-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
More anti-ev gibberish
- Thread starter qwk
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Energy Environment Policy
Electric cars? Americans still want their pickups
The article is oddly positive about Tesla saying that they have the right plan (yet still says people are buying them as expensive toys) by making luxury cars.
The data is bad and the opinions are bad.
- - - Updated - - -
http://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/is-the-boeing-company-bas-dreamliner-the-new-chevy-volt-38062/
I posted this here since Tesla and EV are bashed in this cross posted Motley Fool article.
The author incorrectly blames the Fisker fires on the battery packs and also uses Tesla's "bricking" BS to imply that li-ion batteries are dangerous.
The article is oddly positive about Tesla saying that they have the right plan (yet still says people are buying them as expensive toys) by making luxury cars.
The data is bad and the opinions are bad.
- - - Updated - - -
http://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/is-the-boeing-company-bas-dreamliner-the-new-chevy-volt-38062/
I posted this here since Tesla and EV are bashed in this cross posted Motley Fool article.
The author incorrectly blames the Fisker fires on the battery packs and also uses Tesla's "bricking" BS to imply that li-ion batteries are dangerous.
William13
Active Member
TEG, the article's title implies that electric cars' spark is gone. Of course my Tesla has no spark at all- my Prius does. It and most ICE cars' spark will be gone when EVs are dominant.
They are right however that the predictions for the timing of this tipping point were obviously hyperbole when made and have not yet panned out.
It is sad to see the comments section. One person was comparing our Tesla Model S to slow, loud, smelly, and cheap cars, denying the comparison to the Panamara.
Everything about the Tesla is better than the competition excepting the range and price. The range has yet to impact me with a little planning. The price is competitive for similar vehicles as per the Tesla Master Plan. It will come down.
We need to have Tesla commission a study that does cradle to grave comparisons and give credible data to dismiss all the anti-ev gibberish. The anti progress people will even use CO2 arguments against the EV where the EV is cleaner even with 100% coal generation.
They are right however that the predictions for the timing of this tipping point were obviously hyperbole when made and have not yet panned out.
It is sad to see the comments section. One person was comparing our Tesla Model S to slow, loud, smelly, and cheap cars, denying the comparison to the Panamara.
Everything about the Tesla is better than the competition excepting the range and price. The range has yet to impact me with a little planning. The price is competitive for similar vehicles as per the Tesla Master Plan. It will come down.
We need to have Tesla commission a study that does cradle to grave comparisons and give credible data to dismiss all the anti-ev gibberish. The anti progress people will even use CO2 arguments against the EV where the EV is cleaner even with 100% coal generation.
I'll be more than happy to help with that I did some life cycle assessment studies before. I would suggest they do 2 or three studies
1- raw material comparison and glider
2- battery manufacture process
3. All inclusive use phase, cradle to grave.
In part 1, I would use some Alcoa LCAs as the reference, all includive energy, there's one done on power plants that's commonly cited in wiki, that one is the gold standard, just have to tweak the numbers for the grid ratio.
What it comes down to is battery manufacture and electricity vs engine manufacture and gasoline usage.
I would also include the increased usage of copper in EVs and the usage of precious metals in regular cars to take away a creation detractors critisium.
1- raw material comparison and glider
2- battery manufacture process
3. All inclusive use phase, cradle to grave.
In part 1, I would use some Alcoa LCAs as the reference, all includive energy, there's one done on power plants that's commonly cited in wiki, that one is the gold standard, just have to tweak the numbers for the grid ratio.
What it comes down to is battery manufacture and electricity vs engine manufacture and gasoline usage.
I would also include the increased usage of copper in EVs and the usage of precious metals in regular cars to take away a creation detractors critisium.
These articles are of course misinformed and inaccurate but I can see why many analysts are concluding there is no spark in EVs after having a long talk with a friend who is ready - very motivated to buy an EV but doesn't feel that he can. It's not the money. The problem is the poor choices available. His needs are not unusual or demanding. He wants a small, efficient car and lives in an extreme climate (Vermont). That pretty much eliminates the cars without liquid thermal management such as the Leaf and Focus. Those cars don't have much range in extreme cold (he often has to drive 80 mi/day without being able to plug in). He loves Tesla but the Model S is way too big. He wants something small, easy to park, consumes electricity more like the Roadster or Leaf, with a little more cargo space than the Roadster. The eRav4 can't be purchased or serviced here.
He'd be happy to pay $50 or 60k for such a car, but it doesn't exist. The more I talk to people the more I think any automaker could sell hundreds of thousands of EVs per year if they had the range and extreme climate ability of a Tesla combined with the size of a Prius. It's this lack of choices that's hindering sales and giving rise to articles like this IMHO.
Sadly I don't think we'll see significant EV sales until Gen3 unless another automaker gets their act together before then.
He'd be happy to pay $50 or 60k for such a car, but it doesn't exist. The more I talk to people the more I think any automaker could sell hundreds of thousands of EVs per year if they had the range and extreme climate ability of a Tesla combined with the size of a Prius. It's this lack of choices that's hindering sales and giving rise to articles like this IMHO.
Sadly I don't think we'll see significant EV sales until Gen3 unless another automaker gets their act together before then.
There are definitely people who aren't served by what is available initially, but that has always been the case with emerging technology. Obsessing over those whose needs cannot be satisfied doesn't result in progress. Making the most of what is currently possible to satisfy the customers you can is what makes real inroads, and that's precisely what Tesla is doing. The Roadster met the needs of a few, the Model S is practical for many more, and Gen III will inevitably appeal to an even wider audience. It can't happen overnight, but to deny the inevitability is simply foolishness on the part of supposed expert analysts.
It does bother me that there's so much obsession over range. About the inconvenience of having to spend 30 minutes at a supercharger every few hours. Perhaps some people go on a lot of road trips, but I'm fully prepared to trade that for not having to spend 5 minutes at a gas station every week or two. Or rent a different vehicle for the one or two times a year I'd need it.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
No disagreement there. Our last road trip, as we were moving from Washington to California last August, wouldn't be practical today but should be within a year or two. Whether we could have taken the same route by Crater Lake is much less clear. It may well have added an extra day, or have required another overnight stay to use a lesser power source.
... but it's not that common that we want to take a one-way trip where the objective is to move the car. A rental would have been a fine alternative under most circumstances.
Ugh, local paper published this ridiculous opinion piece:
http://www.news-leader.com/article/20130118/OPINIONS02/301180039/us-needs-national-energy-policy
And then there’s the electric-gas Chevy Volt built by GM (Government Motors). You've seen the commercials where drivers say they've gone months and never bought a drop of gasoline. But they don't tell you the true cost of owning the Volt.
A Reuters column claims GM has spent about $80,000 for every Volt produced (Editor’s note: Former GM co-chairman Bob Lutz wrote a response to that column in Forbes.), but sells it for $40,000. (You've paid the difference.) As pitchman Billy Mays said, "But wait, there's more!"
The Volt doesn't really sell for $40,000 — the government (the taxpayer) will give each new Volt owner $7,500 back. But wait! Volt drivers (who want to reduce the 10-hour charging time) need to spend an average of $2,000 to buy and install a home charging station. Looks like we should push the Volt over the fiscal cliff.
But never mind the Volt's astronomical up-front cost — progressives like the idea that an electric car is "green." But where do we get the electricity that powers the Volt? Mostly from coal — yes, that dirty little four-letter word in the liberal lexicon.
Coal-powered "electric" cars leave the same carbon footprint as gas-powered cars.
http://www.news-leader.com/article/20130118/OPINIONS02/301180039/us-needs-national-energy-policy
And then there’s the electric-gas Chevy Volt built by GM (Government Motors). You've seen the commercials where drivers say they've gone months and never bought a drop of gasoline. But they don't tell you the true cost of owning the Volt.
A Reuters column claims GM has spent about $80,000 for every Volt produced (Editor’s note: Former GM co-chairman Bob Lutz wrote a response to that column in Forbes.), but sells it for $40,000. (You've paid the difference.) As pitchman Billy Mays said, "But wait, there's more!"
The Volt doesn't really sell for $40,000 — the government (the taxpayer) will give each new Volt owner $7,500 back. But wait! Volt drivers (who want to reduce the 10-hour charging time) need to spend an average of $2,000 to buy and install a home charging station. Looks like we should push the Volt over the fiscal cliff.
But never mind the Volt's astronomical up-front cost — progressives like the idea that an electric car is "green." But where do we get the electricity that powers the Volt? Mostly from coal — yes, that dirty little four-letter word in the liberal lexicon.
Coal-powered "electric" cars leave the same carbon footprint as gas-powered cars.
Thumper
Active Member
The math in your comment at the website assumed (a) no transmission or distribution losses, rather than ~10% on average and (b) the comparison should be to a 20mpg car. While the 20mpg is right as a comparison to the Model S, something more comparable to the Leaf would have been fairer. On the other side of the ledger, coal only accounts for ~75% of Missouri's power, with a big slice of nuclear in there; so, your carbon per kWh is too high.
Tesla has done this calculation for every state: Your Questions Answered | Tesla Motors Unfortunately these calculations aren't quite how I would do it:
1. The data are old, from 2009. 2012 generation looks a lot different, with coal on the decline and gas and wind rising;
2. The chart mistakenly assumes that the installed capacity base in a state tells you about the consumption by fuel in the state. This is wrong on two counts: some capacity is used more intensely than others, and many states coordinate dispatch of electric generators to optimize economics. Therefore, there needs to be some regional aggregation. New England should be treated as one area; DC should be wrapped in with Maryland, etc.
Last edited:
Updated: I just pulled and crunched the 2012 YTD generation data. Missouri's mix is:
78% coal
7% natural gas
12% nuclear
3% hydro and other renewables
78% coal
7% natural gas
12% nuclear
3% hydro and other renewables
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
If you take the marginal load approach then the EV load may indeed be met with all coal in that state.
Similar threads
