Tesla Roadster

[roon]

"Even if the tesla were to run off of electricity produced from 100% coal fired turbine plants, they would _still_ let out less emissions than _any_ truck in the US."

Strange. Many academic studies have been written demonstrating that EVs actually release more CO2 than equivalent diesels, in many countries. Here's a neat little graphic from a biased source

http://shrinkthatfootprint.com/wp-conte ... ssions.gif

CO2, yes, but also consider the benefits of centralized exhaust emissions. Particulates, odors, fuel vapors. Yes, people still live near power plants, but generally fewer, given where they're sited. Seems like from a regulatory/bureaucratic standpoint, emissions control and implementation of improvements to emissions-tech would be easier for static plants, rather than trying to keep tabs on millions of individual mini-power plants roaming around. EVs need no emissions tests nor maintenance of devices thereto. Not having to deal with the DMV monstrosity (US road-car bureau) seems like a fair trade for working around charge times & range considerations.

[Greg Locock]

Yes, I was responding to the statement made, not a different one. I am quite happy to agree that electric trucks make sense in some scenarios, but if you worry about CO2 (I don't) then coal powered electricity is not the way to go.

Incidentally I looked up CO2/km for some vehicles and 100 g/km seems like a reasonable number, plus about 10% more for manufacturing them.

[hurril]

Well, on the left hand side is a list of countries. On the right hand side is a list of numbers. At the top it tells you what the numbers mean. At the bottom it gives sources for the data. Which bit didn't you understand?

I didn't understand why you would be arrogant over a chart that does not show what you think it does, in response to a topic that is something different.

I can also draw a chart that shows a number of countries and stick numbers next to the countries. Not that I think you drew the chart. This topic is way too politicised and it seems to cloud your judgement to the point that we cannot have a technical discussion about it.

I am very well aware of the total effect on the environment that an EV has. I am also well aware of the fact that all vehicles are and that these sorts of pamfletts and charts are made in an attempt to have useful soldiers (see: I mean no insults!) pushing your favourite ideology's bandwagon forward.

I want to keep driving my gas guzzler as much as the next guy but that does not prevent _ME_ from appreciating the --- out of Tesla. It shouldn't prevent you either!

[roon]

I didn't understand why you would be arrogant over a chart that does not show what you think it does, in response to a topic that is something different.

You said, "Even if the tesla were to run off of electricity produced from 100% coal fired turbine plants, they would _still_ let out less emissions than _any_ truck in the US." GL simply offered that power plant sources do matter. The terrain is more complex than your initial statement implied. What's the sticking point for you?

...these sorts of pamfletts and charts are made in an attempt to have useful soldiers (see: I mean no insults!) pushing your favourite ideology's bandwagon forward.

You're devoid of ideology?

[hurril]

I didn't understand why you would be arrogant over a chart that does not show what you think it does, in response to a topic that is something different.

You said, "Even if the tesla were to run off of electricity produced from 100% coal fired turbine plants, they would _still_ let out less emissions than _any_ truck in the US." GL simply offered that power plant sources do matter. The terrain is more complex than your initial statement implied. What's the sticking point for you?

...these sorts of pamfletts and charts are made in an attempt to have useful soldiers (see: I mean no insults!) pushing your favourite ideology's bandwagon forward.

You're devoid of ideology?

What's going on here? The very post you quoted even has "100% coal fired turbine" in it. What do you think that means? Is that something ideological with me that __EVEN I__ include the production of the electricity in the CO2 accounting of driving a Tesla when comparing it to a diesel truck?

If you want to include production accounting then things quickly become very complicated but it is true that the batteries are non-trivial here. I mentioned that earlier too.

I have not said that I am devoid of ideology. But saying that EV:s is a liberal toshfest and someone else dropping an irrelevant diagram from a dodgy source that hardly even shows the point being played, that's just crude. Primitive. This is a very high brow technical forum and I expect more. I want to write insults here referencing knuckledragging mouthbreathers something something Nascar and tractor pulling but I won't. Because I am one of those

EV:s still totally fascinate me though and I just cannot understand your need to be dumb about it.

[Andres125sx]

"Even if the tesla were to run off of electricity produced from 100% coal fired turbine plants, they would _still_ let out less emissions than _any_ truck in the US."

Strange. Many academic studies have been written demonstrating that EVs actually release more CO2 than equivalent diesels, in many countries. Here's a neat little graphic from a biased source

http://shrinkthatfootprint.com/wp-conte ... ssions.gif

Sorry but this is a typically biased comparison to fool anyone looking at it

They´re comparing ALL the emissions from an electric vehicle including manufacturing emissions, direct grid and indirect grid emissions and even loses... and throw it into a chart to let you assume comparing that number with the common CO2 emisssions numbers of a diesel car is fair.... when it´s not.

Diesels also pollute when they are manufactured
Diesels also pollute when petrol is extracted
Diesels also pollute when petrol is refined
Diesels also pollute when diesel is transported
Diesel also pollute when spare parts are manufactured and transported


I´m sick of reading biased comparisons to discredit EVs...

[Andres125sx]

'electric energy costs are half those of diesel'

how much higher are the environmental costs ?
(given the coal and nuclear sources of electricity)

not higher at all, maybe in India, but I´d say India is not the first target for EV manufacturers

how much higher are the social costs ?
(if the electricity is untaxed but the diesel is taxed)

Social costs higher? No way.

Diesels are taxed basically because they´re throwing poison to the atmosphere, CO2 is far from the only problem with ICEs. Taxes are only trying to compensate the health problems they cause

the liberal toshfest that is our BBC has just told us this vehicle has zero emissions

The zero emissions propaganda is an invention of the BBC?

has Mr Tesla heard of the 50% efficient heat dilution gasoline engines as used in F1 ?
they don't even need a catalyst

True, no catalyst, they only need 100kg of fuel to cover 300km

[flmkane]

[/quote]
True, no catalyst, they only need 100kg of fuel to cover 300km
[/quote]

Wait. Stop right there. Do you think a Tesla of any model can turn even a single lap of the Nurbergring even with those giant battery packs? Nope. Thus for high performance, the F1 car gets better mileage.

Fuel mileage is a crappy measure for efficiency because of the testing conditions and performance variable can change at any time for any car, and for different countries.

Most electric cars for example never get their MPGe rated performance in real life simply because it's impossible to actually travel at say, 60mph for 300 miles without ever altering throttle input. Similar to gasoline cars that some governing bodies would claim get 60-70 miles per gallon, but are tested under super idealized conditions that do not mimic real life.

Thermal efficiency is a more physically realistic parameter. You can program/tune your car to gain better mileage or better performance depending on what you want to do.

May I suggest that we keep things "technical" ?

[Phil]

how much higher are the social costs ?
(if the electricity is untaxed but the diesel is taxed)

Social costs higher? No way.

Diesels are taxed basically because they´re throwing poison to the atmosphere, CO2 is far from the only problem with ICEs. Taxes are only trying to compensate the health problems they cause

That’s not entirely true by the way. Where do you think a large amount of the money comes from to build and maintain shiny roads and infrastructure?

Just to add - in my country, the tax goes 50% towards road and infrastructure, the other 50% directly to the state. The tax accounted for roughly 8.5% of the entire state income in 2012. Zero goes to health.

[roon]

Out come the emoticons. And on a "high-brow technical forum," no less.

...saying that EV:s is a liberal toshfest...

TC was commenting on the zero-emissions fallacy, not EVs generally. You've misquoted him.

...and someone else dropping an irrelevant diagram from a dodgy source...

The composition of a grid's power sources determine its emissions. The diagram shows how grids with a mix of renewable or low-carbon fuels diminish the grid's carbon emissions. Since EVs get their energy from these grids, this is how you would determine an EV's carbon footprint, relative to which grid it is being plugged into.

[henry]

Yes, I was responding to the statement made, not a different one. I am quite happy to agree that electric trucks make sense in some scenarios, but if you worry about CO2 (I don't) then coal powered electricity is not the way to go.

Incidentally I looked up CO2/km for some vehicles and 100 g/km seems like a reasonable number, plus about 10% more for manufacturing them.

I found some figures for manufacturing which put the CO2 at 17 tonne per vehicle on a Mondeo. Assume 170k km lifetime mileage that’s 100 g/km.

That gives 200 g/ km without including exploration,extraction, transport, refining, distribution.

We would at least need the distribution numbers to make a comparison with the bar chart you posted.

As soon as you look all sorts of assumptions have to be made, and oftime ignored or fudged. So I assumed 170k km for easy maths. I think that’s not untypical for UK based vehicles. But if it’s higher it dilutes the manufacturing contribution to per km CO2.

Size of vehicle also contributes, a small Citroen is quoted at only 6 tonnes, if you take that and a large mileage the manufacturing number comes down. At 600k km we get down to the 10% figure you suggest.

An advantage an electrical vehicle has over an ICE is that any reduction in CO2 from changes in generation mix over its lifetime filters down to it.

[Cannonballer]

Toyota, when coming up with the initial design of the Prius, said that the gasoline hybrid engine produced less CO2 than an all electric engine due to the emissions produced making electricity.*

*The source is as liberal as the come however, as I heard that on a NPR (National Public Radio) station from San Francisco...

[Cold Fussion]

Excellent work everybody turning a simple question about battery technology into a politicised discussion about EV's.

[Greg Locock]

I'm surprised the CO2 content of manufacturing a vehicle is as high as 100g/km, but that is a useful additional data point.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... nt-new-car

Yes, one of you is right, the diesel co2 numbers I quoted were not well to wheel, which adds 15%.

So, 100 for the tank to wheel emissions, 15 well to tank, 100 manufacturing (for a Mondeo, which is probably rather larger and better specced than a typical EV) = 215 g /km.

So that graph, which I got off some greeny website by the way, http://shrinkthatfootprint.com/ shows that China India and Australia are all unwise places in which to run an EV powered by the grid, if you care about CO2, and the difference is pretty small even for the UK and USA.

As for the rest of the histrionics above, hilarious and immature are two adjectives that spring to mind. I don't get emotional about cars or about engineering, or physics. I prove that I'm right, or accept proof that I'm wrong. But whining and stamping your feet probably won't have much effect.

[Shrieker]

If %100 required energy could be obtained from solar panels, what would the CO2 emission be ? Does the production of solar panels cost too much in terms of CO2 emissions ? What about batteries ?

There are some things too good to be true about that car. If I had the means, I'd get in line if those claims were true.