Started By
Message

re: Study - Electric Cars Produce More Pollution Than Fossil Fuel-Burning Cars

Posted on 5/19/16 at 12:27 pm to
Posted by Nado Jenkins83
Land of the Free
Member since Nov 2012
66489 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 12:27 pm to
LINK



quote:

The study also found that the electricity grids for charging lithium-ion batteries contribute to global warming and other environmental and health impacts.



quote:

“These impacts are sensitive to local and regional grid mixes,” Amarakoon said. “If the batteries in use are drawing power from the grids in the Midwest or South, much of the electricity will be coming from coal-fired plants. If it’s in New England or California, the grids rely more on renewables and natural gas, which emit less greenhouse gases and other toxic pollutants."
Posted by baybeefeetz
Member since Sep 2009
32977 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 12:29 pm to
What about overall carbon emissions from production process to end of life?
Posted by KamaCausey_LSU
Member since Apr 2013
17836 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 12:32 pm to
quote:

Amarakoon said. “If the batteries in use are drawing power from the grids in the Midwest or South, much of the electricity will be coming from coal-fired plants.


Maybe for the Midwest but the gulf coast uses mostly natural gas.
Posted by colorchangintiger
Dan Carlin
Member since Nov 2005
30979 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 12:36 pm to
quote:

Absent any incentives/subsidies, is it?


From a pure energy/cost perspective, yes. For $12 in electricity you can drive 300 miles.
Posted by LesMiles BFF
Lafayette
Member since May 2014
5101 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 12:38 pm to
Are you guys reading an Onion article again?
Posted by Hammertime
Will trade dowsing rod for titties
Member since Jan 2012
43031 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 12:39 pm to
And what happens when the batteries need replacement?
Posted by KamaCausey_LSU
Member since Apr 2013
17836 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 12:40 pm to
quote:

Are you guys reading an Onion article again?


Nah, it's the ground breaking research that heavier cars have more wear and tear on tires and brakes than lighter cars.
Posted by Breesy9
Member since May 2016
197 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 12:42 pm to
Can someone link or post the actual study.

Posted by bigrob385series
B. Aura
Member since May 2014
2636 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 12:43 pm to
quote:

Did they factor in disposing of the spent batteries?
i doubt it.pretty sure the disposing of large amounts of lithium and other materials from batteries should be considered pollution and factored in as well.
Posted by Tigerbait46
Member since Dec 2005
8066 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 12:44 pm to
Regarding the extended tailpipe theory for EVs:

quote:

Energy production is more efficient in a power plant than it is in a car engine. To use an example with an identical source fuel, burning natural gas in a power plant is about 60% efficient, meaning 40% of the energy of the fuel is lost in the energy production process. In a car, burning gas is less than 25% efficient, with the vast majority of the energy lost to heat. The larger more complex system at a power plant will always be far better at capturing waste heat than a tiny car engine. The increased efficiency means that even a car running purely on coal-generated electricity will emit carbon at the same rate as a gas car that gets 30 miles per gallon—which would be a significantly cleaner-than-average gas car. Because the breakdown of energy source is different in different states, an EV will be greener in some places than others.






quote:

Myth: EVs are a huge burden on the electric grid.
Actually: The grid is sized for the worst second of the worst day of the worst year—so there’s usually a lot of excess capacity. You could replace 70% of US gas car miles with EV miles with no changes to the grid. That percentage will also grow even higher as more homes get their power from solar panels.


Also, electricity production is diversified, becoming less reliant on coal and more reliant on cleaner sources. This means EVs will continue to become cleaner.

and regarding batteries:

quote:

Myth: The Tesla uses a lot of graphite in their battery, which contributes to China’s pollution problem.
Actually: The logic here is: “Tesla batteries use graphite; the world’s biggest source of graphite is in China; China has terrible pollution; therefore, Tesla is partially responsible for China’s pollution.” Except when I did some digging, I learned that Tesla uses synthetic graphite made mostly in Japan and Poland, and that the average Model S uses 100kg of it. That 100kg lasts for ten years, so the amount of graphite used to make a Model S is similar to the amount you’d use if you had a few barbecues a year.
Posted by colorchangintiger
Dan Carlin
Member since Nov 2005
30979 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 12:46 pm to
quote:

i doubt it.pretty sure the disposing of large amounts of lithium and other materials from batteries should be considered pollution and factored in as well.


It's all recycled, or should be. Even the spent lithium is still worth quite a bit.
Posted by makinskrilla
Lafayette, LA
Member since Jun 2009
9754 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 12:49 pm to
Comrade, you are wrong. Electric cars are much better than cars using "dirty fuels!"
Posted by Tigerbait46
Member since Dec 2005
8066 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 12:50 pm to
quote:

And what happens when the batteries need replacement?



quote:

Myth: EV battery disposal is hazardous. Actually: A) Lithium-ion cells used in cars aren’t especially hazardous and are classified as landfill safe, B) They’re almost all recycled anyway, and C) They’ll continue to be recycled, because a used car battery still has a lot of value, either as a stationary battery or in the raw materials themselves.


and

quote:

Tesla also recently unveiled a new Supercharger feature—the battery swap. A Tesla driver will be able to pull up to a little rectangle and stop the car. The ground opens up and a machine comes out and takes the car’s battery off, brings up a fresh battery and puts it on, and you’re good to go—all in 90 seconds. This would cost $60-80, or as much as an expensive tank of gas
Posted by bayoudude
Member since Dec 2007
25930 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:02 pm to
NO mention of the pollution involved in the creation and disposal of batteries? That alone is worse than internal combustion of fossil fuels.
Posted by bayoudude
Member since Dec 2007
25930 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:05 pm to
quote:

A Tesla driver will be able to pull up to a little rectangle and stop the car. The ground opens up and a machine comes out and takes the car’s battery off, brings up a fresh battery and puts it on, and you’re good to go—all in 90 seconds. This would cost $60-80, or as much as an expensive tank of gas


bullshite. No way the battery is that cheap hell even a traditional deep cycle battery is over $100 if you change it yourself.
Posted by pngtiger
Mobile
Member since May 2004
1838 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:07 pm to
I don't know where they got that 60% from. They are getting about 60% in combined cycle plants, but that's a relatively new thing. Straight natural gas is around 43% efficiency, not 60%

And like I said early, there is still significant loss in the transmission of that power, which that person didn't even address.

LINK

So, this is information reported by the US EIA. You take 3412 (btu equivalent of 1 kWh) and divide by the listed number, so:
Coal: 3412/10428 = 32%
Petrol: 3412/10814 = 31.5%
Natural gas: 3412/7907 = 43%
Nuclear: 3412/10459 = 32%
This post was edited on 5/19/16 at 1:20 pm
Posted by Tigerbait46
Member since Dec 2005
8066 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:17 pm to
quote:

NO mention of the pollution involved in the creation and disposal of batteries? That alone is worse than internal combustion of fossil fuels


Ready my posts.

1. Much of the graphite is sourced from the synthetic variant made in Japan and Europe, not China mines.

2. One Tesla Model S uses 100kg, which lasts ten years.

3. Tesla is building a battery factory that will be self-sufficient, powered by solar, wind, and geothermal energy.

4. Most of the batteries are recycled and they are considered safe for landfill disposal, not hazardous.
Posted by Tigerbait46
Member since Dec 2005
8066 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:25 pm to
LINK

This is the study referenced for the 60%. I haven't read through in detail.
Posted by AwesomeSauce
Das Boot
Member since May 2015
11625 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:36 pm to
quote:

Most of the batteries are recycled and they are considered safe for landfill disposal, not hazardous.

Current acidic ones or alkali metal batteries? Neither are safe for landfill disposal at all.
Posted by N2cars
Member since Feb 2008
40315 posts
Posted on 5/19/16 at 1:54 pm to
I would assume that electric cars, by their nature, are pretty heavy.

I know straight-acceleration is impressive, but I've always wondered how they handled.

first pageprev pagePage 2 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram