testtest

Electric vehicles may not be so sustainable

KillerFord1977

KillerFord1977

SAINT
Founding Member
Cost of new battery packs can be as much or more than the cost of the car was Brand new. The ugly truth about Electric Vehicles.
Story on a Nissan but I have seen such info about Tesla now as well.
insideevs.com

Canadian Nissan Leaf Owner Cannot Get A New Battery Pack For His EV

Battery replacements issues for the Nissan Leaf keep coming up, as this Canadian owner is now experiencing with his 2013 EV. He was told to buy a new one.
insideevs.com insideevs.com
 
Regular vehicles are getting like that also.

A neighbor bought a new truck & was told it has 43 seperate computers to run the thing. Others have been told if significant components fail it's too expensive to fix so the rig is essentially disposable.

Everyone wants all sorts of amenities in these new rigs but it comes with costs up front. And if something goes wrong you're out of luck. None of this sounds green to me.

My 1996 truck has one computer to run the ignition system according to my mechanic. Summer before last my alternator went out in town & I was able to drive 15 miles back home to my mechanic. He said a new rig would shut down immediately.
 
Last edited:
Not only the cost of batteries, and their large "carbon footprint" to harvest the materials to make them, but the electrical power plants to recharge the batteries are fueled by fuel oil, natural gas and a large majority of coal. Nothing "Green" to see here. :rolleyes:
 
The "Greenies" want to get rid of nuclear & the hydro also.

WIndmills & solar are fine but only make up ~10% of power generation. Both are considered "low-density" power, and may be fine to help with residential needs, but they can't provide the "high-density power" that the other sources can to provide huge amounts of energy when needed.

You can't run steel mills, etc on a solar panel.

Also, I know folks that put up solar panels (I think that's OK) for their homes but they're still tied to the grid. I tell them unless they have their own battery bank if something happens to the grid then their lights will still go out. They don't understand they need that battery bank to avoid that.
 
Last edited:
Talyn said:
The "Greenies" want to get rid of nuclear & the hydr o also.

WIndmills & solar are fine but only make up ~10% of power generation. Both are considered "low-density" power, and may be fine to help with residential needs, but they can't provide the "high-density power" that the other sources can to provide huge amounts of energy when needed.

You can't run steel mills, etc on a solar panel.

Also, I know folks that put up solar panels (I think that's OK) for their homes but they're still tied to the grid. I tell them unless they have their own battery bank that if something happens to the grid then their lights will still go out. They don't understand they need that battery bank to avoid that'
Click to expand...
I tried too tell my mom that also.
 
Not only the cost of batteries, and their large "carbon footprint" to harvest the materials to make them, but the electrical power plants to recharge the batteries are fueled by fuel oil, natural gas and a large majority of coal. Nothing "Green" to see here. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Nevermind the disposal process for all the dead (toxic) batteries, once they go through their 5-7 year useful-life span. Ever try to put a battery in the landfill? How's that go for ya?

Wind and solar are low-yield, as well as being intermittent. Dark? No solar. Calm? No wind. Heavy winds? They feather the blades on the turbines and can't use them, because they'll destroy themselves. They're "goldilocks" power - all the conditions have to be "just right" in order to use them. And, as noted, something needs to be done to STORE what little energy they do create, so someone can use it when they need it...which brings us back to batteries. LOTS of batteries. Tesla just built a multi-million dollar battery plant in Australia...for a small town. How big do you think the battery bank would need to be for LA? SF? DC?

How cost effective is that?

How environmentally friendly is all that acid, and rare earth metals that have to be (usually strip-)mined in order to produce the batteries?

How about the windmill blades? You know, the ones that take an entire tractor-trailer trailer to ship, and have a 3-5 year useful life? They're made from plastics (petroleum products), and they take up a TON of space in the landfill when they're disposed of.

Solar panels? Glass, plastics, more precious metals...and also a short useful life. What do we do with all of THOSE when they wear out?

Clean coal...oil...CNG...nuclear...hydro...all we have to do is throttle up for demand...throttle back when demand drops...

Yeah, I can see why nobody likes that. Reliable, trusted, proven, efficient...
 
I am and always have been of a mind that we sould be good stewards of the earth. But I am in total agreement with all of you in that wind and solar are not the answer. Just let the engineers know what emissions to shoot for with coal and gas, and see if they can come up with something close. Batteries require far more resources and electric cars are not the answer. But a lot of folks have jumped on the bandwagon. Makes me think of lemings. :)
 
Talyn said:
Regular vehicles are getting like that also.

A neighbor bought a new truck & was told it has 43 seperate computers to run the thing. Others have been told if significant components fail it's too expensive to fix so the rig is essentially disposable.

Everyone wants all sorts of amenities in these new rigs but it comes with costs up front. And if something goes wrong you're out of luck. None of this sounds green to me.

My 1996 truck has one computer to run the ignition system according to my mechanic. Summer before last my alternator went out in town & I was able to drive 15 miles back home to my mechanic. He said a new rig would shut down immediately.
Click to expand...

That is exactly why my truck is a 1995 model! :)
 
The Greenies keep stiffling the construction of new nuclear plants that would use much more advanced * safer tech. The majority of the existing plants use much older tech.

They need to be replaced without all the litigation that is holding the replcement of old plants up.
 
I am and always have been of a mind that we sould be good stewards of the earth.
Click to expand...

I agree.

I also believe that the earth has cyclical temperature changes - not just spring/summer/fall/winter, either. Every 1,000 years or so, the temp will climb a degree or so...then, it will drop a degree or so. Witness: Roman "warm period". Warmer temps, outstanding food production, HUGE advances in society. Witness: "The Dark Ages" - colder, much more pestilence, sickness, disease. Look back through archaeological records (do it before all that data gets altered!), and you will see these facts in things like tree rings, rock deposits, and even animal/human skeletons.

Up a degree...down a degree. Cyclical.

And...it has NOTHING to do with how much CO2 we humans do (or don't) produce. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

We shut down the globe for coronavirus - CO2 emissions were cut drastically because people, by and large, didn't go out. But...the temp didn't change. Nothing changed. Some heavy cities had a little less visible smog...but the "climate" didn't even blink.
 
A little food for thought for the tree hugging hippies.
image.png
 
Peglegjoe said:
Nevermind the disposal process for all the dead (toxic) batteries, once they go through their 5-7 year useful-life span. Ever try to put a battery in the landfill? How's that go for ya?

Wind and solar are low-yield, as well as being intermittent. Dark? No solar. Calm? No wind. Heavy winds? They feather the blades on the turbines and can't use them, because they'll destroy themselves. They're "goldilocks" power - all the conditions have to be "just right" in order to use them. And, as noted, something needs to be done to STORE what little energy they do create, so someone can use it when they need it...which brings us back to batteries. LOTS of batteries. Tesla just built a multi-million dollar battery plant in Australia...for a small town. How big do you think the battery bank would need to be for LA? SF? DC?

How cost effective is that?

How environmentally friendly is all that acid, and rare earth metals that have to be (usually strip-)mined in order to produce the batteries?

How about the windmill blades? You know, the ones that take an entire tractor-trailer trailer to ship, and have a 3-5 year useful life? They're made from plastics (petroleum products), and they take up a TON of space in the landfill when they're disposed of.

Solar panels? Glass, plastics, more precious metals...and also a short useful life. What do we do with all of THOSE when they wear out?

Clean coal...oil...CNG...nuclear...hydro...all we have to do is throttle up for demand...throttle back when demand drops...

Yeah, I can see why nobody likes that. Reliable, trusted, proven, efficient...
Click to expand...
My current suburb town of residence had a Major brand battery recycling/disposal plant in it. Mostly car batteries. Town went from thousands to hundreds of thousands in 20 years and found the plant by downtown high density population. Folks started having health issues and cancer. Town, state, feds and the company had to reach an EPA agreement to shut it down an relocate in another part of the state. Clean up is ongoing after 3 years still of moving tons of earth and cleansing the soil. EPA air devices are everywhere downtown
 
Well as long as it all keeps the cows from farting...it's OK.

(sarcasm)

Greenies are just too shortsighted to see things like this. Stuff wears out. What do you do with it then??

Which is ironic, considering they're clamoring to "save the planet for generations to come!" - they're just strip-mining more ore out of the land, and replacing it with more cancerous refuse.

1604001854590.png
 
I think electric cars have a role in suburban/urban areas since those areas appear to be the greatest sources of air pollution.

BUT, with current tech they sure wouldn't work in the rural mountainous West USA, and I suspect they wouldn't work well in the rest of rural USA until the tech, and power generation/didtribution issues are figured out as time goes on.

Right now I don't want to carry a gas generator with me when I'm out in the sticks to recharge an electric rig.
 
Talyn said:
I think electric cars have a role in suburban/urban areas since those areas appear to be the greatest sources of air pollution.

BUT, with current tech they sure wouldn't work in the rural mountainous West USA, and I suspect they wouldn't work well in the rest of rural USA until the tech, and power generation/didtribution issues are figured out as time goes on.

Right now I don't want to carry a gas generator with me when I'm out in the sticks to recharge an electric rig.
Click to expand...
Add a crank on it like the flashlights.
 
I know how to fix range anxiety, if anyone knows patent law...got it all drawn out and everything, current off-the-shelf parts, no major redesigns required to existing electric vehicles...scalable design...would basically eliminate the need to ever recharge an electric vehicle. Without it being a hybrid - no fuel required, just an initial charge, and maybe an occasional top-off once in a while, depending on usage cycle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top