EV Physics question

[nctnico]

What I'm trying to understand is you don't get something for nothing, nobody has invented perpetual motion yet.

In terms of energy and resources The total 'cost" of propelling 2 ton of metal at 50mph should be the same, right ?  Regardless of what source of power you use.

In theory yes.

The big problem is that at this moment there are a lot of wheels in motion especially when considering there is a transition going on from using fossil fuels to 'fuels' (electricity and hydrogen) that are produced without CO2 or other air polluting emissions (nuclear, solar and wind). But to get there, we need fossil fuels. Currently BEVs have a large CO2 footprint simply because the factories are powered by fossil fuels. But that is changing gradually both where it comes to manufacturing and sourcing the electricity.

But you need to look at cost versus distance driven to make a good estimation on what technology will end up on top. In the end the TCO (cost per distance driven) of a car is what counts to most people. Some people get lost in comparing efficiencies or looking at repair costs. Don't fall into that trap. Efficiencies don't matter because these are already being accounted for in cost per distance and repair costs are typically (*) dwarfed by 'fuelling' costs over the lifetime of a car.

* The trick of buying a low TCO car is to make sure to buy a model which doesn't have a history of expensive repairs like needing complete engine / battery pack replacements.

[CatalinaWOW]

Your argument could be used to explain why we should never develop electric cars (or planes).  Because personal automobiles are really a bad solution from a variety of perspectives.  We should eliminate single family dwellings, build arcologies and use only trains for long distance transport.  Yeah, there is massive capital investment in making that change, but think how wonderful it would be.

That sounds like hell to me. I think I would rather be dead than imprisoned in an apartment in crowded urban city. A single family home on some land is the only arrangement I find tolerable. As it stands I can hardly wait for the day I can retire and move somewhere rural with more open space around me and fewer people clogging the roads. I have to go into downtown Seattle sometimes for work and I absolutely hate it there.

Hell might be a bit extreme, but it is way down on my list of desired futures.  But this is a perfect example of why it is difficult to evaluate alternative approaches to constructing a future.  Wind energy has been mentioned favorably here, but it is many peoples version of visual hell.  How do you factor in the aesthetic costs.  Or nuclear energy.  The fear many feel of this, whether it is justified or not is real.  How to factor that cost in?  There really is no good analytics for this.  But that is no excuse for just magically saying this or that problem is not real, or is simple to solve.

[radiolistener]

EV's are cleaner and more sustainable long term

Actually not. It uses batteries which needs to be replaced after several years and old batteries produce a lot of garbage which pollutes the environment with harmful substances. For example, one battery for Tesla contains 7104 small batteries. It equals to 7000 phones or other gadgets.

[TimFox]

Your argument could be used to explain why we should never develop electric cars (or planes).  Because personal automobiles are really a bad solution from a variety of perspectives.  We should eliminate single family dwellings, build arcologies and use only trains for long distance transport.  Yeah, there is massive capital investment in making that change, but think how wonderful it would be.

That sounds like hell to me. I think I would rather be dead than imprisoned in an apartment in crowded urban city. A single family home on some land is the only arrangement I find tolerable. As it stands I can hardly wait for the day I can retire and move somewhere rural with more open space around me and fewer people clogging the roads. I have to go into downtown Seattle sometimes for work and I absolutely hate it there.

Hell might be a bit extreme, but it is way down on my list of desired futures.  But this is a perfect example of why it is difficult to evaluate alternative approaches to constructing a future.  Wind energy has been mentioned favorably here, but it is many peoples version of visual hell.  How do you factor in the aesthetic costs.  Or nuclear energy.  The fear many feel of this, whether it is justified or not is real.  How to factor that cost in?  There really is no good analytics for this.  But that is no excuse for just magically saying this or that problem is not real, or is simple to solve.

As Sartre wrote in his play "Huis Clos" ("No Exit"), "Hell is other people."  https://www.ttbook.org/interview/what-sartre-meant-hell-other-people
Before moving to a small detached single-family house in the city of Chicago, convenient to public transportation, I grew damned tired of noise from neighboring apartments.

[james_s]

Hell might be a bit extreme, but it is way down on my list of desired futures.  But this is a perfect example of why it is difficult to evaluate alternative approaches to constructing a future.  Wind energy has been mentioned favorably here, but it is many peoples version of visual hell.  How do you factor in the aesthetic costs.  Or nuclear energy.  The fear many feel of this, whether it is justified or not is real.  How to factor that cost in?  There really is no good analytics for this.  But that is no excuse for just magically saying this or that problem is not real, or is simple to solve.

For me it isn't extreme, I absolutely loathe the urban environment, it makes me feel like a caged animal. I'm much like a cat, I need to have a territory, a personal space that is mine to wander, I don't enjoy being in close proximity to large numbers of people, it feels suffocating. Personally I find wind turbines beautiful and graceful like enormous kinetic sculptures and would love to have a view of a field of them from my back deck. I wonder if they would gain greater acceptance if they were given interesting paint schemes rather than plain white.

[james_s]

Actually not. It uses batteries which needs to be replaced after several years and old batteries produce a lot of garbage which pollutes the environment with harmful substances. For example, one battery for Tesla contains 7104 small batteries. It equals to 7000 phones or other gadgets.

The batteries should last 15-20 years in most cases, and they can be recycled to recover the materials. I suspect there will be a thriving business recycling EV batteries, and before that another layer salvaging and selling the cells for other uses. The latter already exist, companies like Battery Hookup sell salvaged rechargeable lithium batteries of many types. I have bought some of them to use in various projects.

[nctnico]

Hell might be a bit extreme, but it is way down on my list of desired futures.  But this is a perfect example of why it is difficult to evaluate alternative approaches to constructing a future.  Wind energy has been mentioned favorably here, but it is many peoples version of visual hell.  How do you factor in the aesthetic costs.  Or nuclear energy.  The fear many feel of this, whether it is justified or not is real.  How to factor that cost in?  There really is no good analytics for this.  But that is no excuse for just magically saying this or that problem is not real, or is simple to solve.

For me it isn't extreme, I absolutely loathe the urban environment, it makes me feel like a caged animal. I'm much like a cat, I need to have a territory, a personal space that is mine to wander, I don't enjoy being in close proximity to large numbers of people, it feels suffocating. Personally I find wind turbines beautiful and graceful like enormous kinetic sculptures and would love to have a view of a field of them from my back deck. I wonder if they would gain greater acceptance if they were given interesting paint schemes rather than plain white.

Have you ever been close to one? The make a crapload of noise! You can hear them clearly from over 1km away. Trust me, you don't want wind turbines in your backyard!

Where I live there are lots of wind turbines installed and I can't say it looks pretty. Hundreds of wind turbines as far as the eye can see and more are being added. I'd rather look at a forrest with waving trees or so. And throw in some mountains while you are at it  .

[themadhippy]

Hundreds of wind turbines as far as the eye can see

But aint that part of your historical culture,windmills everywhere

[james_s]

Have you ever been close to one? The make a crapload of noise! You can hear them clearly from over 1km away. Trust me, you don't want wind turbines in your backyard!

Where I live there are lots of wind turbines installed and I can't say it looks pretty. Hundreds of wind turbines as far as the eye can see and more are being added. I'd rather look at a forrest with waving trees or so. And throw in some mountains while you are at it  .

Sure, there are loads of them in Eastern Washington, I was just over in Ellensburg last week. I never got close enough to them to hear more than a faint swooshing noise, mostly they're up on the hills and not all that close to houses but I had a nice view of them. At night they've got red obstruction beacons that all flash in sync too, I thought it was cool. I've lived in a heavily forested and mountainous area my whole life, the forest of windmills is somewhat novel to me.

[radiolistener]

The batteries should last 15-20 years in most cases, and they can be recycled to recover the materials.

At the moment just about 5% can be recycled, but it cost too much, so they are just sent to third world countries and simply dumped in landfills, poisoning the environment, because it is more cheap. Yes, of course they said that they recycle it and get money for that recycle from government, but in reality this is lie. You can find evidence on youtube.

So called "green technology" is actually worldwide corruption schemes to steal money from government budgets under the pretext of subsidies and benefits for "green" companies. They said that they need to increase taxes and utility rates in order to pay more money for protecting environment. But in reality they take money from citizens and give it to the oligarchs and worldwide private corporations who enrich themselves by using governments for their personal purposes. And unfortunately no one can stop it, because government have right to get your money and give it to the oligarchs, and you can't reject it.

This is why solar panels and wind farms are so popular, these "green technology" allows scammers and corrupt officials to rob the citizens with high taxes and tariffs. In reality any engineer realize that solar panels and wind farms cannot provide enough energy for mankind and cannot replace oil, gas and nuclear technology to obtain energy.

For example, current electricity cost price at nuclear power plants is about 0.014 USD per kWh or 14 USD per MWh (this price is taken from official reports). It includes all expenses for nuclear power plant. Just compare it with price which you pay, there is a huge margin due to taxes and earnings for intermediaries due to these "green energy" corruption schemes with solar panels or wind farms...

In some countries government pays 0.00244 USD per kWh or 2.44 USD per MWh to a nuclear power plants, but at the same time government provides guarantee buy at 50 times more expensive price from these "green energy" private companies who produce electricity with solar panels and wind farms. All expenses are covered from citizens taxes and utility rate. This example shows why "green energy" is very interesting for government officials...


I think the same story with EV... It looks cool, but it hides too many issues which mankind will realize 15-20 years later, when these spent batteries create a real problem for Earth environment... But at the moment it allows some enterprising people to make money on it with help of government, because this technology is actually too expensive

The only technology which can provide mankind with enough energy at a cheap price is a nuclear technology, such as nuclear power plants.

There is also thermonuclear fusion talks, but it looks like scam, the same as "green technology", because they spend a lot of money on research, but for many years there are no results in this area. So, it looks that they doing such research just to get more money from government...

[pcprogrammer]

Hundreds of wind turbines as far as the eye can see

But aint that part of your historical culture,windmills everywhere

Yes they are, but an old traditional windmill has much more appeal, at least to me, than these modern ones with a long steel tower and these huge, hard to recycle, fiberglass blades.

And the density of the historical ones was never as high as what you see nowadays. To me, landscape pollution.

As for the EV versus ICE, there are pro's and con's to list for either, but to think that EV's are going to provide a sustainable alternative is wishful thinking. To make them you still need lots of other resources that are finite, just the same as fossil fuels. The same applies to making the needed windmills and solar-panels to harvest the needed electricity to run them. I wrote this before, it is shifting the problem to be solved, not solving the actual problem.

And recycling is all very nice, but it is expensive, requires a lot of energy and possibly harmful chemicals, and the latter can become another waste problem, where just as seen over many years, people don't want to pay for a proper solution, and the stuff gets spilled into nature, poisoning more of our valuable living space.

[pcprogrammer]

... I absolutely loathe the urban environment, it makes me feel like a caged animal. I'm much like a cat, I need to have a territory, a personal space that is mine to wander, I don't enjoy being in close proximity to large numbers of people, it feels suffocating. .....

I can relate to that. Just back from a visit to the in laws in the Netherlands, and even though not one of the bigger towns (Roermond and surrounding villages) I feel suffocated being there. Rather sit on my new terrace or look out of the windows and see the trees, meadows and hills around our house. Nearest neighbors >150 meters away, without them looking into your garden. Freedom and privacy.

[tszaboo]

Hundreds of wind turbines as far as the eye can see

But aint that part of your historical culture,windmills everywhere

Yes they are, but an old traditional windmill has much more appeal, at least to me, than these modern ones with a long steel tower and these huge, hard to recycle, fiberglass blades.

So we just wait a hundred years, when these are going to be the novelty, which are part of the the usual view of the coast.
Or ask a 4 year old if they mind it.
I rather listen to gentle whooshing from wind turbines, than to a hipster on a petrol moped. It's amazing that mopeds are not banned yet in Europe.

[pcprogrammer]

So we just wait a hundred years, when these are going to be the novelty, which are part of the the usual view of the coast.
Or ask a 4 year old if they mind it.

A hundred years is way beyond my time left on earth, and if the whole planet is going to be filled with these "novelties" then I'm glad that I'm not there to watch it. Asking a 4 year old about it is silly, because they don't have a notion yet of what the world is about, let alone a solid knowledge of history. Give them candy and they will agree with everything.

I rather listen to gentle whooshing from wind turbines, than to a hipster on a petrol moped. It's amazing that mopeds are not banned yet in Europe.

Have not been close to a wind turbine, large or small, so can't say anything about the sound they make, but agree very much on not liking the sound of a not properly silenced combustion engine. Being it mopeds, hogs or roadsters on what ever number of wheels.

[sokoloff]

1. If there is not enough capacity more power stations can be built, power stations are money printers, businesses will want to build power stations (and charging points).

1.  If that is true why is electricity getting so expensive in some areas?  Perhaps even if there were adequate power plants, we'd still need fuel for them and perhaps expanded distribution networks?  Not trivial issues IMHO.

The fact that electricity is getting expensive is exactly aligned with the business opportunity angle here, not a refutation of the point. It's the "bat signal" that causes businesses to satisfy the demand for electricity.

[f4eru]

The fact that electricity is getting expensive is exactly aligned with the business opportunity angle here, not a refutation of the point. It's the "bat signal" that causes businesses to satisfy the demand for electricity.

Yep. Time to install renewable electricity generation like there would finally really be a tomorrow

Germany is already at 50% renewable electricity, just waking up to attack the other half (Yeah, they are very very inefficient at it)

[james_s]

Yep. Time to install renewable electricity generation like there would finally really be a tomorrow

Germany is already at 50% renewable electricity, just waking up to attack the other half.

You act like that's some trivial thing to accomplish. The first 50% was the easy part in comparison. Trying to be 100% renewable is going to take decades and cost vast sums of money that has to come from somewhere.

[nctnico]

Yep. Time to install renewable electricity generation like there would finally really be a tomorrow

Germany is already at 50% renewable electricity, just waking up to attack the other half.

You act like that's some trivial thing to accomplish. The first 50% was the easy part in comparison. Trying to be 100% renewable is going to take decades and cost vast sums of money that has to come from somewhere.

Indeed. The last 5% of the work needs 99% of the effort. The hurdle to overcome at this point is putting storage into place which is neither cheap and easy to accomplish.

[f4eru]

Indeed. The last 5% of the work needs 99% of the effort.

Sure. Let's go to 95% fast, then take all the time needed to tackle the last 5%.
Best cost/pollution investment ever.

[nctnico]

Indeed. The last 5% of the work needs 99% of the effort.

Sure. Let's go to 95% fast, then take all the time needed to tackle the last 5%.
Best cost/pollution investment ever.

You are way too optimistic... Getting to the next stage requires getting nuclear power plants, foreign wind + solar and hydrogen infrastructure, transport & storage going. The wheels are in motion but it will take at least another decade to have a significant effect. Meanwhile contribution from local solar + wind will reach a plateau.

[f4eru]

Getting to the next stage requires getting nuclear power plants, foreign wind + solar and hydrogen infrastructure, transport & storage going.

Totally Wrong.

https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/de/veroeffentlichungen/studien/wege-zu-einem-klimaneutralen-energiesystem.html

[nctnico]

Brush up your German because the report you linked to says hydrogen is a key buildingblock for the energy transition. The report also says that hydrogen will be used for energy storage and a lot of it will be imported from other countries. Local solar and wind alone simply are not enough to cover the energy needs (no surprise there given the location of Germany). And ofcourse nuclear isn't mentioned because at the time the report was written, Germany was still planning to halt nuclear power but it looks like the Germans are going to make a 180 on that.

[redkitedesign]

The cost of rooftop solar in .nl or .de is about 5ct/kWh. That used to be barely competetive with gas or coal powered generation, which would often drop below 4ct/kWh.

However, without russian gas, electricity can easily cost 25ct/kWh.

That makes rooftop solar (and offshore wind at 6ct/kWh) suddenly hugely competitive. So competitive, that solar installation costs have recently soared too...

Converting electricity to hydrogen or methane is not really hard, however the yield is low (at most 80%). Converting that methane back to electricity makes the yield even lower (like 40%).

However, with a summer price for electricity of 5ct/kWh, that would result in a winter price based on methane produced in summer of 12ct/kWh. Add a few cents for the equipement (current gas powered turbines are at about 1ct/kWh).

Thats still less than the current fossil-gas based power cost, and less than the cost for new nuclear (20ct/kWh based on Hinkley Point C)

Oh, and methane stores easily. As in Europe currently has a full winter usage in storage allready.

[f4eru]

Energy storage, yes, as a last resort for long term storage.
Transportation, nope.

[tszaboo]

The cost of rooftop solar in .nl or .de is about 5ct/kWh. That used to be barely competetive with gas or coal powered generation, which would often drop below 4ct/kWh.

However, without russian gas, electricity can easily cost 25ct/kWh.

That makes rooftop solar (and offshore wind at 6ct/kWh) suddenly hugely competitive. So competitive, that solar installation costs have recently soared too...

Converting electricity to hydrogen or methane is not really hard, however the yield is low (at most 80%). Converting that methane back to electricity makes the yield even lower (like 40%).

However, with a summer price for electricity of 5ct/kWh, that would result in a winter price based on methane produced in summer of 12ct/kWh. Add a few cents for the equipement (current gas powered turbines are at about 1ct/kWh).

Thats still less than the current fossil-gas based power cost, and less than the cost for new nuclear (20ct/kWh based on Hinkley Point C)

Oh, and methane stores easily. As in Europe currently has a full winter usage in storage allready.

Your numbers are off. P2G2P has a round trip efficiency of 60-70% today, expected to become even more energy efficient in the future. And it's a seasonal storage, unlike any energy storage method, battery or even hydro. Plus, you don't even need to think about the G2P part, because it is well understood and has been working for decades now. You can even just feed in the methane to the gas network, and turn ordinary houses heating system renewable, without any investment of the owner.
It's the ultimate, low investment/high effect technology that likely be enough for this entire century. Considering that it literally reverses global warming with carbon capture.