EVs - New Hampshire gets it right

[1dog]

Natural gas generation is 44% efficient, coal is 32%. Worldwide use of coal is 36%, world wide use of natural gas is 23% of electricity production. (US is 20% coal and 40% natural gas)

So currently a weighted average in the US is 40% efficiency on generation of electricity, which comprises 60% of the electricity generated. Due to the lower efficiency of coal, the fossil fuel generation is not more efficient at the powerplant than in your car. Much worse on a world wide basis.

Of course, the non carbon sources for electricity generation mean lower carbon emissions for an electric vehicle. In the US, 60% is still fossil fuel, and 18% is nuclear. Only 22% is 'green' renewables.

So all this R&D, and push to spend more money on the purchase price of electric cars is to save 36% on carbon emissions. (40% less the 10% loss from all electric transmission, storage and motor losses) The US contributes 14% of worldwide carbon emissions. In the US, transportation accounts for 28% of carbon emissions. Of all the transportation sources, cars contribute 45%. So on a worldwide basis, by transitioning to electric vs ICE engines we will be reducing worldwide carbon by 36% of 45% of 28% of 14%. Thats going to be a small number.

US transportation carbon emissions: ...28%
Of that cars are 45%..................................12.6%
Of that, electric cars reduce by 36% ...4.5%

By transitioning all of our US cars to electric, (not going to happen) we would save 0.63% of worldwide carbon emissions. Compare that to worldwide savings by reducing coal, using more natural gas, and more nuclear. Spending time and capital on electric cars doesn't seem that rewarding.

Giving control away. . . the countries with the energy sources are the ones who have the most control over their own destiny.

Some fun facts:

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/09/the-daily-chart-who-has-the-metals.p

Looks like South America - or whomever has control and influence of said country's- has a future.

No one still has answered the base question - where is all this electricity coming from?

Epoch News - behind a paywall, has Lindzen and Happer. both emeritus MIT and Princeton, respectively - so they can speak freely not concerned for their jobs or where federal money for 'studies' are coming from claim it is all a hoax.

CO2 is a greenhouse gas, as is water vapor and a lot of other GHG's. Except we exhale it, and plants use it.

Concept of 'saturation' is that 400 PPM today to 800PPM ( we will never get there) has a highly reduced effect of radiation ( Happer specialty- previous to Princeton he was head of energy research at the Dept of Energy. his quote ' I was funding a lot of this work, and I knew very well then that these models were overpredicting the warming by a huge amount.')

From article it would increase radiation to space by 1%.

Found it:

Happer, Lindzen: EPA Climate Regulations Based on a ‘Hoax’ | Principia Scientific Intl.

William Happer and Richard Lindzen argue the EPA regulations on cutting CO2 will be disastrous for the US

principia-scientific.com

 

[Harvey]

In the US ... 22% is 'green' renewables.

22% is more than I thought.

Any way to see this number graphed over the last 10 years?

 

[1dog]

22% is more than I thought.

Any way to see this number graphed over the last 10 years?

Everything I’ve read is closer to 4% ( wind/solar) so maybe that includes bio-fuels?

 

[ceo]

By transitioning all of our US cars to electric, (not going to happen) we would save 0.63% of worldwide carbon emissions. Compare that to worldwide savings by reducing coal, using more natural gas, and more nuclear. Spending time and capital on electric cars doesn't seem that rewarding.

Even if your numbers are correct (and I'm pretty sure they're not, but I don't have time to do the research right now), you're ignoring the fact that EVs can take advantage of the transition to more renewable sources and ICE vehicles can't.

 

[Harvey]

EVs can take advantage of the transition to more renewable sources and ICE vehicles can't.

I always assumed that is why they are putting on the pressure to use electric for heat.

 

[2Planker]

Just roadtripped to Bangor and back in the new F150 Lightening. Very nice indeed, and that "Frunk" is massive

 

[BodeMiller1]

Just roadtripped to Bangor and back in the new F150 Lightening. Very nice indeed, and that "Frunk" is massive

If you figure out how much it costs per mile I'd like to know.

 

[mister moose]

Even if your numbers are correct (and I'm pretty sure they're not, but I don't have time to do the research right now), you're ignoring the fact that EVs can take advantage of the transition to more renewable sources and ICE vehicles can't.

I'll post sources if you'd like. Many were US Gov sites.

Yes, if and when a higher percentage of the grid is renewables EVs will benefit. My issue is the mandated push to EV is occurring far before the grid and generation will be there to support it. California's mandate to be zero emission by 2035 is laughable.

 

[BenedictGomez]

If you figure out how much it costs per mile I'd like to know.

Ehhh.... almost nobody ever does this analysis correctly, because they fail to consider the fact that the EV F150 costs like $23,000 more than the ICE F150, and that's even more relevant today with an interest rate of roughly 7%.

The people who buy these things just love to say, "oh I'm SAY-ving SO much money on gas!!!!", but they're completely financially oblivious.

 

[SteezyRob]

If you figure out how much it costs per mile I'd like to know.

new profile picture

 

[mister moose]

Seen today...

 

[1dog]

Ehhh.... almost nobody ever does this analysis correctly, because they fail to consider the fact that the EV F150 costs like $23,000 more than the ICE F150, and that's even more relevant today with an interest rate of roughly 7%.

The people who buy these things just love to say, "oh I'm SAY-ving SO much money on gas!!!!", but they're completely financially oblivious.

Prices falling a bit, they are not moving as quickly as expected. And our help, in the form of subsidies both on consumer side in form of rebates and subsidizing the companies to build these . . . . . I can't believe they are doing it on their own without government help ( or push). Now they have the UAW screaming.

How is that mileage/distance gonna be in 10 degree weather? Asking for a friend. ( I do own a plug-in hybrid- it is impacted immensely from cold)

“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money”

-Alexis De Tocqueville

Has anyone answered the question yet? Where is all this power coming from?

 

[Puck it]

Has anyone answered the question yet? Where is all this power coming from?

 

[Harvey]

Cost per mile is only one metric in car buying decisions. No one is buying either F150 (EV or ICE) if cost per mile is most important to them.

I agree EVs aren't there yet. And I will never be an "early adopter" of new technology. But people who are, are important to technological advancement.

 

[Harvey]

( I do own a plug-in hybrid- it is impacted immensely from cold)

This is why we are going with regular hybrids. When we were looking for a new car in March, the dealers around us wanted almost 10k more for the RAV pluggin vs the RAV hybrid. In cold and hilly terrain (moving to the mountains next year) it didn't make sense to us.

 

[Newpylong]

I always assumed that is why they are putting on the pressure to use electric for heat.

I installed heat pumps because they cost considerably less than propane (which I still retain as backup for the negative digits) to heat and cost less than window units to cool. I felt no pressure to do so and could care less where the power comes from lol.

 

[Harvey]

I installed heat pumps because they cost considerably less than propane (which I still retain as backup for the negative digits) to heat and cost less than window units to cool. I felt no pressure to do so and could care less where the power comes from lol.

This is exactly what I am doing too.

It makes the point that when new technology provides the consumer an advantage, it will be adopted.

The argument starts when you have to decide how to get there, and how imperative it is to move ahead.

Once EVs are truly better for the consumer Benedict will likely stop grinding the ax.

 

[BodeMiller1]

View attachment 59079

All power is nuclear. Whether from coal or gas or wind. It all starts with the sun.

Coal is from dead animals and plants, "powered" or nurtured by the sun. Etc....

Does this have anything to with EVs. It all depends on how far you want to go.

Energy cannot be created or destroyed, only transferred. When Mr. Moose talks about these kinds of things, he includes energy lost because of imperfect systems. For example heat lost. He is correct. This is the level scientists in think tanks......

Meow

 

[BodeMiller1]

This is exactly what I am doing too.

It makes the point that when new technology provides the consumer an advantage, it will be adopted.

The argument starts when you have to decide how to get there, and how imperative it is to move ahead.

Once EVs are truly better for the consumer Benedict will likely stop grinding the ax.

You're assuming consumers act in reasonable and predicable ways. If this were true no one would be driving a 5 series BMW living in an apartment.

Game, set, meow

 

[BodeMiller1]

Seen today...

Clamydia Change?