ETCgreen anti-EV FUD

[JRP3]

I have served as an Analyst and Engineer for 30 years for the DoD, DoE, various universities and 4 Fortune 100 Corps.

No wonder they are all so screwed up if they take the data that you provide at face value. You have almost everything completely wrong.
The average new vehicle purchase price in 2010 was around $29K. Including used vehicles in a comparison of new EV's is completely misleading. Not surprising you'd do so.
http://www.road-reality.com/2010/07/15/average-new-car-purchase-price-rises-in-2010/
Mercedes, BMW, Audi, etc. sell millions of vehicles each year, I'd say that's a good market for Tesla.
The average lifetime of a vehicle is around 13 years and less than 150K miles, so your 300K number is also BS:
http://www.safecarguide.com/gui/new/neworused.htm
Here's a research paper showing that EV's are not more environmentally damaging than ICE vehicles for their lifetime:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-08/sflf-te083010.php

You have failed to post a single referenced fact. No surprise from a FUD master.

 

[rolosrevenge]

And he didn't answer the IEEE spectrum rebuttal of his biofuels argument, nor the fact that he doesn't even know the proper unit abbreviation, a true researcher doesn't throw arguments, they throw peer reviewed sources. I highly doubt this person is an engineer or an analyst, just a spewer of BS.

 

[dpeilow]

I'd be quite happy for this discussion to move to the ETCgreen website. We play away and at home - you can even bring your friends.

 

[qwk]

I'd be quite happy for this discussion to move to the ETCgreen website. We play away and at home - you can even bring your friends.

:biggrin: lol

 

[Robert.Boston]

Interesting, he never rebutted any of my arguments...

 

[qwk]

Interesting, he never rebutted any of my arguments...

He only picks and chooses. Amazingly, all of his rebuttals are lies and no proof. I would love to see some math(although that favors EV's so he is avoiding it like the plague).

 

[vfx]

Can we spilt to an ETC Biofuels rant?

 

[rolosrevenge]

Interesting, he never rebutted any of my arguments...

Nor mine, since I cited a very reputable source.

 

[doug]

Woah... I totally missed all the activity on this thread lately. Split off as requested.

I've only managed to skim this, but wow so much FUD, it's hard to know where to begin. But as a semiconductor physics guy, one that really stuck out to me, and that ETC brings up a couple times was this:

To manufacture solar panels, one must have rare earth minerals - a great deal of rare earth minerals.

Rare?? You mean mean like silicon?? The second most abundant element in the earth's crust (after oxygen)???

 

[dpeilow]

Maybe ETCgreen's studies say we should run all this on biodiesel?

 

[ElSupreme]

Maybe ETCgreen's studies say we should run all this on biodiesel?

YEAH! It cleans the air!

EDIT: I can't believe we were at over 80 posts.

 

[rolosrevenge]

Alors pourquoi pas pour voyager?

I love it!

 

[strider]

few years ago, all diesel cars from volkswagen/audi were ready to run on pure biodiesel (not pure rape oil or other cold pressed veg. oil). But when the oil-industrie fears to loose market share to the farmer, the EU put pressure to tax bio-diesel (and veg. oil) higher. Today biodiesel is priced higher then diesel which has up to 7% biodiesel added (to the welfare of the oil industry) (now they can dictate the price for biodiesel)

Yep. Here in the states, there is a biodiesel tax credit but it must include at least some petro-diesel. So most people run B99.

That being said, My wife drives a diesel Jeep Liberty and has run on B99 for 98,000 of it's 100,000 mile life with no ill effects. It actually runs much better on bio than on petro-diesel. But you are correct in that Jeep only warranties B5 however this has struck me as a bit odd. If you have a fuel problem (say there was water mixed w/ the fuel - whether it's petro or bio) the manufacturer will not warranty your vehicle and will charge you for the repairs - you will have to try and recover the cost from the fuel station. So bad fuel is bad fuel whether it's B0, B5, or B100. All that to mean, you can buy any new diesel vehicle today and run B100 in it with no problems and no effects to your warranty.

Finding that fuel is another story. The fuel we run comes from the waste oil from a tortilla chip factory. But if they didn't make biodiesel out of it they would sell it to farmers that would add it to cattle feed so it's not like it would go to waste. TODAY, running biodiesel does take away from food. As others have stated, once we get algae bio production scaled up that will be viable as you can make a lot of fuel from a pretty small space but like "cheap solar" it's still coming.

The point I'm trying to make is that this isn't a black and white issue. There is room for several different sources of energy and modes to transport that energy (electricity, biofuels, hydrogen, etc) depending on the use case. Can't we all just get along?

 

[ElSupreme]

But you are correct in that Jeep only warranties B5 however this has struck me as a bit odd.

This is mostly due to the fact that Bio-Diesel is very tough on rubbers use in traditional fuel lines. It will swell and warp parts in your fuel lines if you are not careful. It won't hurt the car really in any other way. The same with ethanol in gasoline cars. I always thought the 'FlexFuel' was weird branding.

 

[Eberhard]

if you use biodiesel for the first time, then it will clean the mess up, taking away all dirt and plaque from you tank and pipes and may block you filter if you don't clean or replace it on time.

 

[JRP3]

The point I'm trying to make is that this isn't a black and white issue. There is room for several different sources of energy and modes to transport that energy (electricity, biofuels, hydrogen, etc) depending on the use case. Can't we all just get along?

Sure but there is a huge issue of scaleability and efficiency. Waste cooking oils will only be a drop in the bucket. Liquid fuels still rely on inefficient ICE's, which is why the study I referenced showed better use of biomass by simply burning it in generating plants to charge EV's instead of going through all the work, and energy, involved in turning it into liquid fuels for individual ICE's. Biomass is still a limited resource after all, no sense wasting it.

 

[dpeilow]

They also all compete for the same funding, the same physical resources and in the end the same tax breaks. We shouldn't waste these on the wrong solution.

'We need a range of solutions' is also the mantra of the hydrogen lobby, for the same reason - they can't win on the actual physics and economics.

 

[doug]

'We need a range of solutions'

Yes. While that phrase has a sensible ring to it, it often comes after spreading FUD in a dishonest attempt to appear to be the reasonable party.

 

[strider]

This is mostly due to the fact that Bio-Diesel is very tough on rubbers use in traditional fuel lines. It will swell and warp parts in your fuel lines if you are not careful. It won't hurt the car really in any other way. The same with ethanol in gasoline cars. I always thought the 'FlexFuel' was weird branding.

As I understand it, no cars since the early 90's have used rubber fuel lines (synthetic is better and cheaper) so this is not a problem unless you buy an older car - I have not had to replace any part of the fuel system nor have I deviated from the standard maintenance schedule. Otherwise, as Eberhard mentioned, biodiesel is a better solvent than petro-diesel so if you get a car that has run petro-diesel for a long time you'll be changing fuel filters often for a few thousand miles while all the crud gets worked loose. But like in my case when the car only had 2k miles on it when I switched it's been fine.

 

[strider]

Sure but there is a huge issue of scaleability and efficiency. Waste cooking oils will only be a drop in the bucket. Liquid fuels still rely on inefficient ICE's, which is why the study I referenced showed better use of biomass by simply burning it in generating plants to charge EV's instead of going through all the work, and energy, involved in turning it into liquid fuels for individual ICE's. Biomass is still a limited resource after all, no sense wasting it.

I don't see BEV's being practical for things like trucking for a long while (and even recreational towing for that matter). Unless there is a battery breakthrough we just don't have the energy density for such an application. Yes, ICE's are inefficient but you can still pack a ton of kwH in a pretty small space.

I agree that my current source (waste cooking oil) doesn't scale and I said as much in my post. I also agree that most biomass to liquid fuel solutions are cost and energy negative. But algae bio has the potential to work really well (it's more than potential - it could work in large scale today but oil companies are doing everything they can to kill it). In fact, one of the perfect places to grow algae bio is in power plant ponds which is otherwise unused (the physical space) and has lots of clean warm water which algae love.

I agree w/ dpeilow that we shouldn't fund everything just to have a "range of solutions" every technology should compete on the merits. But if you think EV's will solve every problem then you're just as guilty as ETC.