and rare earth materials electric motors ,wiring that goes into all the electric vehicles , and charging equipment .
my view is in the end (the big picture ) it may balance out to be bugger all difference pollution wise , and requiring lots of money to build stuff also has a pollution value if that makes sense, there are no free lunches imo.

[mik]

Originally Posted by Junkyard-Dog

Solar, wind and hydro-electricity are viable options these days. I already have solar and a wind-turbine... if I had running water on property I would have a hydro-electric turbine too.

It almost seems like some people WANT electric cars to fail because they're afraid of losing internal combustion engines.

those things are not always viable , i dont think its a matter of people wanting ev`s to fail , but more a matter of people questioning the benefits of one versus the other and the big picture ,
when you can buy a 2 ton suv that goes 800/1000 k`s , does not cost a lot of money , does every family duty, tows the family equipment , and in the scheme of things actually doesn't cost that much to run for the versatility in the one single vehicle .....which one would you buy ?

[2011G6E]

Nope.
Well they are if you choose to feel smug and ignore the horrifying environmental damage from the mining of rare earth minerals and other substances for the battery packs which are then shipped around the world (diesel powered container ships) and transported across countries (diesel powered trucks or trains) and then huge factories make them into battery packs and motor drives (again using electricity to run the factories).

Sums were done quite a few years back that showed over the expected lifetime of a vehicle (taking into account sourcing of raw materials, manufacture, running costs, fuel/energy usage, cost of purchase, etc), if you compared a Prius to a Hummer, the Hummer was actually more environmentally friendly than the Prius...

Originally Posted by mik

those things are not always viable , i dont think its a matter of people wanting ev`s to fail , but more a matter of people questioning the benefits of one versus the other and the big picture ,
when you can buy a 2 ton suv that goes 800/1000 k`s , does not cost a lot of money , does every family duty, tows the family equipment , and in the scheme of things actually doesn't cost that much to run for the versatility in the one single vehicle .....which one would you buy ?

Exactly right. And one big part is that the most vocal proponents of electric vehicles simply cannot seem to understand why everyone doesn't immediately scrap their old fashioned petrol/diesel powered car and get an EV. Personal choice or need doesn't seem to figure...we should be looking at "the bigger picture" and give up the very freedoms of travel/usage that you mention there and limit ourselves to an electric vehicle that doesn't do the things we need in our motoring life.

I don't think anyone has much against electric cars...however we accept and don't shy away from acknowledging and speaking up about the limitations of them. To be basic: we don't sugar-coat it and be blind to the problems of production and owning the things.

[Itsme]

As power generation moves away from fossil fuels to other alternatives such as solar, wind power etc yes electric cars will me become more cleaner, we might not see the benefits in our lifetime but I'm sure future generations will.

[Crazy Dazz]

Designing, building, and tuning any motor-car is a balance of compromises. The fundamental problem with Hybrids, is that they are much more able to be fine-tuned to specific conditions (ie the standard fuel economy tests.) Push them outside their comfort zone, and they are as rubbish as any other car. Top Gear proved this by pitting a Prius against a BMW, and when driven at the same speeds (pushing them hard around their track) the BMW got better fuel economy.

As for batteries, well firstly any greenie applauding electric cars is a moron. We still generate electricity from coal (which the hippies hate) so it is highly doubtful whether an electric car is significantly better for the environment.
Now as to efficiency, I honestly don't know. Internal combustion engines are very inefficient, and a lot of work and engine goes into producing petrol. I would be interested to know how that stacks up against the combined efficiency of power generation, reticulation, and battery storage.

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Internal combustion engines are very inefficient, and a lot of work and engine goes into producing petrol. I would be interested to know how that stacks up against the combined efficiency of power generation, reticulation, and battery storage.

Thirty years ago 10lt/100km was considered outstanding figures for a four cylinder...any four cylinder, even small hatchbacks.
Now if a new four cylinder only got 10/100 it would be laughed at.
When we had the G6E Falcon I used to constantly be amazed that a big heavy four door sedan with a four liter six cylinder and auto was cruising the highway getting sometimes under 8lt/100km.
Internal combustion has become stupidly efficient compared to even ten years ago.

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Thirty years ago 10lt/100km was considered outstanding figures for a four cylinder...any four cylinder, even small hatchbacks.
Now if a new four cylinder only got 10/100 it would be laughed at.
When we had the G6E Falcon I used to constantly be amazed that a big heavy four door sedan with a four liter six cylinder and auto was cruising the highway getting sometimes under 8lt/100km.
Internal combustion has become stupidly efficient compared to even ten years ago.

But in terms of actual efficiency, they would still be low, most of the energy goes out the exhaust. But then I have no idea how efficient a power station actually is? And I know batteries and electric motors are not, so it would be interesting to know what the overall comparison is.

[Boza]

I can see the benefit now that people have mentioned it of EV'S in congested city's where you spend all your time in traffic.

I have relo's in LA and NYC and they have said over the last decade the traffic is out of control my uncle spent 7-8 hours getting home from Manhattan to Staten island he said just idling the car was getting hot it was hot inside from the exhaust and exhaust's around him so I can see the benefit of EV for heavily congested city's. But the program focused more on people taking the moral high ground saying they drive an electric car when they have no clue how much resources are used in it's manufacture and charging.

[383hq]

In terms of "embodied energy" it's not such a clear case of one over the other. It is difficult though, to compare "apples to apples" given the propaganda about. Oil based fuel has had many decades to improve extraction efficiency, and I do laugh at the current adds - use caltex fuel, it cleans while it burns.

to state a Tesla is faster then a Porsche turbo - that has got my attention, but I need range+speed, not just speed....
Love where the market is going for electric bikes, particularly in urban environments (sorry, I recognise this is a car forum), but really, 1-2 Tonnes needed to push a 80Kg human around? really?

[Pedro]

Well you may give yourself a hug and tell yourself you're doing your bit to save the world by championing electric cars and such but until this problem is solved your efforts will do jack ****. http://www.timeoutshanghai.com/featu...the-Dome-.html

[2011G6E]

People complain about petrol engined cars not reaching the range and economy claimed...yet every test I have seen of hybrid and pure electric cars usually mentions the exact same problem with them. Drive them on level ground gently and easily and you will get the claimed range. Maybe. But drive them normally, stop start, a few good hard take-offs, up hills, with a full load of passengers, and things change dramatically.
Talked to a cabbie at work about the Camry Hybrid, and he said he did consider one, but after talking to a few other cabbies about the actual range and efficiency and running costs including battery replacement, and he was going with a diesel powered sedan of some sort instead. Of course taxis run up the kilometers in a way no private car ever does, but still.

Don't get me wrong...EV cars and hybrids have their place, and will get better with time. If I lived in a big city and had to commute a shortish distance to work, I'd probably consider one as a second car for work purposes...or an EV motorbike more likely. But they can't be all things to all people, as much as the True Believers would have us all thinking.

[mik]

Originally Posted by Boza

I can see the benefit now that people have mentioned it of EV'S in congested city's where you spend all your time in traffic.

I have relo's in LA and NYC and they have said over the last decade the traffic is out of control my uncle spent 7-8 hours getting home from Manhattan to Staten island he said just idling the car was getting hot it was hot inside from the exhaust and exhaust's around him so I can see the benefit of EV for heavily congested city's. But the program focused more on people taking the moral high ground saying they drive an electric car when they have no clue how much resources are used in it's manufacture and charging.

imo this is where hybrids make the most sense , you can sit in the heavy traffic in the big smoke with no engine running , but dont lose your ability to go anywhere long distance because of the fear of no power point to plug into for a dedicated ev . .

[mik]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

People complain about petrol engined cars not reaching the range and economy claimed...yet every test I have seen of hybrid and pure electric cars usually mentions the exact same problem with them. Drive them on level ground gently and easily and you will get the claimed range. Maybe. But drive them normally, stop start, a few good hard take-offs, up hills, with a full load of passengers, and things change dramatically.
Talked to a cabbie at work about the Camry Hybrid, and he said he did consider one, but after talking to a few other cabbies about the actual range and efficiency and running costs including battery replacement, and he was going with a diesel powered sedan of some sort instead. Of course taxis run up the kilometers in a way no private car ever does, but still.

Don't get me wrong...EV cars and hybrids have their place, and will get better with time. If I lived in a big city and had to commute a shortish distance to work, I'd probably consider one as a second car for work purposes...or an EV motorbike more likely. But they can't be all things to all people, as much as the True Believers would have us all thinking.

i agree with the range thing , i read an article on a small dedicated economy ev that thats been out for some years now , and the car maker cited some tweaks that yielded more range ..... up to 200 k`s on a change ,
the testers on one day of the test struck inclement weather requiring extra accessories run , heater , wipers , demister ,etc and the vehicles range went down to 65 k`s , losing range in an ev is much more inconvenient than a internal combustion engined vehicle when you can fill up the ice vehicle in 5 minutes and be on your way .
theres no doubt about it , there are advantages and disadvantages for all vehicles , but conventional ice vehicles at this stage are more versatile and have less of the disadvantages .

[simon varley]

current fuel economy testing is based n an idealised drive cycle, hence the published figures often do not reflect what a customer really sees. This is recognised and there is a move to change to a much more realistic test cycle. I imagine much the same will happen for EVs (heater on, lights, wipers etc.)

[EBSXR6]

I am not sure if this still applies but I read an article a few years ago about batteries for the Japanese built Hybrids. One of the metals was mined in Canada, shipped to the UK for processing, the processed material was shipped to China, the batteries built in China and shipped to Japan. it was quoted the amount of energy used in producing the batteries had more of an impact on the environment than running a big gas guzzler for seven years.

[Jastel]

Toured the Prius factory in Japan a few years back when this was big news...asked the guide how was this better for the environment...she said "Not Toyotas Problem...Panasonic problem" (they make the batteries).
She also said they recycle the cardboard boxes the batteries come in!

[vztrt]

Depends on the state. In vic its actually worse cause of burning brown coal. But cleaner in nsw.

If you use renewables then more clean.

But if you really care buy a second hand car as buying new puts out more co2 due to the manufacturing as well as running.

[chizzy86]

Network capacity is not really an issue in states such as Vic and NSW after the "gold plating" so to speak. I remember reading that around 20pc of one of the distributors networks is used onn average 2 (yes 2!) days a year.

[chamb0]

Tesla don't use rare earths in there battery packs or drivelines. The motors are AC induction which don't require magnets. The batteries are recyclable.

[Brazen]

AGL is offering $1 a day maximum charge at your home for electric vehicle charging from November as electricity overcapacity grows.

http://www.afr.com/business/energy/e...0160621-gpnxaq

AGL Energy: Charge your Tesla or BMWi3 for $1 a day from November


AGL Energy will offer customers with electric cars such as Tesla's Model S unlimited charging for $1 a day under a new plan to launch on November 1.

The $365-a-year, "all-you-can-eat" offer will apply to electric vehicles on the market, from the high end Tesla's Model S and BMW i3 to the more affordable Toyota Prius hybrid and Nissan Leaf.

Unlimited electric vehicle charging is one of a suite of services the company plans to roll out in a bid to boost electricity demand and remain relevant to customers enticed by the allure of installing rooftop solar and batteries to go off the grid.

Chief executive Andy Vesey told the Australia Energy Week conference the electricity supplied to electric vehicles under the offer would be fully "carbon offset" - meaning the company will plant trees or invest in other carbon offsets in Australia to match the carbon dioxide emissions.

"For a dollar a day if you have an electric vehicle and you have an AGL smart meter and a charger you can get energy for that car for $1 as day, as much as you like," Mr Vesey told the conference on Tuesday.

AGL will either hook up to electric vehicle chargers customers already have installed or supply them with a charger. Electric vehicle chargers cost about $1000.

Mr Vesey said AGL is looking at a range of new services to add to the traditional electricity supply business which is flatlining as more households add solar panels, energy efficient appliances and increasingly batteries and smart meters to reduce their reliance on the centralised grid.

"We continue to try to find new applications that customers want. We continue to try to build load," he said, adding that growth in demand is important because without that the National Electricity market would not overcome its 7000 megawatt overcapacity.

AGL has a few BMW i3 electric vehicles in its fleet, and promises to have 10 per cent of its fleet in EVs by 2018
AGL has a few BMW i3 electric vehicles in its fleet, and promises to have 10 per cent of its fleet in EVs by 2018 Mark Bean
He outlined a future in 2050 in which not just households but smart devices talk to each other to optimise their energy usage in the interests of their owners as the computational power of the "internet of things" continued to multiply.

For now, AGL plans to install 1000 storage batteries in South Australian homes and businesses to trial "micro power plant" technology which enables individual households and firms to trade their surplus solar power to neighbours who need it at certain times and buy their surplus power at other times when they have a need.

Mr Vesey said the company chose South Australia because of the problems with its network stability and price volatility caused by having the highest penetration of renewable energy - more than 40 per cent - of any state.

Details of the final offer are still being worked out but charging two vehicles would cost $2 a day.

AGL has committed to having 10 per cent of its fleet in electric vehicles or hybrids by 2018. It currently has a couple of Mitsubushi Outlanders and some extended range BMWs i3.

The initiative comes as traditional electricity suppliers grapple with rapid change in technology, consumer preference and government regulation.

[The Stylist]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

People complain about petrol engined cars not reaching the range and economy claimed...yet every test I have seen of hybrid and pure electric cars usually mentions the exact same problem with them. Drive them on level ground gently and easily and you will get the claimed range. Maybe. But drive them normally, stop start, a few good hard take-offs, up hills, with a full load of passengers, and things change dramatically.
Talked to a cabbie at work about the Camry Hybrid, and he said he did consider one, but after talking to a few other cabbies about the actual range and efficiency and running costs including battery replacement, and he was going with a diesel powered sedan of some sort instead. Of course taxis run up the kilometers in a way no private car ever does, but still.

Don't get me wrong...EV cars and hybrids have their place, and will get better with time. If I lived in a big city and had to commute a shortish distance to work, I'd probably consider one as a second car for work purposes...or an EV motorbike more likely. But they can't be all things to all people, as much as the True Believers would have us all thinking.

I tend to agree - I'd consider one as a daily commuter and leave the 'on-order' Levorg GT-S for those longer trips into the unknown. Speaking of cabbies; I've noticed a few are now hopping into diesel Mondeo's of late.

[mik]

Originally Posted by chamb0

Tesla don't use rare earths in there battery packs or drivelines. The motors are AC induction which don't require magnets. The batteries are recyclable.

Pigs *** they dont.

[chamb0]

Wanna bet?

[383hq]

Originally Posted by mik

Pigs *** they dont.

batteries or motors?
If motors, Can I get in on the action?
Search induction motor

I hear the batteries are just 18650 's

For anyone that liked Seinfeld : The Mercedes Benz 'AA' edition
https://youtu.be/arQ8_PW-RiA

[Junkyard-Dog]

As soon as the battery/storage technology advances, the EV's will control the market.