"EV's simply move the tailpipe to Coal" Answer

I hope he wiped those numbers off after he pulled them out of where he got them.

 

"Don't blame EVs for the terrible choice your state has made."

I'm driving Leaf using 100% renewable energy power using the "Green Energy" option.

 

Unless you are generating your own power, you are using the same mix of power everyone else on your grid is using.

 

About 4% of the energy used to refine crude comes from grid electricity. About 68% is from the crude itself, much of that still gas which has poor market value. The other 27% is from natural gas.
www.epa.gov%2Fsectors%2Fpdf%2Fenergy%2Fch3-11.pdf
page 3-89

I'll be generous and agree that the crude to finished product is about 85% efficient (probably closer to 90%).

About 4% of that 15% of the total crude energy used to refine petroleum comes from grid electricity. That is equivalent to 0.6% of the energy in the crude. There are about 37kW-hr of energy in a gallon of crude. 0.6% of that is about 0.2 kWhr, not 6kWhr. Off by a factor of 30.

Take an honest look at the overall sources of electricity in the US, also consider fuel to electricity conversion efficiency and transmission losses. You know electricity doesn't just magically appear at the plug and it isn't made form pixie dust and faerie farts. A good share of it is coal, petroleum and natural gas based.

Electric cars are already good and they have place in the world, why do people like that article writer distort the truth so much?

No, I'm saying your source is a stranger to the facts.

 

I phoned my electric utility to see if I could pay extra for clean energy. The response was "No. All our electricity is already clean. It all comes from the Bonneville Dam, except a tiny bit from wind." So my electric car runs clean. Probably took about the same amount of energy to build it as a stinker.

 

Simple response to this argument: While it is true that electric power may be generated with polluting energy sources, those sources are fairly heavily regulated, and you only have to rely on relatively few power companies to keep their plant up to code. Despite Vehicle Emissions standards, if everyone is using gas, then you have to rely on each car owner to keep their car exhausts clean. That is probably not the most efficient way to manage those costs. Busses and commercial vehicles are the bigger offenders, unfortunately. Oh, leave us not forget gas powered lawn equipment - some of the biggest polluters.

This is why I think those car convoy systems will work - like Audi is working on. Just one chowder head in the mix with unserviced brakes will really mess things up.

 

Excellent point!!! Every day I see cars and trucks spewing filthy smoke out their tailpipes. Not to mention the asshats who run their cars without mufflers.

 

I hope they said Bonneville Power Administration, not Bonneville Dam. Outside of Enron-style tactics, it makes no sense to ship power from that dam, the lowest on the Columbia River, all the way upstream to Spokane while most of the power from the 11 dams in between is flowing in the opposite direction.

 

I live in an area serviced by coal, so I am putting my efforts into REDUCING electricity consumption in my home through conservation, solar, and some increased NG use.

An interesting detail is that the changes will net net net not cost me any money. The savings are more than the capital outlay over the life of the investments. Total subsidy of $300 to decrease CO2 by 2600 kg a year for decades.

The changes are windows and a NG water heater. When complete, compared to a per capita US residential consumer, we will each consume 70% of the the NG, and 18% of the electricity. The home will in total have footprint of about 2350 kg CO2 a year.

 

Definitely true now. That should also be definitely true 100 years from now. By then we should have a lot higher percentage of our transportation energy being renewable.

Obviously you are not an critic of electric cars, just manipulations that don't help anyone. However, I don't see how sustainability is reached with fossil fuel cars. I can see how sustainability might be reached with electric cars. Thoughts?

 

The guy on the phone (an office worker who takes customer calls) did say "Bonneville Dam." I understood that to mean the Bonneville Power Administration, for the reason you mention.

The point was that with 100% renewable energy (hydro, plus a tiny bit of wind) they didn't even have a program to let people pay extra for renewable electricity. And though I do still drive the Prius for road trips and to the airport, all the rest of my driving is electric.

Mea culpa: I offset my zero-carbon driving by taking several airline trips per year. So I make no claim to being any better than the next guy. I just hate gasoline and diesel fuel and the cars and trucks that burn them.

 

That is odd, especially when the vast majority of hydro does not count as renewable energy under the Initiative 937 mandates adopted in this state in 2006. But California will take it as renewable under their rules.

My utility does have a program to pay extra for renewable energy. I don't participate because (1) all the available renewable energy will still get used (**) regardless of my participation, and (2) my resources are better spent reducing my own energy use.

Prior to 2006, my all-electric house averaged 10,600 kwh/year. Following various improvements, the past two years have consumed 8400 each. Hopefully this summer's refrigerator replacement and a few other improvements will push it below 8000. I have a roadmap to <7500 in the next year, though more study is needed.

(**) excluding special circumstances, such as transmission capacity limits and fish protection requirements that caused this year's hydro surplus to push a bunch of wind power offline.

 

To KISS,

EVs, are much more efficient users ( and potential recapturerers ) of energy that ICE engines.

EVs are able to use solar and wind energy, and in effect store that energy at times of not wind, and or no sun.

EVs are also (technically) able to sell back tot he grid at times of peak demand, lessoning the need for oer fuels to power short term spikes in demand. (-as well as reducing potential idle, spinning generating capacity of other energy sources)

Anybody have a problem with that?

Icrarus

PS. EVs especially for urban commuters ir really a no brainier!

 

Hill - without going into details, this is basically California-style enviro arguments in this blog. California is "blessed" or "cursed" with a very heavy tar "tar pit" crude oil, depending on your point of view. Presumably this blogger would be much happier if California imported gaso as well as elec power from other states, and water.

 

Hydro is renewable to ME! Hydro comes from the sun evaporating surface water (mostly from the oceans, but also from land). The water vapor rises (also due to solar energy which creates thermal convection. The vapor condenses and some of it falls as rain on upland regions, from where it flows downhill. Until it reaches the sea it holds gravitational potential energy, which dams trap, and turbines convert to electricity.

This is a renewable energy source because it is a continual process with a short cycle time. The sun, precipitation, and flow of rivers is continual. The water that flows through the turbines is replaced on a daily basis with some seasonal and annual fluctuations.

Thus, it is renewable and sustainable. That's good enough for me.

The potential is there, but at a cost of using up some charge/discharge cycles. Whether an EV-driving public would accept that remains to be seen. Perhaps if they are paid enough of a premium for the energy buy-back that the accelerated degradation of their batteries is worth it to them.

The public today is notably not public spirited. A person who will vote for any demagogue who promises never to raise taxes, and will buy Chinese slave labor at Walmart rather than U.S. union labor, is not likely to volunteer his car's battery to help keep other people's utility bills down. We've turned into a me-first society, and that does not bode well for a vehicle-to-grid plan.

 

ICARUS- Item-1 "potential recapturerers" is an issue. Coal fired power plants are typically 30% efficient, so you are going to have to burn quite a bit more coal (2-4x) than gasoline to get the same driving distance (using Prius HEV as gaso basis), even if the elec engine itself has certain theoretical merits. I know, I know, elec is more patriotic for some, and could be made cleaner (via solar etc).

Basically the OP is lamenting that some in the public may be starting to feel that there has been some misleading info in the pro-EV argument. OP may disagree with me, but I do feel that there is some misleading info.

 

My point however is that electic motors are significantly more efficient than ICE engines ( BTUs net) and they can recapture energy like a hybrid in a way that a pure ICE cannot.


I also think. My other points are valid

Icarus