In the US, life cycle emissions for EVs are 60-68% lower than gasoline.

[jaslion]

7 minutes ago, Distinctly Average said:

The current big problem with Hydrogen is that most current supplies are made free m fossil fuels, so not greener at present. If you make it using electricity then it is a very inefficient process at present. You use electricity to create hydrogen then use the hydrogen to generate electricity. If it is generated as a store during times of over supply of electricity then that does make more sense

Thats what the current home hydrogen generator does. It's mean to be an overflow from your solar (and or wind) power. So basically a big battery yeah it's not as efficient but from what I've read has a lot less of an impact compared to using a battery bank for this. It is A LOT less efficient at it but it doesn't really need to be when it would be wasted energy anyway and it's not really doing anything harmful when generating as far as I know.

[StDragon]

1 minute ago, Mark Kaine said:

Yeap, with the climate of Venus if all goes according to plan…

 

 

These nihilistic takes always weird me out.  

No where near that bad. But purely from a national security POV, we do need renewable energy and a domestic supply chain to maintain it.

 

Remember, wars are fought over natural resources, fear, and pride. At the least we should mitigate against the former.

[BigDamn]

12 hours ago, poochyena said:

the grid isn't divided up by states https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_power_transmission_grid

Your point? Do some research. I'll give you a head start: https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.html

 

Quote

Oh no, I can't drive 500 miles in the western US in a single day driving non-stop. That is definitely a thing most americans regularly do and sure will interrupt many peoples lives!

It is something people do, why do you say this sarcastically? Eventually everyone will be driving EV's, but some people will adopt later than others depending on their needs. That's how this works.

[leadeater]

27 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Which means not having winters. Winters effectively cut your range in half

It's not really that bad, even when mine warms me air is very cold range isn't even close to halved. That being said many, if not all, new models now have battery pack heaters for this reason anyway and the small amount of power used to heat the battery pack is less than the range improvement given back.

[Distinctly Average]

32 minutes ago, jaslion said:

Thats what the current home hydrogen generator does. It's mean to be an overflow from your solar (and or wind) power. So basically a big battery yeah it's not as efficient but from what I've read has a lot less of an impact compared to using a battery bank for this. It is A LOT less efficient at it but it doesn't really need to be when it would be wasted energy anyway and it's not really doing anything harmful when generating as far as I know.

Great on a small scale but sadly there are few large scale plants. There is a great one on a Scottish island where they have taken green energy to new levels. In Norway there is a plant that IIRC is used to generate hydrogen to power a ferry. A steel plant in Sweden is the first fully powered by hydrogen but unfortunately the hydrogen is in big part from fossil fuel. We are getting there but still a long way to go.

[AlwaysFSX]

10 hours ago, poochyena said:

they could just rent a gasoline car

Want to travel further than an EV will let you in a reasonable amount of time? Rent a gasoline car! That will be banned and unavailable.

 

Hm. scratches head

Simple fact of the matter is until energy density and recharge times improve several-fold, EVs are a poorly planned disaster waiting to happen for a lot of people. Right now you need magnitudes more charging area if we were to switch completely because they charge so slowly and a huge amount of people can't plug-in at their place of living.

[jaslion]

25 minutes ago, Distinctly Average said:

Great on a small scale but sadly there are few large scale plants. There is a great one on a Scottish island where they have taken green energy to new levels. In Norway there is a plant that IIRC is used to generate hydrogen to power a ferry. A steel plant in Sweden is the first fully powered by hydrogen but unfortunately the hydrogen is in big part from fossil fuel. We are getting there but still a long way to go.

Very much so and can't be soon enough. Just like everything the first generations are never the best but are the ones that make or break a concept.

[Sauron]

1 hour ago, Beerzerker said:

That depends on the situation of the person(s) affected.
Not everyone has such transportation available as a "Whenever I need it, wherever I have to go" option. 

That's my point - in a lot of places, more could have been invested in improving availability and timeliness. I've been to some cities where you barely feel the need for a car thanks to excellent public transport systems.

 

I'm not saying we could get rid of all cars, but we could significantly reduce their use.

[Quackers101]

1 hour ago, ShrimpBrime said:

The entire battery, cooling and drive train systems are maintenance free. Go back, click the link I shared and read.

 

It's advertised and sold " maintenance free"

Not sure what you people can't figure out here.

maintenance free is a lie, any part can have issues and might need maintenance... (also if you are talking about EV in general or batteries)

if it's regular maintenance? maybe less to none. cables and eletric systems can still fail or need maintenance to software which is another can of worms.

Not to mention any part breaking or poor part added that will have issues, to get your car checked or towed.

[Mark Kaine]

1 hour ago, StDragon said:

No where near that bad

Its the absolutely super duper worst case scenario, but remember any water we lose is not coming back (I think thats the main issue in this scenario, besides the hellish temperatures and sulfuric acid rain, earth is afterall a water planet) 

 

Spoiler

Reminder what Venus atmosphere, which is thought to have been similar to earth once, looks like:

 

carbon dioxide gas (about 96%), nitrogen (about 3%), water vapor (0.003%)

 

 

1 hour ago, StDragon said:

Remember, wars are fought over natural resources, fear, and pride. At the least we should mitigate against the former.

In the end its usually over money, but I agree we should mitigate against a lot of shit…

 

We should have stopped burning fossil fuels long ago for example, there have always been alternatives but burning fossil fuel is just so much easier and lucrative (again, money being the reason)

 

 

PS: I would have thought cars are much less of a problem than people think, but "transportation" contributes 30% of GHG apparently, I see why they're looking for alternatives…

 

Personally, Id go nuclear tbh, so much time wasted already with current, inefficient uranium reactors tho… 

 

 

[poochyena]

54 minutes ago, AlwaysFSX said:

That will be banned and unavailable.

by who? Whose planning to ban all gasoline cars?

[Distinctly Average]

22 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

Its the absolutely super duper worst case scenario, but remember any water we lose is not coming back (I think thats the main issue in this scenario, besides the hellish temperatures and sulfuric acid rain, earth is afterall a water planet) 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Reminder what Venus atmosphere, which is thought to have been similar to earth once, looks like:

 

carbon dioxide gas (about 96%), nitrogen (about 3%), water vapor (0.003%)

 

 

In the end its usually over money, but I agree we should mitigate against a lot of shit…

 

We should have stopped burning fossil fuels long ago for example, there have always been alternatives but burning fossil fuel is just so much easier and lucrative (again, money being the reason)

 

 

PS: I would have thought cars are much less of a problem than people think, but "transportation" contributes 30% of GHG apparently, I see why they're looking for alternatives…

 

Personally, Id go nuclear tbh, so much time wasted already with current, inefficient uranium reactors tho… 

 

 

Unfortunately Nuclear is too expensive compared to other alternatives. Here in the UK, Hinckley Point C the s a testament to that. Add in the storage of waste and from a financial point of view alone it doesn’t make sense. Until we all have our own personal Mr Fusion of course. 

[Distinctly Average]

Just now, poochyena said:

by who? Whose planning to ban all gasoline cars?

Most European governments for a start. Sales of new ICE cars will be banned by 2030 in many countries. Why? Because they really are terrible for our health. Some cities have already banned them, some now charge for you to drive an ICE car in their zones. In Parts of China you are not allowed to but one and are forced to go EV unless you win one of the few plates allied each year. ICE is going the way of the dodo. It also appears correct grammar is dead too.

[Mark Kaine]

23 minutes ago, Distinctly Average said:

Unfortunately Nuclear is too expensive

This harks back to what i said, short term financial gains and shortsighted decisions over what would be the right thing to do. Tldr, i dont believe that to be the case, especially if you consider long term costs and effects.

 

23 minutes ago, Distinctly Average said:

in the storage of waste

" One of the unique benefits of a thorium reactor is that it can be mixed with current nuclear wastes that are produced. That means the waste products that are currently in storage could be used again as a power source. At the same time, when thorium is added to current nuclear waste, the storage time for the waste is reduced. Current estimates for nuclear storage are up to 100,000 years of maintenance. With thorium waste, the estimated time is just 300 years."

 

19 minutes ago, Distinctly Average said:

It also appears correct grammar is dead too.

Yup, rip. (thanks, smartphones)

 

 

Edit: wth happened to ITER? wasn't that supposed to finally solve all our issues like, last year?  *off to google i go*

 

Nope: "As of May 2021 the ITER is over 78% complete ... The construction of the facility is expected to be completed in 2025"

 

Thats a hell of a delay lol… 

[AlwaysFSX]

28 minutes ago, poochyena said:

by who? Whose planning to ban all gasoline cars?

EU, USA, wouldn't doubt Canada is on that list too. Have you been blissfully ignorant on the news of EVs?

[Quackers101]

2 minutes ago, AlwaysFSX said:

EU, USA, wouldn't doubt Canada is on that list too. Have you been blissfully ignorant on the news of EVs?

more like reduce and replace until it's all gone, which I guess will have strong taxes on non-EV or gas vehicles in the future to the point its "banned"?

[wanderingfool2]

2 hours ago, RejZoR said:

263 miles (423 km) in ideal conditions. Which means not having winters. Winters effectively cut your range in half. My petrol car does 600 km in any conditions and I only have to drive around 50kg of fuel that even gets lighter as it's being consumed.

At least the modern Tesla's with a heat pump don't cut range in half.  With a heat pump the range shouldn't be cut in half...actually the range only got cut in half when it was -21C (-5.8F), so in most places where the winter is milder real world numbers are much lower (in terms of % lost).  As the cell chemistry and cell density also increases it's likely we will see vehicles increase in range as well (without added cost).

 

2 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Refueling also takes a minute in ANY "recharge" station and I can pay for it without absolutely retarded apps that demand using smartphone.

The chargers near-by my house appear to just need a tap (albeit, our regulations are stupid here  in that they can't charge per kWh but instead by time...but that's local legislation at fault).  Also Tesla's super charger it pretty much does it for you.  My friend, who owns a Bolt EV, hasn't had to worry about "refueling" in a few years as he just gets home and plugs it in every other day and pretty much has his vehicle start in a topped up state.  This compared to me, where every month I need to drive 20 minutes round trip to a gas station (and spend 5 minutes at the pump) [I average 14 fill ups a year]...that's 5 hours 40 min a year of wasted time each year for my gas vehicle.

 

2 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Only reason one owns an EV now is to scream "I'm ECO". And they have bunch of money to throw around at prices EV's are going

That's a disingenuous comment.  Guess what, in my use case EV's make more sense.  I have friends who have EV's that bought it, and are happen with with because they don't have to go out of their way to fill up and it doesn't impact their driving.  It's also about neutral in cost when you factor in pricing of gas vs electric (if you are one to drive a vehicle until it needs super major repairs EV's come ahead though...or at least Telsa's do).  [Or course depending on your price of electricity vs gasoline but in many places it's even more favorable to electric].

 

2 hours ago, ShrimpBrime said:

The entire battery, cooling and drive train systems are maintenance free. Go back, click the link I shared and read.

 

It's advertised and sold " maintenance free"

Not sure what you people can't figure out here.

Boiling down a vehicle to the battery, cooling and drive train is silly.  The fact is it needs tire rotations/balancing/replacing more often than ICE vehicles (due to the weight), brake fluid still needs to be checked (although pads and such rarely replaced), also the brake calipers need greasing every year.  Is it less maintanence than ICE vehicles, yes...but it's not "maintenance free" and keeping that myth going is exactly what people will use against it (or create unsafe vehicles if they believe it)
 

 

[AlwaysFSX]

Just now, Quackers101 said:

more like reduce until it's all gone, which I guess will have strong taxes on non-EV or gas vehicles in the future to the point its "banned"?

You know, there's a slight difference between "you are not allowed to sell an ICE vehicle" and "hey we should gently 'encourage' people to prefer buying EVs over ICEs."

[CarlBar]

5 hours ago, StDragon said:

Totally agree. Hydrogen requires special tanks to store at high pressures in liquid form, leaks, and causes embrittlement for certain metals.

 

The most sensible option is carbon neutral synthetic gas (methane). Basically take hydrogen and bind it with carbon for ease of transport. In addition, we have the pipeline infrastructure in place to move it around. The downside is the energy loss in conversion.

 

You can't liquefy Hydrogen by pressure alone, (at least if your not talking pressures beyond anything we can produce here on earth), it has to be cooled to very low temperatures. Liquid Hydrogen isn't happening as anything but rocket fuel and experimental applications. Also the thought of what the stuff would do in the case of a tankage rupture. Brrrrrr.

[Master Delta Chief]

6 hours ago, hollyh88 said:

lol netherlands underwater? one of if not the best country when it comes to working with water and managing to control/keep it back? i doubt it.  we have learned from the past. adapted and overcome these water issues that would cause a flooding from the ocean.

You put way too much faith on those dams and dikes. I know the Dutch are really good at creating land and managing water flow, but at one point it will become as good as impossible to hold the large amounts that will eventually build up in the Atlantic. Also, the fact that very recently a few areas down the southern region were flooded by the immense amount of rain shows how climate change has a detrimental effect on certain regions in the world. 

[JZStudios]

21 hours ago, IkeaGnome said:

My old 6.9 IDI says you can't touch it with a 6 cylinder sound.

RIP Greenpeace

 

On an on topic note, if EVs were easily available in Alaska and I could get something that would hold up to our winters, I'd be all over it (hint hint Tesla or Ford)

That's actually kind of a problem, extreme changes in temperature can vastly reduce the lifespan of a battery.

 

20 hours ago, Senzelian said:

Interestingly enough I just found a masters thesis showing the necessary work that needs to be done to convert all gas stations at the A96 (Autobahn 96 (highway)) to electric charging stations. So this excludes the benefit of being able to charge at home.

According to this thesis it would require 18 nuclear power plants of the powerplant "Grohnde" to power the current traffic just on that one Autobahn.

The Autobahn 96 isn't even that large or particular outstanding in terms of its traffic.

Of course, who knows how accurate this is, especially considering it came out in 2018, but interesting nontheless.

https://opus.fhv.at/frontdoor/deliver/index/docId/2773/file/Masterarbeit_Reitmair.pdf

That's definitely the biggest issue no one wants to actually acknowledge. Whether it's plugged in overnight or there's fast chargers, it's still going to be using a shitload of electricity when places like Cali with it's "green" power is already frequently suffering from blackouts. The UK has to ramp up production for tea time. Solar power keeps being proven to be unsustainable for large companies, kills the surrounding environment, then falls into disuse or disarray. Homeowners panels only pay for themselves by the time they're worn out and need replacement. Then a bunch of places are switching over to biofuel plants instead of gas/coal/nuclear, which is fucking stupid. Instead of burning something cleanly and efficiently, we'll just go out and raze forests to burn that's significantly less of either. And when we run out of forests, we'll turn to animals, and then to just any other garbage like tire chips.

 

This whole CO2 emissions thing is a scam, none of this actually reduces anything, it just shuffles it around. Not to mention the ridiculously harmful chemicals the batteries are made from that have to be mined, poisoning the environment and the people forced into labor. There needs to be a massive restructuring of public transport so it's actually usable instead of having to drive 15 miles to work.

[IkeaGnome]

Just now, JZStudios said:

That's actually kind of a problem, extreme changes in temperature can vastly reduce the lifespan of a battery.

I think it's a big part of why they aren't hardly adopted here yet. In January, I've got a week that won't get above -30, and in the summer 29C isn't uncommon. 

1 minute ago, JZStudios said:

Solar power keeps being proven to be unsustainable for large companies, kills the surrounding environment, then falls into disuse or disarray.

Or there's not enough sun half the year for it to make enough energy.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200219-the-solar-farms-fighting-climate-change-in-alaska

Spoiler

Willow averages 2.2 metres (87 inches) of snow per year, which means solar panels can end up blanketed in snow and ice during the winter months.

“We have had to hire people for snow removal,” says Renewable’s Miller. “But in months like December, when it’s really dark, we just let the snow build up, as there isn’t enough daylight to warrant snow clearing. As we move into spring, when we are starting to get more hours of sun, we will come out and clear snow frequently.” At GVEA, they have the same philosophy on snow removal, leaving the panels buried during the least productive winter months and beginning scraping around February.

 

[JZStudios]

4 minutes ago, IkeaGnome said:

I think it's a big part of why they aren't hardly adopted here yet. In January, I've got a week that won't get above -30, and in the summer 29C isn't uncommon. 

Or there's not enough sun half the year for it to make enough energy.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200219-the-solar-farms-fighting-climate-change-in-alaska

  Reveal hidden contents

Willow averages 2.2 metres (87 inches) of snow per year, which means solar panels can end up blanketed in snow and ice during the winter months.

“We have had to hire people for snow removal,” says Renewable’s Miller. “But in months like December, when it’s really dark, we just let the snow build up, as there isn’t enough daylight to warrant snow clearing. As we move into spring, when we are starting to get more hours of sun, we will come out and clear snow frequently.” At GVEA, they have the same philosophy on snow removal, leaving the panels buried during the least productive winter months and beginning scraping around February.

 

I live in AZ, in the desert, so the batteries are more prone to overheating. The only other option in Alaska is biofuels, which are fucking stupid, or wind farms, which are also kind of dumb. Not sure how well they'll hold up to blizzards and the occasional hurricanes either.

[atxcyclist]

2 hours ago, AlwaysFSX said:

EU, USA, wouldn't doubt Canada is on that list too. Have you been blissfully ignorant on the news of EVs?

Probably not ignorant of EV news, but argumentative about EVs and prescribing solutions for everyone else without much experience. It’s someone that has never driven any real distance in a vehicle and doesn’t understand why anyone would ever do that; Just out of touch.

[Mark Kaine]

9 minutes ago, atxcyclist said:

It’s someone that has never driven any real distance in a vehicle and doesn’t understand why anyone would ever do that;

But theres a solution… you dont own the vehicle youre driving and when its time to refueling you just swap , at a "charge station" (including charge station sushi, if you so wish… )

 

Its a non issue basically.

 

11 minutes ago, atxcyclist said:

Just out of touch.

yup.