ETCgreen anti-EV FUD

[JRP3]

Seriously, you're all trying to educate someone who has no intention of listening to anything he isn't saying himself ... it doesn't matter what you say, his mind is made up. I suspect he's delighted he's gotten you all on his hook, is entertained by this, and is feeling totally self-righteous about his position. Pffffytt. I've seen plenty of people come to this forum with lack of facts & be willing to learn. etcgreen is not one of those people.

That's no reason to let his total misinformation go unchallenged. If he is really enjoying this factual beat down that's fine with me.

 

[dsm363]

Robert. I was just about to post the same thing:smile:
Nice work! It's nice to have someone like you, along with many others here, who thoroughly understands this topic to pick through etcgreen's 'article'. Thanks.

 

[vfx]

In a recent Edmunds poll, 97% of car buyers do not agree with your perspective on this issue.

Users polled believed that an Ipad would be of no use. Or a smart phone or a mobile phone or personal computer. When people don't know what is possible they don't know what they want.

 

[dsm363]

It's a know fact that 97% of statistics are made up on the spot and the remaining 3% is at least 50% biased.

 

[vfx]

It's a know fact that 97% of statistics are made up on the spot and the remaining 3% is at least 50% biased.

I 97% agree with you. And 3% wondering how 50% can be biased.

 

[ElSupreme]

In a recent Edmunds poll, 97% of car buyers do not agree with your perspective on this issue.

Damn it sounds like 97% of those people have never driven 700 miles straight. It sucks! I won't ever do it again. The TSA is worth not driving 700 miles.

 

[etcgreen]

"False. T&D for the grid is around 7%, of course the customer pays for it."

Having worked at the world's largest electric utility for several years in data analysis, I will beg to differ.

"False. Of the thousands of EV's on the road not a single one has ever exploded, let alone even caught fire, in an accident. The Volt battery in NHSTA testing never exploded."

The NHSTA test resulted in the battery catching fire. I was a PI for a DoD UAV project - Lithium batteries catch fire, explode and their materials/fluids spray out. It is ugly.

"False. Lithium batteries have little to no free liquid in them."

You are correct with "little" (I have modified the statement to include materials). The materials of a Lithium Ion battery is still rated toxic which requires a HAZMAT cleanup.

"A Prius does not use lithium batteries but NiMH."

That is correct - not sure why you are making this statement - our article does not state that a Prius uses Lithium (yet).

"No records exist of the thousands of Prius's in accidents spilling battery chemicals or causing hazardous spills."

How politically correct of you to state it this way. You must realize that chemicals from a Prius battery have, in fact, been leaked in an accident.

"Lithium cells pose even less of a risk."

Biodiesel is less toxic than table salt, is virtually non-flammable and is sustainable. EV's are not sustainable - unless you want to discuss the use of minerals from Mars. Have you researched what minerals and the amounts that are necessary to build EV's? Where do these minerals come from? Where are they mined? How many Chinese died to mine these minerals? EV's are far from Green.

"False. Coal is only 45% of the US grid."

Allow me to share the following - the typical coal plant generates electricity at .024/KwH vs. NG at .52 vs. wind at .12/KwH vs. solar at .18KwH. You can believe what you want to believe - I am sharing the facts with you.

It's also much easier to capture emissions from a single generating plant than millions of ICE vehicles."

Correct, but since the emissions from a vehicle burning B100 from 2nd generation feedstock "cleans the air in metro areas while running" - this is a positive item. EV's do not clean the air.

"Further, it is more efficient to simply burn biomass in a large generating plant to charge EV's than to process and refine it into fuel to burn in inefficient ICE vehicles."

Not even close. The energy conversion loss by your method is staggering. EV systems (not just the EV) are only about 45% efficient while the complete B100 from 2nd gen feedstock system is about 65% (with start/stop tech). You need to catch up - your arguments are out of date.

 

[bonnie]

See??

 

[dsm363]

I 97% agree with you. And 3% wondering how 50% can be biased.

Trying to figure that our myself. Making up statistics is tough.

 

[ElSupreme]

See??

On behalf of all of us we are deeply sorry.

 

[vfx]

Seriously, you're all trying to educate someone who has no intention of listening ....

Yes but it's a break from pointless door handle conversations.

 

[bonnie]

I personally prefer the long thread about door alternatives.

 

[ElSupreme]

Yes but it's a break from pointless door handle conversations.

I hear they are going to put a transmission in the Model S so the drive motor can retract the door handles. That way you can't open the door while it's moving. And to make sure there is just enough torque to get the closed all the way.

:scared:

 

[bonnie]

Nice one!

 

[dsm363]

I'd like to get back to talk about perpetual motion and solar panels on the car. Back to the official Tesla forums I guess.

 

[bonnie]

I'd like to get back to talk about perpetual motion and solar panels on the car. Back to the official Tesla forums I guess.

I've heard that Searcher is no longer making an appearance.

 

[dsm363]

I've heard that Searcher is no longer making an appearance.

I kind of miss him. He did seem very genuine though so have to give him credit. etcgreen is probably just doing lobbying work for his employer.

 

[Norbert]

EVs will not serve every transportation role; for example, long-range trucking is not promising territory for EVs.

While it may take longer for some roles, I do expect that electric transportation will also take over long-range trucking. For example, last time I checked IBM was still very optimistic about Lithium-Air. Several announcements have been made that the capacity of Lithium-Air has a potential even higher than IBM's direct goals. I'd expect that Lithium-Air will be able to provide the means for effective long-range trucking (in so far as it won't be replaced by electric trains for example).

I consult with 12 of the top 20 utilities in the country, and none of them have raised this issue, at least at this level of investment.

Also, at least two utilities have gone on record (one in South California, the other I think in the Portland area) saying that the distribution grid will be able to support a full (100%) electric fleet with modest efforts only, in relation. Yes, a number of neighborhood transformers will need upgrades. So what, they seem to in any case.

 

[qwk]

If biodiesel is less toxic than a tablespoon of salt, how about you do us all a favor and drink a few pints of it. Deal?

 

[richkae]

Consistent evasion when facts are shown to be false or exaggerated.
If the case for biofuels is so clear, why the lieing?

The reason that trolls exist to push biofuel and hydrogen and other pie in the sky chemical fuel alternatives is to delay the development of an infrastructure that allows us to escape the peddlers of chemical fuel.