Brave new World?

[Mega]

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/volksw...ototype-review

Mega's thoughts:-
This car is the direct result of Tesla, Tesla was nothing to do with making a profitable eletric car company.......Tesla was simply a "Stocking Horse"....to force the main stream auto producers to produce their own. When didn't happen we got "diesel gate"........oh don't get me wrong i am delighted by these devolpments.

The assh*le in a 10 year old + 130 mph diesel BMW/Audi/Merc will be culled VERY quickly..........& he/she will not be able to buy an old eletric car as the battery will be shagged out .....require-ing major investment in new cells.......which will not happen.

I already crossed swords with a nasty little BMW owner with a nasty little i3, which hit the buffers at 85MPH.........my 140 bhp Ford can manage 125....althought i didn't go any where near that to walk away from himearly one morning.......

Nope, its looking good.
Sh1t loads of old diesels will die!..............ash0les will be moved quickly on to low CO2 "solutions"............& once again Performance will cost & be rare....in either eletric or Gas-o-line format ;))

Mega

[dcarrigg]

Re: Brave new World?

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/volksw...ototype-review

Mega's thoughts:-
This car is the direct result of Tesla, Tesla was nothing to do with making a profitable eletric car company.......Tesla was simply a "Stocking Horse"....to force the main stream auto producers to produce their own. When didn't happen we got "diesel gate"........oh don't get me wrong i am delighted by these devolpments.

The assh*le in a 10 year old + 130 mph diesel BMW/Audi/Merc will be culled VERY quickly..........& he/she will not be able to buy an old eletric car as the battery will be shagged out .....require-ing major investment in new cells.......which will not happen.

I already crossed swords with a nasty little BMW owner with a nasty little i3, which hit the buffers at 85MPH.........my 140 bhp Ford can manage 125....althought i didn't go any where near that to walk away from himearly one morning.......

Nope, its looking good.
Sh1t loads of old diesels will die!..............ash0les will be moved quickly on to low CO2 "solutions"............& once again Performance will cost & be rare....in either eletric or Gas-o-line format ;))

Mega

I don't have much of a sense of the home electric setup across the pond, but in the older parts of the US like where I live, the 220v service needed to charge an electric car overnight (and garages in general) are relatively rare, particularly compared to Texas or California or something. In lots of spots, there's no space for a garage. In others, it wouldn't be approved even if there were.

This is another barrier to an 'electric car for the masses.' You're going to have to spend thousands on electricians rigging some nonsense up just to be able to plug the thing in at night. Rich, fancy people who can afford a Tesla also probably have $500k and over houses with 220v service and garages. The common schmuck doesn't, at least not in my neck of the woods. Just having looked around, my sense is a lack of garages is probably a bigger problem for the European market than the North American one, and I don't know about the electric, but probably that's an issue too.

[Mega]

Re: Brave new World?

Bit by Bit............"They" are NOT going to give real money (Gold backed?) to russia/Saudi etc.

[GRG55]

Re: Brave new World?

Bit by Bit............"They" are NOT going to give real money (Gold backed?) to russia/Saudi etc.

The Audi E-Tron GT looks like a Model S on steroids.

Now that the gin and Jaguar set have discovered infinite torque at zero RPM electric propulsion, every serious performance/luxury dragster out there must be electric.
Still a very select niche market.

[santafe2]

Re: Brave new World?

The Audi E-Tron GT looks like a Model S on steroids.

Now that the gin and Jaguar set have discovered infinite torque at zero RPM electric propulsion, every serious performance/luxury dragster out there must be electric.
Still a very select niche market.

It's going to change but there is a big sound wall to overcome. I have to admit I'm still holding onto the sound of the 8-9k rpm, deep throated, naturally aspirated racing engine. Porsche created one of the most well balanced and affordable track cars in their history with the 718 Cayman but it's a lower revving, whiny, 4 cylinder turbo and it's not popular. Everyone is waiting for, and only a few will get, the 718 GT4 which, of course, will not be a turbo or a 4 cylinder version. It will be a standard, flat 6 naturally aspirated Porsche. And no Porsche sounds as perfect as a 12 cylinder Ferrari. So how do we get from *that sound* to an electric vehicle? It's the sound that's going to take time. My younger daughter loves cars and yesterday we were driving next to a new Camaro SS and the exhaust note was perfect. She said, "listen to that bad-ass car", and it sounded amazing. The love of cars is related to music, I'm not sure how you remove the sound without it becoming common transportation.

[bungee]

Re: Brave new World?

will be moved quickly on to low CO2 "solutions"............

Mega

Surely the quotes should be round "low CO2" as electric cars are anything but low CO2 just like "green" low energy compact fluorescent bulbs are polluting the world with mercury and burning woodchips in powerstations cutting down the forests and producing more CO2 is also "green" and good for the environment.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/busin...XZEawtedK.html

"For perspective, the average German car owner could drive a gas-guzzling vehicle for three and a half years, or more than 50,000 kilometers, before a Nissan Leaf with a 30 kWh battery would beat it on carbon-dioxide emissions in a coal-heavy country"

It always looks like on the back of any "green" initiative is a profit seeking industry paying NGOs to push their agenda and once you get past the headlines you see that the green bit is only there as an emotive to sell the product (or tax). Don't these green campaigners ever wonder where the money to pay for them comes from?

[thriftyandboringinohio]

Re: Brave new World?

I see your point bungee and I'm confident your facts are correct. None the less, I view that same glass as half full.
The German gas guzzling car will probably roll down the road for more than 150,000 kilometers before it gets scrapped, so for 2/3 of its life it's polluting more than that Nissan Leaf.
If the driver switches to the Nissan leaf a pretty big benefit is captured.

Your point is a good one - when we look down the whole supply chain and across the whole product life cycle some things that seem green often are not. The classic example is using a ceramic coffee mug and washing it daily versus using foam coffee cups. The energy and chemicals used to manufacture and wash the mug will pollute more overall than the energy and chemicals used to make a few hundred foam cups.

Still, when billions of people try their best to be a little greener good things happen. The profiteers who serve those customers have earned their profits, good on them for working in industries that at least pretend to be better. Some will be truly green, some will be partially green, and some will be dishonestly lying about being green when they are not. Oh well, life is imperfect. It's still good overall for the billions of us to make the attempt, change our thinking, and get whatever gains we can.

[santafe2]

Re: Brave new World?

"For perspective, the average German car owner could drive a gas-guzzling vehicle for three and a half years, or more than 50,000 kilometers, before a Nissan Leaf with a 30 kWh battery would beat it on carbon-dioxide emissions in a coal-heavy country"

Certainly there are green initiatives that are no better than green washing but Germany is a bad example if you want to support that point. Germany is not a "coal-heavy country". See below.

[santafe2]

Re: Brave new World?

And a couple of additional points now that I've read the article. The author states: With such heavy batteries, an electric car’s carbon footprint can grow quite large even beyond the showroom, depending on how it’s charged. Driving in France, which relies heavily on nuclear power, will spit out a lot less CO2 than Germany, where 40 percent of the grid burns on coal.

It may be true that 40% of the grid in Germany still has access to coal based energy but as you can see from the above graph, coal as an energy source is 22.8%. It's possible the author was using the same reference and using 100 as the denominator instead of 203.3. In any event, this is incorrect. There are several other suspect claims in the article but I'm not going to go point-by-point to refute them.

Regarding battery factories being dirty, Tesla has one of the largest lithium ion battery factories in the world and it's nearly carbon neutral. Tesla is also building 3 additional plants which will have similar carbon footprints.

I suppose I should be happy that after 10 years of making these arguments on iTulip, folks are linking articles related to stage 4 climate denial; "We can't solve it." Apparently most recognize that it's real, it's mostly us and it is a problem. And, it's not only one we can solve, we will solve this problem.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Brave new World?

And a couple of additional points now that I've read the article. The author states: With such heavy batteries, an electric car’s carbon footprint can grow quite large even beyond the showroom, depending on how it’s charged. Driving in France, which relies heavily on nuclear power, will spit out a lot less CO2 than Germany, where 40 percent of the grid burns on coal.

It may be true that 40% of the grid in Germany still has access to coal based energy but as you can see from the above graph, coal as an energy source is 22.8%. It's possible the author was using the same reference and using 100 as the denominator instead of 203.3. In any event, this is incorrect. There are several other suspect claims in the article but I'm not going to go point-by-point to refute them.

Regarding battery factories being dirty, Tesla has one of the largest lithium ion battery factories in the world and it's nearly carbon neutral. Tesla is also building 3 additional plants which will have similar carbon footprints.

I suppose I should be happy that after 10 years of making these arguments on iTulip, folks are linking articles related to stage 4 climate denial; "We can't solve it." Apparently most recognize that it's real, it's mostly us and it is a problem. And, it's not only one we can solve, we will solve this problem.

FWIW, I totally agree with you. I'm simply less sold on EVs than most methods. Think the little Leafs and whatnot are fine. But don't see them taking over the world--not yet.

That said, the US in particular is getting ridiculous. IIRC, Wyoming's putting out 1,800% or so more CO2 per person than Massachusetts. It's just easy low hanging fruit. In the least efficient electricity generation markets, that is by far the largest CO2 emitter. Around here, electric generation is overwhelmingly natural gas and increasingly renewable. Transit and thermal and electric are roughly equal sources. And I still think the easiest, lowest hanging emissions reductions are on the power generation front, followed closely by efficiency measures on the thermal front. Transit is going to be the hardest piece of the puzzle, and the most expensive. But a surprising amount of the output is not cars, but trucks. And maybe natural gas conversion makes a big dent there, if companies start switching their fleets over.

It can be done. It will be done. I just think EVs have a long way to go. Hyundai's Ioniq hybrid's getting about 60mpg combined. The very best electric cars get maybe twice that. The power hogs with the real fast 0-60 get maybe 150% of it. The difference is marginal. Not as big of a difference as trading in an old v6 Sonata for a new Ioniq. Point is just perspective. I think if you've got the fun money, EVs can be really cool toys, quick to accelerate. If you've got the lifestyle and the house for it, having a Leaf for cruising around town and a bigger car for long trips and projects can be a smart combo. But for most working schlubs, I just do not see it. There will still be improvements. New aluminum F-150 gets almost double the mpg of 5 years ago. Chevy Colorado does even better. Advancements--big ones--are still being made. But as far as bang for your buck goes, the money invested in EVs probably could have reduced CO2 much more efficiently if instead of giving every anesthesiologist at the country club a $7,500 tax credit for their new Tesla, we gave $7,500 tax credits per truck for fleet owners to switch to CNG or LNG. And that wouldn't come close to bundling that money and using it to switch Wyoming off of coal. It is what it is, and what's done is done.

I just don't think one has to be in denial to look at this problem, believe it's solvable, and still believe there are relatively limited uses for EVs: namely, 1) substitute for luxury/sports cars, 2) short-range, 'in-town' transit for multi-vehicle households, 3) niche business uses. Many more are coming. So we'll see. Perhaps I'll be proven wrong. But in the meanwhile, there's plenty of low hanging fruit to work on. For instance, if instead of giving $7,500 to Dr. Hometenniscourt to purchase a Tesla instead of a Porsche we allocated $2,000 each to insulate every inhabited house over 50 years old, then we'd be really making a big dent. It's not as sexy as going 0-60 in 2.5 seconds in a Model S. But it's a hell of a lot more practical. And it saves everyone money on fuel oil and cord wood.

[santafe2]

Re: Brave new World?

FWIW, I totally agree with you. I'm simply less sold on EVs than most methods. Think the little Leafs and whatnot are fine. But don't see them taking over the world--not yet.

Agree with that. EVs are just a first step. Most major car companies are focused on automated driving and shared transportation, (not so much in Wyoming). Subsidies are almost always handouts to folks who don't need them but have the ability to drive..... change. It's not fair but it has to start somewhere. As you said, rebates for insulation are more important as they are a more efficient use of capital but we need a sane government in the US to move that agenda forward. Unfortunately that will require more sanity in the US electorate.

Along with renewables, there are several companies developing methods for turning airborne CO2 into fuel which essentially recycles carbon. I think we'll be fine as long as we don't live in places like Florida. There's no hope for folks living there but as you might imagine, I can't wait to hear them whining about sea level rise.

[santafe2]

Re: Brave new World?

Along with renewables, there are several companies developing methods for turning airborne CO2 into fuel which essentially recycles carbon.

Here's a Youtube video describing the carbon capture process used by the Canadian company Carbon Engineering. Seems promising. The video is almost 3 years old and at the time they hadn't proved they could combine the CO2 with hydrogen to create fuel for heavy industry, (trucks, planes, etc.). That hurdle has been cleared, but they still have to prove they can scale and deliver their product at a competitive price.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=d3rFhlpZX4k

And a link to their site if you're interested:

http://carbonengineering.com/

[Mega]

Re: Brave new World?

Ah............how i miss the old days.........

Best cars
Best Music
Best Movies
Best Prime Minister

[GRG55]

Re: Brave new World?

Installed capacity trend is an indication of how the investment in capacity type is changing. However, from an economic standpoint what really counts is net generation, not installed capacity.

For the twenty commercial wind farms currently in operation in the jurisdiction I live in the average annual net generation for all of them together is well under 30 percent of installed capacity. As I type this the wind farms are producing 757 MW out of 1447 MW installed. Four days ago there was a major westerly flow front moving across here and the wind turbines were collectively peaking just above 80 percent of installed capacity - one of the highest numbers I have ever seen. We are still enjoying the residue of that pressure gradient. Unfortunately that wind generation peak only represented 10.7 percent of total demand, but because of the green incentive pricing accounted for 55 percent of the total cost of generation at the time.

The one commercial solar farm we have has collectors covering about one square mile in the sunniest part of the Province. It's output last year was less than 1 percent (no typo) of nameplate installed capacity. Now today, in the dead of winter, with the days short, the sun shining in clear skies and power demand high, its output is...zero. I suspect some sort of chronic technical problems here. Somebody lost their shirt on that boondoggle. Want to bet it was us ratepayers?

Don't misunderstand. There has been progress. Some 25 years ago coal represented more than 75 percent of the power generation in the Province. Today coal represents just 36 percent of the installed generating capacity and right at this moment coal is contributing only 30.4 percent of the power being consumed. Certainly better mass storage technology is will go a long way to improve renewables.

But for now whenever someone tells me the price of solar and wind has fallen to be equal to fossil fuels, and the amazing percentage of installed capacity renewables now represent, I have to chuckle.

Edit added: In parts of Oklahoma and Kansas some wind farm operators are reporting annual average output of more than 50 percent of installed nameplate. Given there is zero cost of fuel for this source of power, that level of net generation is very attractive to the power producers on a full life cycle basis. I hope we can see something similar with storage technology improvements over time as it is clear the weather patterns in many jurisdictions, including where I live, will not allow that level of wind sourced net generation unaided.

[Southernguy]

Re: Brave new World?

Exel Energy Colorado: this year energy bid: with storage solar pv 36 dollars, wind with storage 21 dollar median prices offered.
https://www.greentechmedia.com/artic...age#gs.vcUsVuw

In Uruguay wind makes, now, 30% of overall generation. Hydro 60%, rest is biomass 7% solar and fossil 3%

Installed capacity trend is an indication of how the investment in capacity type is changing. However, from an economic standpoint what really counts is net generation, not installed capacity.

For the twenty commercial wind farms currently in operation in the jurisdiction I live in the average annual net generation for all of them together is well under 30 percent of installed capacity. As I type this the wind farms are producing 757 MW out of 1447 MW installed. Four days ago there was a major westerly flow front moving across here and the wind turbines were collectively peaking just above 80 percent of installed capacity - one of the highest numbers I have ever seen. We are still enjoying the residue of that pressure gradient. Unfortunately that wind generation peak only represented 10.7 percent of total demand, but because of the green incentive pricing accounted for 55 percent of the total cost of generation at the time.

The one commercial solar farm we have has collectors covering about one square mile in the sunniest part of the Province. It's output last year was less than 1 percent (no typo) of nameplate installed capacity. Now today, in the dead of winter, with the days short, the sun shining in clear skies and power demand high, its output is...zero. I suspect some sort of chronic technical problems here. Somebody lost their shirt on that boondoggle. Want to bet it was us ratepayers?

Don't misunderstand. There has been progress. Some 25 years ago coal represented more than 75 percent of the power generation in the Province. Today coal represents just 36 percent of the installed generating capacity and right at this moment coal is contributing only 30.4 percent of the power being consumed. Certainly better mass storage technology is will go a long way to improve renewables.

But for now whenever someone tells me the price of solar and wind has fallen to be equal to fossil fuels, and the amazing percentage of installed capacity renewables now represent, I have to chuckle.

Edit added: In parts of Oklahoma and Kansas some wind farm operators are reporting annual average output of more than 50 percent of installed nameplate. Given there is zero cost of fuel for this source of power, that level of net generation is very attractive to the power producers on a full life cycle basis. I hope we can see something similar with storage technology improvements over time as it is clear the weather patterns in many jurisdictions, including where I live, will not allow that level of wind sourced net generation unaided.