[chris719]

Originally Posted by AlexFL

Yes. All those Teslas need to be charged up and 60% of US electricity is being generated from fossil fuels.

I hear this a lot, but it's not telling the entire story.

Even the worst coal plant is around 10% more efficient than the best ICE. Imagine if you live in a region with a lot of hydroelectric or nuclear, this is a significant boost. As we improve generation then it will swing even further. This isn't even taking into consideration the massive amount of energy it takes to refine and transport said fuel. The losses of the electric grid are negligible in comparison. For example, HVDC transmission lines will only lose around 3.5% per 1000 km. There are few things in life that become less efficient when done on a massive scale in dedicated facilities.

Even including mining of lithium (more often aqueous extraction) and not-so-rare earth metals, it is still less bad overall than fossil fuels according to the credible estimates I have seen.

Most people who haven't taken at least 1 semester of thermo in college seem to drastically underestimate how inefficient an Otto or Diesel cycle engine really is.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by chris719

I hear this a lot, but it's not telling the entire story.

Even the worst coal plant is around 10% more efficient than the best ICE. Imagine if you live in a region with a lot of hydroelectric or nuclear, this is a significant boost. As we improve generation then it will swing even further. This isn't even taking into consideration the massive amount of energy it takes to refine and transport said fuel. The losses of the electric grid are negligible in comparison. For example, HVDC transmission lines will only lose around 3.5% per 1000 km. There are few things in life that become less efficient when done on a massive scale in dedicated facilities.

Even including mining of lithium (more often aqueous extraction) and not-so-rare earth metals, it is still less bad overall than fossil fuels according to the credible estimates I have seen.

Most people who haven't taken at least 1 semester of thermo in college seem to drastically underestimate how inefficient an Otto or Diesel cycle engine really is.

Yep, gas-turbine power generation is popular right now in areas because it’s easily scalable for increased demands and better than 65% thermally efficient. That’s a huge number and why it’s better to transmit the energy at low demand times rather than truck it all around to storage tanks all over.

[chassis]

jmg What about the carbon to put the EV on the road? Digging and refining lithium, etc.

What about end of life? How are EVs recycled today, specifically the batteries?

You have posted about fuel. What about the whole carbon-unfavorable-vs-ICE lifecycle of EVs?

[AlexFL]

Originally Posted by chris719

I hear this a lot, but it's not telling the entire story.

Even the worst coal plant is around 10% more efficient than the best ICE. Imagine if you live in a region with a lot of hydroelectric or nuclear, this is a significant boost. As we improve generation then it will swing even further. This isn't even taking into consideration the massive amount of energy it takes to refine and transport said fuel. The losses of the electric grid are negligible in comparison. For example, HVDC transmission lines will only lose around 3.5% per 1000 km. There are few things in life that become less efficient when done on a massive scale in dedicated facilities.

Even including mining of lithium (more often aqueous extraction) and not-so-rare earth metals, it is still less bad overall than fossil fuels according to the credible estimates I have seen.

Most people who haven't taken at least 1 semester of thermo in college seem to drastically underestimate how inefficient an Otto or Diesel cycle engine really is.

Hey, Dr. Google, maybe you should have taken 1 semester of attention instead, because you clearly didn't understand Zipse's point.

[AlexFL]

Here is a good read about lithium mining (aka simple "aqueous extraction") and its environmental impacts.

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/0...ing%20stations.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by AlexFL

Hey, Dr. Google, maybe you should have taken 1 semester of attention instead, because you clearly didn't understand Zipse's point.

I wasn't replying to Zipse. I was replying to you repeating a common trope.

[AlexFL]

Originally Posted by chris719

I wasn't replying to Zipse. I was replying to you repeating a common trope.

another good read for you:
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/1...48-9326/abe2d0

[chris719]

Originally Posted by AlexFL

another good read for you:
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/1...48-9326/abe2d0

Good article. It basically says that at worst it's a wash or slight increase due to increased short term manufacturing activity associated with subsidies. The conclusion seems to reinforce the long-term benefit.

Our research findings are consistent with Miyata et al (2018), who also found a positive effect of BEV subsidies on GDP and CO2 emissions in Japan

[Bruuuce]

I love these conversations and have my own weird opinion, may be a bit off topic form the OP, but what ever.

Number 1, the use case for an electric car is different for me than an ICE car.
I only need 50 miles of range and can charge every night at home. I don't need an EV to go 400 miles, I need a commuter car

Number 2, price, said commuter car should not be 2x the price of ICE car. Nisan Leaf vs Versa, 2X for the EV for same basic car, last I looked

I could go on a bit, but my use case for long distances could be solved longer term, but charging takes way too long, thats still a physics and infrastructure issue. I could not go see my parents same day with current EVs. Which I easily do with ICE.

My use case on Trucks is skewed as well with my use. Again, not 50 mile city range.


One day it will come, but I don't think the use case and economics fit my needs now.

Build me a 50 mile range EV for 20K, I am in.

[kyriian]

Originally Posted by Bruuuce

Build me a 50 mile range EV for 20K, I am in.

Amen

[SteveinArizona]

Originally Posted by kyriian

Amen

so you each paid $20K for your current ICE car?

[kyriian]

Originally Posted by SteveinArizona

so you each paid $20K for your current ICE car?

I am talking strictly daily commuter cars here, the X5 and Z4M don't really qualify under the 'commuter car' category, even though the Z4M was brought under 20k USD in 2018

The first 2 Civics I had for commuting were used, one was $1700 CAD, the other $3500 so its not really applicable.

My wife's first new car, her 2011 Scion tC is likely about 20k USD in 2011 (it was listed at 18k USD MSRP from 2011), taxes etc on top would likely push it a smidge above. I believe her end price was about 26k CAD when its all said and done. I took it over from her, and still use it everyday for the commute

My former new daily, a 15 VW Golf 1.8TSI 3 door manual was a little under 20k CAD MSRP before tax again, well it was a lease so it was a little different but had i brought it then yes it would qualify under 20k USD before taxes

Where I live, why buy a nice fancy commuter, when it sees the brine of local salt sprayers for 6 months of the year, and the other 6 months sits outside in the sun.

[Bruuuce]

lots of basic commuter cars for 20K

Nisan Versa starts at 18K
Nisan Leaf starts at 28K

10K is allot of petrol

now the whole tax credit is another topic, but an option now to bridge the gap.

[SteveinArizona]

Average cost of new car in the United States:

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a3...-prices-47100/

[clutchdj]

This guys hands seem to be larger than his head.

[kyriian]

Originally Posted by SteveinArizona

Average cost of new car in the United States:

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a3...-prices-47100/

Inflation is a thing, you also know this I am guessing.
The article also highlighted many of the reasons of the abnormal price jump.
Not to mention the behavior of the modern consumer has changed, most don't buy their cars, they lease thanks to low interest rate, this is not a part of this 'average transaction price'.

There is still a number of cars you can buy new that does come under 20k today before taxes
Jetta, Impreza, Venue, Elantra/Accent are just a few, you can even have a base Corolla for just a smidge over 20k. (I looked on the US site of them just so we are clear) None of them are particularly attractive nor a ball of fire to drive, and these stripper specs are rare even before the whole world turned upside down. Stating the average transaction price of a new car in the US surpassed 40k isn't painting the whole picture.

The main point of this is when I buy say... a Kona EV, I expect a 40k level of interior fit and finish and equipment, not the same as the peon spec 20k Kona ICE. Am I expecting too much here?

The only entry level EV worth its price tag on the whole likely is the MINI SE, which actually does hit many of my needs in a commuter, except at 40k its still a tad expensive.