TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

My wife is beating me over the head with Ozzie Zehner

Discussion in 'Energy, Environment, and Policy' started by Jointguy, Jul 3, 2013.

  1. Jointguy

    Jointguy Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2012
    Messages:
    26
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
  2. capt601

    capt601 Vin02324

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    454
    Location:
    Mission Viejo, California, United States
    I remember an article before just like this that turned out to be funded with oil money. wouldn't be surprised here as well.
    also, most of these articles only assume the cost for gasoline starts after the pump. forgetting the production of gasoline requires vasts amount of power. I read a stat the the number 1 user of electricity in the state of California are the oil refineries producing the gasoline for ICE cars. this is never in the assumptions of these articles. and also, you need to transport the gasoline to the gas stations, and it takes electricity to run the pumps to get the gas in the car. Also, what do you do with the wasted oil that you have to dispose of every 3000-10000 miles? never factored in. and 25-35% efficiency of an ICE? recycling of Tesla batteries ( or any EV) is not factored in.
    basically, Ive learned we are always going to have to defend Ev's and Tesla from the ignorant who do not want to do the complete research on it. My wife says she can see me get frustrated every time someone brings this topic up.

    probably not an educated response, but i am sure others will chime in.
     
  3. arondaniel

    arondaniel Il Sessanta Caricato

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2011
    Messages:
    160
    Location:
    Memphis
    #3 arondaniel, Jul 3, 2013
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2013
    For one, the Tesla Model S doesn't use rare earths in its motor.

    "When the National Academies researchers projected technology advancements and improvement to the U.S. electrical grid out to 2030, they still found no benefit to driving an electric vehicle."

    Their electrical grid "projection" is likely based on more coal and natural gas plants. Assume green energy instead and the picture changes.

    "Do electric cars simply move pollution from upper-middle-class communities in Beverly Hills and Virginia Beach to poor communities in the backwaters of West Virginia and the nation’s industrial exurbs?"

    That is just a false equivalency, with no data to back it up. Centralizing power conversion makes sense. Cities are better off without smog, cars are better off for not having controlled explosions, and backwater WVA is a single point where emissions can be scrubbed and carbon captured, etc.

    "Perhaps we should look beyond the shiny gadgets now being offered and revisit some less sexy but potent options—smog reduction, bike lanes, energy taxes, and land-use changes to start."

    So, first he discounts any improvements to the grid and the efficiencies that EVs could bring. No mention how EVs can actually improve grid efficiency by balancing demand between peak and off-peak hours. Then he heavily weights other "potent options" like lifestyle changes that are largely orthogonal to what type of car you drive.

    -A
     
  4. jeff_adams

    jeff_adams Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    617
    Location:
    Monterey
    #4 jeff_adams, Jul 3, 2013
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2013
    Ozzie says your wife needs to walk, ride a bike or take public transportation. In other words, his agenda is no personal vehicles. Ask her if that sounds realistic.
     
  5. Zythryn

    Zythryn MS 70D, MX 90D

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,660
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Has she driven the car?
    If not, get her a test drive:)

    The article is full of holes and aspects that don't apply to the Model S. And in California, the grid is much cleaner than the numbers they are using.
     
  6. ckessel

    ckessel Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    4,266
    Why would she do that?
     
  7. Krugerrand

    Krugerrand Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2012
    Messages:
    4,271
    Location:
    California
    This appears to be grounds for divorce.
     
  8. markwj

    markwj Moderator, Asia Pacific

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Messages:
    3,664
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Yes, this one keeps coming back (usually because of that biased Norwegian study). Here is my standard response;

    EV Myths: #3 EVs are not environmental in the long-run

    The truth is that no vehicle today is truly zero emissions - both to run and manufacture. But, EVs have the capability to get closer to that goal, especially when combined with changes to the power generation grid. Petrol/Diesel vehicles quite simply can't.

    Another interesting link is:

    Bill Gates on energy: Innovating to zero! | Video on TED.com

    If we're going to 'innovate to zero', battery EVs offer the best hope today.
     
  9. capt601

    capt601 Vin02324

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    454
    Location:
    Mission Viejo, California, United States
    LOL! or when will we see the first mobster movie with the body being pulled out of the Frunk?
     
  10. ChadS

    ChadS Petroleum is for sissies

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    Messages:
    2,401
    #10 ChadS, Jul 3, 2013
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2013
    When Sherry Boschert was with Plug In America, she did a meta-study of a few dozen reports. She had a quick look at this; here is her take:

    As she notes, most people don't READ the studies; and even if they do they don't have enough context to evaluate them. This is why somebody with an agenda attacks the most complicated angle - the "greenness" of EVs - even though it doesn't influence many buying decisions. It's easy to say something that sounds smart and can influence some of the millions of people that are not experts, but doesn't stand up under the scrutiny of the few people that have studied the issue in depth. As jeff_adams notes, Ozzie definitely has an agenda.

    The DOE, Sierra Club, Union of Concerned Scientists and other groups have been going over the real studies for many years, and they firmly back the environmental benefits of EVs. But we'll see lots more rehashing "studies" like this one for the simple reason that they work, as Jointguy's post makes clear.
     
  11. AmpedRealtor

    AmpedRealtor Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2013
    Messages:
    4,701
    Location:
    Buckeye, AZ
    I'm supposed to believe that it's more polluting to power my electric vehicle using the 14 kWh solar array on my roof than it is to fuel my car with gasoline and change its motor oil every 3,500 miles? Oh right, because building EVs creates pollution… Well the last time I checked, building ICE vehicles was also a polluting endeavor. Nobody will ever convince me that the construction of a lithium ion battery pack and powering it with green and sustainable energy is more polluting and harmful to the environment than the construction of an ICE vehicle's gas tank plus the many years of gasoline and resulting emissions that go along with said gas tank.
     
  12. artsci

    artsci Sponsor

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    4,675
    Location:
    Timonium, Maryland
    Go to the sources! Much of the so-called research on this topic was funded by guess-who? The fossil fuel boys. You can't trust anything from a source that has skin in the game.

    I'll trust the work of Argonne National Labs any day.
     
  13. CapitalistOppressor

    CapitalistOppressor Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,621
    Yes, the entire piece is based on cherry picked data that relies on the idea that we'll continue to burn coal. Once you convert your grid to clean energy sources, most of these issues go away.

    If the materials needed to build the car are more energy intensive (like aluminum), that matters only to the extent that grid power generates CO2. If you have a clean grid, it has relatively little impact, even though heating up ores can still release gasses. If that's our main emissions source we are in pretty good shape. At worst, this pushes our main environmental problems into the extraction category, but those tend to be micro-problems instead of macro-problems.

    And something completely ignored so far are the economic benefits of a switchover to EV's. Regardless of what you think about air quality, the U.S. actually does have the capacity to generate ALL of it's electricity needs from local sources. We are on track to import over $400 billion worth of oil this year (and this is a good year for us, because we have dramatically increased production with fracking). Every dollar that we spend on imports reduces the size of our economy (in the simplest GDP accounting on a 1/1 basis).

    If not for the past few decades of oil imports draining away our wealth (to countries like Saudi Arabia), our economy would likely be dramatically larger. Think about it. $400 billion dollars is equal to ~2.6% of our GDP for 2013. Compound those savings over decades and we are much poorer than we should be. And because the middle class pays a disproportionate share of that burden we are all getting reamed by our reliance on oil.

    In addition, the U.S. Military has generally devoted an average of $200bln/year to operations in the Middle East, which are primarily related to securing the supply lines for oil. In fact, a huge portion of the Reagan buildup was because of a decision he made to build up our military capacity in the Middle East. We hardly increased our NATO commitments at all (which was Cold War spending). Instead a huge chunk of the money was used to build our military capacity in the Middle East to prevent the Soviets (or Iranians) from seizing the oil fields.

    Our military spending doesn't make us directly poorer like purchasing foreign oil does, but there are probably more productive investments we could be making. Especially when you consider the human cost of the wars and supporting our veterans.
     
  14. jomo25

    jomo25 P4398

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    1,938
    Location:
    Tempe, AZ
    Another thread related to the article: More FUD:

    My response there:
    facepalm.jpg
     
  15. MikeL

    MikeL some guy

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Messages:
    1,042
    Location:
    Salt Lake City, UTAH USA
    My response: "Perhaps the exhaust pipe on your car should come out the center of the steering wheel."

    oh wait, you say it's your WIFE !? Hmmmm. . . . . better start that with "Honey... or "Darling... or something. :eek:
     
  16. gctseng

    gctseng All around good guy

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Messages:
    43
    Location:
    United States
    I think the real question is what specific rejection she has to the Tesla?

    If the objection is "greenness", then get a solar setup. That should take any wind out of her sails re: green of electricity generation.

    BTW, the argument that there will not be enough change for the next few years just smacks of someone arguing that we shouldn't do anything unless everyone does something.

    It's time for each of us to take some personal responsibility to take care of our planet. I'm just glad we have the wherewithal to do it with style...

    Or it could be time you lavish a little more attention on her? Perhaps it's time to take her on a road trip (or maybe go on one yourself and leave her stewing with the article)?
     
  17. Jason

    Jason Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2013
    Messages:
    139
    Location:
    DFW, TX
    What about even going back further than making the gasoline - the oil wells and drilling to get the crude out of the ground or ocean, the energy and CO2 from making the equipment to do the mining. Even the energy/CO2 to manufacture tankers to haul oil from the foreign countries to get it here.
    The number of gas stations (121,000 in US) - the energy/CO2 for gas pumps and huge underground tanks at each of those stations. There were over 200,000 stations in 1994. How much time/money/CO2 to dig those old tanks up. In addition, the clean up and maintenance from the leaking tanks.

    That all is 'part' of the gas that ends up in the tank of an ICE...
     
  18. gctseng

    gctseng All around good guy

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Messages:
    43
    Location:
    United States
    While we're at it, what about all the transportation costs to get those workers to the gas stations, refineries, etc.!

    And the poor dinosaurs. No one ever cares about those poor dinosaurs...

    Okay. All done.


    Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4 Beta
     
  19. Discoducky

    Discoducky Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2011
    Messages:
    2,884
    Location:
    Seattle
    #20 Discoducky, Jul 3, 2013
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2013
    Attacking EVs: New Book Says Electric Cars Aren't Clean | PluginCars.com

    Author Claims Electric Vehicles Are a Green Illusion | Autopia | Wired.com

     

Share This Page