A post EV era

[Greg Locock]

I hazard a guess that it is talking about Germany, given the language. I'd have said there was enough attribution on the screenshot for a non lazy person to find the source themselves. It is of course a standard puerile internet technique to attempt to discredit the source rather than discuss the content.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... e-friendly

has lots of links.

[Andres125sx]

Interesting that GHG emissions for vehicle and battery manufacture don't decrease much over 9 years. Indicates that manufacture emissions are due to more than just electricity used. I wonder if they accounted for green steel (replacing coking coal with hydrogen) by 2030?

I´d say it´s normal, manufacturing involves several steps from mining to painting, electricity is just a fraction of the total

[Andres125sx]

I hazard a guess that it is talking about Germany, given the language. I'd have said there was enough attribution on the screenshot for a non lazy person to find the source themselves. It is of course a standard puerile internet technique to attempt to discredit the source rather than discuss the content.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... e-friendly

has lots of links.

I´d have said for a non lazy person providing a source is basic

Discussing the content of a graph without a source is difficult. Even so I tried

An embarrassing study

https://149366104.v2.pressablecdn.com/w ... 20x540.png

Source?

Gruntguru pointed out one of the reasons that might be another biased report. Looks like they´re using India or similar (worst case scenario) as if it was the average, with similar emissions per km, when reality is very different

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


https://theicct.org/sites/default/files ... 2021_0.png

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

I´ll read the link later

[Greg Locock]

No, Germany.

[Andres125sx]

I hazard a guess that it is talking about Germany, given the language. I'd have said there was enough attribution on the screenshot for a non lazy person to find the source themselves. It is of course a standard puerile internet technique to attempt to discredit the source rather than discuss the content.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... e-friendly

has lots of links.

Most links don't work, at least not any which provides any useful data about their claims

[lucafo]

Pretty obvious and it would be better with some source of the data.
But is very good to open minds on the problem - it is not about the car...

[gruntguru]

It all depends how the electricity is produced. EVs will progress towards zero CO2. ICVs will not.

[gruntguru]

Interesting that GHG emissions for vehicle and battery manufacture don't decrease much over 9 years. Indicates that manufacture emissions are due to more than just electricity used. I wonder if they accounted for green steel (replacing coking coal with hydrogen) by 2030?

I´d say it´s normal, manufacturing involves several steps from mining to painting, electricity is just a fraction of the total

My point is the graph shows no reduction in CO2 emissions for the manufacturing component over 9 years. Reality is that CO2 emissions for all aspects of manufacture will reduce over time - energy and steel being two of the biggest.

[Andres125sx]

Interesting that GHG emissions for vehicle and battery manufacture don't decrease much over 9 years. Indicates that manufacture emissions are due to more than just electricity used. I wonder if they accounted for green steel (replacing coking coal with hydrogen) by 2030?

I´d say it´s normal, manufacturing involves several steps from mining to painting, electricity is just a fraction of the total

My point is the graph shows no reduction in CO2 emissions for the manufacturing component over 9 years. Reality is that CO2 emissions for all aspects of manufacture will reduce over time - energy and steel being two of the biggest.

I know what you meant, but my point was in 9 years the manufacturing process emissions are not going to change dramatically because there are many aspects apart from electricity and steel.

And because electricity renewables percentage do not change too much in 9 years, this is a very long process

[Andres125sx]

Pretty obvious and it would be better with some source of the data.
But is very good to open minds on the problem - it is not about the car...

Even when I agree on some points (EV are not zero emissions today) I see two mistakes in that reasoning, wich have been raised here repeatedly

1- you can´t use world average grid emissions to evaluate EV emissions. No EV use that average, they will use the average of the country it´s charged, wich means in most developed countries it will be significantly lower

2- those lines comparing emissions from ICE and EV should not be straight, the EV line will be lowered with time as more renewables are built, while ICE line will raise with time as the engine gets older and its efficiency is decreased


If this is taken into account that graph will change significantly and conclusions will be very different. Even so I agree EVs are not as good as some try to show, but neither they´re as bad as some try to show. We humans tend to be too radical, looks like we like radical points instead of balanced and sensible ones

[gruntguru]

I´d say it´s normal, manufacturing involves several steps from mining to painting, electricity is just a fraction of the total

My point is the graph shows no reduction in CO2 emissions for the manufacturing component over 9 years. Reality is that CO2 emissions for all aspects of manufacture will reduce over time - energy and steel being two of the biggest.

I know what you meant, but my point was in 9 years the manufacturing process emissions are not going to change dramatically because there are many aspects apart from electricity and steel.

And because electricity renewables percentage do not change too much in 9 years, this is a very long process

Australia might not be typical but annual generation from renewables grew by 10% in the five years from 2015 to 2020. https://www.energy.gov.au/data/australi ... generation

In 2021 it grew by a further 5%. https://www.energy.gov.au/publications/ ... 1-and-2021

[Andres125sx]

Great, but as I said, manufacturing involves a lot of aspects wich are not related to electricity. Mining for example, materials needed, transport... Electricity is just a fraction, so even if that fraction is decreased a fraction, it´s still a fraction of a fraction, so the overall do not change that much

[gruntguru]

. . . and of course many car manufacturers have already moved a lot of their electricity consumption to renewables.

A lot of the remaining carbon footprint of vehicle manufacture is still related to electricity.

Our analysis shows that for an internal combustion engine vehicle (ICEV), 29 percent of material emissions could be abated in a cost-positive way by 2030. The industry—indeed, automotive manufacturing ecosystems—should prioritize the methods that can help achieve such savings. Most of these savings involve electrifying existing processes, using low-carbon energy sources, adopting and scaling new technologies that reduce process emissions, and both allowing for increased use of recycled materials and actually recycling a greater share of materials.

About 60 percent of these cost-positive decarbonization approaches involve aluminum and plastics. More expansive use of recycled aluminum, new smelting technologies, and green electricity can reduce emissions from aluminum production by about 73 percent from their current levels while also reducing production costs. Similarly, recycled materials such as polypropylene or polyethylene, especially for plastics in parts of vehicles that are not generally visible, can produce savings and cut emissions from plastic production by 34 percent. Scaling nylon recycling technologies could further decrease total plastics emissions by up to 92 percent
.
.
.
Automobile manufacturing could further reduce its current emissions if manufacturers increase production of relatively carbon-intensive components such as battery cells in regions with low-carbon power grids; indeed, such activity is already occurring in some areas. If the industry were to implement the measures that have potential for cost savings, those savings could then be applied to an additional 37 percent of abatement measures to offset the measures’ costs. The net result would abate 66 percent of emissions while keeping vehicle costs the same.

https://www.mckinsey.com/business-funct ... the-agenda

[Andres125sx]

. . . and of course many car manufacturers have already moved a lot of their electricity consumption to renewables.

A lot of the remaining carbon footprint of vehicle manufacture is still related to electricity.

Our analysis shows that for an internal combustion engine vehicle (ICEV), 29 percent of material emissions could be abated in a cost-positive way by 2030. The industry—indeed, automotive manufacturing ecosystems—should prioritize the methods that can help achieve such savings. Most of these savings involve electrifying existing processes, using low-carbon energy sources, adopting and scaling new technologies that reduce process emissions, and both allowing for increased use of recycled materials and actually recycling a greater share of materials.

About 60 percent of these cost-positive decarbonization approaches involve aluminum and plastics. More expansive use of recycled aluminum, new smelting technologies, and green electricity can reduce emissions from aluminum production by about 73 percent from their current levels while also reducing production costs. Similarly, recycled materials such as polypropylene or polyethylene, especially for plastics in parts of vehicles that are not generally visible, can produce savings and cut emissions from plastic production by 34 percent. Scaling nylon recycling technologies could further decrease total plastics emissions by up to 92 percent
.
.
.
Automobile manufacturing could further reduce its current emissions if manufacturers increase production of relatively carbon-intensive components such as battery cells in regions with low-carbon power grids; indeed, such activity is already occurring in some areas. If the industry were to implement the measures that have potential for cost savings, those savings could then be applied to an additional 37 percent of abatement measures to offset the measures’ costs. The net result would abate 66 percent of emissions while keeping vehicle costs the same.

https://www.mckinsey.com/business-funct ... the-agenda

Very interesting, thanks

Anycase that´s what could and should be done, not what will be done in next 9 years. Unfortunatelly there´s a huge difference

[johnny comelately]

An historical perspective, the whole lot is good but the EV part starts about 2:45