A post EV era

[J.A.W.]

Some glaring errors in that screenshot.
"Modern ICEV's could easily deliver this by improvement BEV's which weigh about 30% more will lead to more PM 2.5 because of tyre wear.No evidence is supplied for this. To my mind BEVs offer several advantages in tyre wear:
- lower CG
- superior launch torque control than clutched transmissions
- electronic control of a large % of retardation events (regen)
- superior traction control
- easier and more frequent implementation of AWD with electronic distribution of torque

Did you miss (if it is still 'up') the youtube clip of the BMW engineer running tyre performance/handling
/steering tests on their big EV/SUV pre-production, ('moose test' etc), wherein he pronounces himself
satisfied on a technical basis, but saliently adds he is glad not to be paying for the tyres himself, since they'd - over a test-session, been essentially 'chewed out' - between the 'rock & a hard place' situation naturally appending to massive/instantaneous torque working hard against a tall/weighty chassis,
& yeah so something's def' gotta give...

[DChemTech]

The whole 'recycling issue' with windmills is completely blown out of proportion by people seeking to demonize windmills. There is a perfectly fine end-of-life solution for composite materials: bury them. That's what happens to most of it, like aircraft parts and boats, which make up a far more significant composite waste stream than windmill blades do. And noone bats an eye about them, they're inert materials after all, which just lie there. But when it comes to windmills, people suddenly act like it's the end of the world.

Also, when comparing solid waste/kWh power produced, windmills perform much better than, say, coal. Yes, the mass of solid waste (ashes) per kWh produced power of coal is larger than the mass of composite waste produced per kWh of wind power produced (and not a bit more - around 200x more). That is excluding all the other wastes (CO2 and other gaseous emissions, water pollution, etc.) that coal also produces. What happens to those ashes - that are certainly not inert? They are buried or used as filler in construction material, from where they leach into ground water and do damage. And noone bats an eye. But when we bury a windmill blade... o my.

And then still, more and more companies are coming up with ways to recycle existing blades, or produce new materials that are recycling. Great, even better. But not a necessity - avoiding wind power because of the recyclability 'issue', while retaining a fossil status quo in place, is absolutely ludicrous.

For more on the topic: https://medium.com/climate-conscious/wi ... 61913dcbd9

Thanks for your mature take on the discussion and the provided data.
As I wrote previously, blades was just a example.
I am not neglecting any technology; there are problems on all of them and none could exist without the other - there is no carbon fiber for wind blades without oil.
By the way, what we should do with older or broken solar panel? Burn either?
What I mean is that there are lot of resources not put into account.
And, last, you are talking about the gains on burning windblades, but how much energy did you use to construct (produce carbon fiber), install, decommissioning, grind and finally burn? The energy do not comes from nothing; if it burns better you should have put some (lots of) energy on the process.
There is no simple solution and politics plays a big hole.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Apologies, maybe my tone was a bit harsh. I've just seen the windmills give waste argument too often being used as a total disqualifier for windmills (on e.g. linkedin), it easily grinds my gears.

Of course, aside from not using energy, no method is without impact. Which is why life cycle analysis is such a useful tool, even if it will never be fully complete, and why I am a fan of true pricing on (environmental/social) impact, such that the expenses of a good represent (to the best degree possible) correlate with the real cost/impact, and not just with direct production costs excluding all externalities.

For the windmills, I did't say burn (I think?), but bury. Landfill. Put a load of sand on it. Doesn't sound very environmentally friendly maybe, but composites are rather harmless (certainly compared to landfilled ashes). I don;t know energy use of production, but cannot imagine it to be a huge factor. Certainly there are studies on that.

[johnny comelately]

I delicately place this here....

[gruntguru]

Some glaring errors in that screenshot.
"Modern ICEV's could easily deliver this by improvement BEV's which weigh about 30% more will lead to more PM 2.5 because of tyre wear.No evidence is supplied for this. To my mind BEVs offer several advantages in tyre wear:
- lower CG
- superior launch torque control than clutched transmissions
- electronic control of a large % of retardation events (regen)
- superior traction control
- easier and more frequent implementation of AWD with electronic distribution of torque

Did you miss (if it is still 'up') the youtube clip of the BMW engineer running tyre performance/handling
/steering tests on their big EV/SUV pre-production, ('moose test' etc), wherein he pronounces himself
satisfied on a technical basis, but saliently adds he is glad not to be paying for the tyres himself, since they'd - over a test-session, been essentially 'chewed out' - between the 'rock & a hard place' situation naturally appending to massive/instantaneous torque working hard against a tall/weighty chassis,
& yeah so something's def' gotta give...

Missed that one - sounds great! Not sure if you are refuting my post - I certainly concede that most EVs have the capability to annihilate tyres - we just have to hope they are not all driven that way.

[Greg Locock]

Well there's a coincidence, just yesterday a tire shop said the same thing to me. Tesla drivers like demonstrating their green credentials by indulging in quick starts, and demolish the sidewalls of the tires in the process. But it is OK, because their green virtues are on display.

[henry]

Well there's a coincidence, just yesterday a tire shop said the same thing to me. Tesla drivers like demonstrating their green credentials by indulging in quick starts, and demolish the sidewalls of the tires in the process. But it is OK, because their green virtues are on display.

Meanwhile, whatever their motivation, they are establishing a fleet of second hand EVs which will be needed to bring pricing down to more affordable levels. Doing the right thing for the wrong reasons still results in the right thing being done.

[bjpower]

The first cars were not much better than a horse and cart. People often had their arms broken by the crank.

The weight of current EVs is an issue most about 2000 kg. But if the solid-state batteries live up to their hype we could see good improvements on that front. A golf sized car is about 1400 kg.

Personally they are not ready yet to suit my needs. If a carbon neutral solution is available for petrol I think it would be of benefit.saying that we would need to compare all pollution coming from the exhaust from both fuels. Co2 is an issue but so is the rest of it.

Oil is the most useful substance man kind has ever discovered. We will not find a silver bullet to replace it. I will have to be death by 1000 cuts

[Tommy Cookers]

the problem of course is replacing all consumption of fossil fuels
most of that consumption is for making heat

there is no problem finding uses for such defossilised electricity as we produce
it's all used
mostly not by EVs

[Greg Locock]

@Henry, I must admit my initial reaction was that we've been through this before. C4 or C5 Corvettes with the LT5 engine came with a key that enabled extra torquiness. So if your offspring borrowed the car they just got the downgraded version.

I don't think that would be at all difficult to set up in software. You could choose a tire-shredding setting.

[Andres125sx]

Life-cycle GNG emissions for different powertrainsin in different parts of the world, both for current cars and projected 2030 cars:




https://theicct.org/publication/a-globa ... nger-cars/

[gruntguru]

Well there's a coincidence, just yesterday a tire shop said the same thing to me. Tesla drivers like demonstrating their green credentials by indulging in quick starts, and demolish the sidewalls of the tires in the process. But it is OK, because their green virtues are on display.

Agree - of course nobody thinks an "EV world" will look like a Tesla in every garage. The current crop of EV's are largely high-end models, often with ballistic performance.

[Greg Locock]

...in the west. I imagine (based on no evidence) the big sellers in China are 100 kW or less.

[gruntguru]

. . . and E-bikes.

[Andres125sx]

Well there's a coincidence, just yesterday a tire shop said the same thing to me. Tesla drivers like demonstrating their green credentials by indulging in quick starts, and demolish the sidewalls of the tires in the process. But it is OK, because their green virtues are on display.

It is ok because he´s a free person who paid a good amount of money for a very powerful car. What´s you´re problem with that? Have you ever criticized anyone with a sports car doing a quick start?

Or people burning tires without even racing?

Have you ever criticized drifting?




But now someone doing a quick start with an EV is a problem because of PM2.5 emissions???

[Billzilla]

Have you ever criticized drifting?

I have. It's a colossal wank.