Adventures in an all electric vehicle.

[premmington]

The pollution generated when a car is made always outweighs any potential benefit from the new car being more economical.
For info, I was getting very similar mpg from my 2007 BMW 352i and the classics I usually drive from the 1970s. The newer car was a lot more refined but was no more economical.

The chart below is a few years old (before EVs became so common - so the stats don't include all the toxic components that go into an EV battery).
Note the scale, pollution when driving in measured in cubic metres of pollution, everything else (mining the raw materials, shipping them around the world to be processed, and everything else) is measured in millions of cubic meters of pollution.
View attachment 403990

The environmental cost of mining all the raw materials is mind blowing and is getting worse as the volume of EVs increases.
A 2017 report showing supply of raw materials was becoming a problem, the situation has got a lot wosrse since then as demand has increased a lot!

Critical Minerals For EV Batteries Are Declining In America - TechStory

The country is set to initial its progress towards zero-carbon emissions, but this shortage of minerals is a concern.

techstory.in

I'm doing my bit for the environment by driving 50+ year old classics so need need to generate millions of cubic meters of new pollution to create a replacement for them.

What you are saying above - has crossed my mind before - maybe "not having a new car" would be better.

Use things for longer - get the full "value out of them" - get the full value of the "hit" from making them in the first place....

Even recycling things has an energy cost. Just keep using them does not.

 

[daleyd]

The pollution generated when a car is made always outweighs any potential benefit from the new car being more economical.
For info, I was getting very similar mpg from my 2007 BMW 352i and the classics I usually drive from the 1970s. The newer car was a lot more refined but was no more economical.

The chart below is a few years old (before EVs became so common - so the stats don't include all the toxic components that go into an EV battery).
Note the scale, pollution when driving in measured in cubic metres of pollution, everything else (mining the raw materials, shipping them around the world to be processed, and everything else) is measured in millions of cubic meters of pollution.
View attachment 403990

The environmental cost of mining all the raw materials is mind blowing and is getting worse as the volume of EVs increases.
A 2017 report showing supply of raw materials was becoming a problem, the situation has got a lot wosrse since then as demand has increased a lot!

Critical Minerals For EV Batteries Are Declining In America - TechStory

The country is set to initial its progress towards zero-carbon emissions, but this shortage of minerals is a concern.

techstory.in

I'm doing my bit for the environment by driving 50+ year old classics so need need to generate millions of cubic meters of new pollution to create a replacement for them.

The pollution generated when a car is made always outweighs any potential benefit from the new car being more economical.
For info, I was getting very similar mpg from my 2007 BMW 352i and the classics I usually drive from the 1970s. The newer car was a lot more refined but was no more economical.

The chart below is a few years old (before EVs became so common - so the stats don't include all the toxic components that go into an EV battery).
Note the scale, pollution when driving in measured in cubic metres of pollution, everything else (mining the raw materials, shipping them around the world to be processed, and everything else) is measured in millions of cubic meters of pollution.
View attachment 403990

The environmental cost of mining all the raw materials is mind blowing and is getting worse as the volume of EVs increases.
A 2017 report showing supply of raw materials was becoming a problem, the situation has got a lot wosrse since then as demand has increased a lot!

Critical Minerals For EV Batteries Are Declining In America - TechStory

The country is set to initial its progress towards zero-carbon emissions, but this shortage of minerals is a concern.

techstory.in

I'm doing my bit for the environment by driving 50+ year old classics so need need to generate millions of cubic meters of new pollution to create a replacement for them.

I’m not sure that’s right about the emissions from build - a quick google suggests the general consensus is that the driving emissions from a car far outweigh the manufacturing emissions.

The quote below was just the first that I got, from a website that’s not particularly ev friendly, but even they seem to suggest this is the case.

********

According to reports, the construction of a sedan will emit about 18 tons of carbon dioxide. But this accounts for very little of a car’s overall carbon footprint.6

The majority of its carbon footprint comes from the amount of carbon dioxide ejected from the tailpipe.

According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a gas-powered sedan will generate between 8 and 10,000 grams of carbon dioxide per gallon.

 

[premmington]

I’m not sure that’s right about the emissions from build - a quick google suggests the general consensus is that the driving emissions from a car far outweigh the manufacturing emissions.

The quote below was just the first that I got, from a website that’s not particularly ev friendly, but even they seem to suggest this is the case.

********

According to reports, the construction of a sedan will emit about 18 tons of carbon dioxide. But this accounts for very little of a car’s overall carbon footprint.6

The majority of its carbon footprint comes from the amount of carbon dioxide ejected from the tailpipe.

According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a gas-powered sedan will generate between 8 and 10,000 grams of carbon dioxide per gallon.

Your quote "I’m not sure that’s right about the emissions from build - a quick google suggests the general consensus is that the driving emissions from a car far outweigh the manufacturing emissions."

Are you sure? That is not what @Nomad - is saying - posted....

You are saying a life time of "tail pipe emissions" are higher than the emissions from manufacturer and disposal of the host vehicle?

 

[daleyd]

Your quote "I’m not sure that’s right about the emissions from build - a quick google suggests the general consensus is that the driving emissions from a car far outweigh the manufacturing emissions."

Are you sure? That is not what @Nomad - is saying - posted....

You are saying a life time of "tail pipe emissions" are higher than the emissions from manufacturer and disposal of the host vehicle?

Yes. I’ve read some estimates as high as 80% of the “lifetime emissions” are from the fuel used in driving, some a bit less, but all say over the life time of a car tailpipe emissions are the biggest contributor.

But I’ve never read anywhere that the manufacture/disposal of a car produces significantly more than the driving emissions. I’m happy to be corrected if anyone has different reliable info of course.

 

[Nomad]

I had a quick look to see if I could find any up-to-date figures for the environmental "full lifecycle" cost of a car ( mining raw materials - shipping them around the world to be processed - driving the car - recycling when it dies) and I can't find anything.

There are lots or reports comparing electric to petrol/diesel vehicles (many claim zero tailpipe emissions for Electric but ignore the need to have power stations producing the energy for them).
A shame the reports often contradict each other about the "true" cost of the vehicles, it's all as clear as mud !

 

[premmington]

I had a quick look to see if I could find any up-to-date figures for the environmental "full lifecycle" cost of a car ( mining raw materials - shipping them around the world to be processed - driving the car - recycling when it dies) and I can't find anything.

There are lots or reports comparing electric to petrol/diesel vehicles (many claim zero tailpipe emissions for Electric but ignore the need to have power stations producing the energy for them).
A shame the reports often contradict each other about the "true" cost of the vehicles, it's all as clear as mud !

It is a minefield mate - trying to see the "real facts"...

Lot of "sales" going on here...

Lot of three/five year political popularity contests as well.

--------

Getting to see the wood from the trees is not easy mate....

 

[daleyd]

I had a quick look to see if I could find any up-to-date figures for the environmental "full lifecycle" cost of a car ( mining raw materials - shipping them around the world to be processed - driving the car - recycling when it dies) and I can't find anything.

There are lots or reports comparing electric to petrol/diesel vehicles (many claim zero tailpipe emissions for Electric but ignore the need to have power stations producing the energy for them).
A shame the reports often contradict each other about the "true" cost of the vehicles, it's all as clear as mud !

The one I copied from above is from MIT university and gives figures for build, and how much can be “saved” by driving an ev compared to an ice. It also goes into detail about the differential between charging from a grid supplied by a lot of fossil fuels and one where there’s more renewables, for example.

It’s also quite clear that running older cars until they eventually expire makes sense in terms of emissions too - no one is saying that doesn’t hold true. It seems quite a fair assessment to be honest,

 

[premmington]

The one I copied from above is from MIT university and gives figures for build, and how much can be “saved” by driving an ev compared to an ice. It also goes into detail about the differential between charging from a grid supplied by a lot of fossil fuels and one where there’s more renewables, for example.

It’s also quite clear that running older cars until they eventually expire makes sense in terms of emissions too - no one is saying that doesn’t hold true. It seems quite a fair assessment to be honest,

Your quote "It’s also quite clear that running older cars until they eventually expire makes sense in terms of emissions too - no one is saying that doesn’t hold true. It seems quite a fair assessment to be honest,"

Your previous quote "Yes. I’ve read some estimates as high as 80% of the “lifetime emissions” are from the fuel used in driving, some a bit less, but all say over the life time of a car tailpipe emissions are the biggest contributor."


I am just confused mate...

Gonna gracefully withdraw from this... ( it is nice sunny evening - everybody enjoy it please!)

 

[Bullet2012]

Imagine how hard it is to pull up at the correct side of the pump with a normal vehicle, then with an electric it will be impossible,Hold my beer says the Tesla driver.

 

[reb78]

The one I copied from above is from MIT university and gives figures for build, and how much can be “saved” by driving an ev compared to an ice. It also goes into detail about the differential between charging from a grid supplied by a lot of fossil fuels and one where there’s more renewables, for example.

It’s also quite clear that running older cars until they eventually expire makes sense in terms of emissions too - no one is saying that doesn’t hold true. It seems quite a fair assessment to be honest,

I'm sure there was a Bristol Uni study that charted a TD5 disco vs an EV in am overall creation to running to recycling study?

 

[daleyd]

Your quote "It’s also quite clear that running older cars until they eventually expire makes sense in terms of emissions too - no one is saying that doesn’t hold true. It seems quite a fair assessment to be honest,"

Your previous quote "Yes. I’ve read some estimates as high as 80% of the “lifetime emissions” are from the fuel used in driving, some a bit less, but all say over the life time of a car tailpipe emissions are the biggest contributor."


I am just confused mate...

Gonna gracefully withdraw from this... ( it is nice sunny evening - everybody enjoy it please!)

It’s not confusing at all. Running an old car makes sense because all the emissions in manufacturing have already been done. Might as well run it until it expires….

But, and here’s the thing - eventually there will be new cars sold. If they weren’t then at some point we’d all be back in horse and carts because there’s now no more secondhand cars…

So if you “replace” the ice car the new car buyer was getting anyway with an ev the lifetime emissions will be lower. No one’s suggesting that anyone replace their 20 year old motor with a new ev - what happens is that the natural buying habits of new car buyers, be they private or fleet, change gradually.

 

[GRW]

It's interesting. Imagine if all the tax breaks, concessions, incentives for business use and business leasing (& the peer pressure for businesses to be "seen to be green" by a largely ignorant but combative environmentally-conscious section of society)......

.... weren't being applied to, and accredited to - the EV.

Is anyone naive enough to think that, on a level playing field and on performance merit - that businesses, local authorities, Universities, Utilities etc etc - would have adopted anything like as many EV's?

As an analogy.... let's say instead of ULEZ zones and tax breaks etc, instead our Govt decided to make all the roads into and around cities only 1-metre wide.
All of a sudden, the bicycle and the scooter sales increased hugely, so travellers could use personal transport inside the city limits.
Now.... does the sudden increase in sales mean that the scooter & the bicycle, are a superior vehicle to the ICE car?

 

[daleyd]

It’s a good job it’s only EV that get subsidies.

Fossil Fuel Subsidies

Subsidies are intended to protect consumers by keeping prices low, but they come at a high cost. Subsidies have sizable fiscal costs (leading to higher taxes/borrowing or lower spending), promote inefficient allocation of an economy’s resources (hindering growth), encourage pollution...

www.imf.org

 

[GRW]

It’s a good job it’s only EV that get subsidies.

Fossil Fuel Subsidies

Subsidies are intended to protect consumers by keeping prices low, but they come at a high cost. Subsidies have sizable fiscal costs (leading to higher taxes/borrowing or lower spending), promote inefficient allocation of an economy’s resources (hindering growth), encourage pollution...

www.imf.org

Good grief. What else is there to say.
You'd go to the ends of the earth to try and find any way you can (no matter how tenuous or totally unrelated) - to try to show the EV in a positive light (or rather, show anything else in a negative light).
The EV doesn't stand up on its own merits against alternatives for the vast majority of people. The Govt have moved the goalposts massively to help overcome this (& show every sign of continuing to tilt the field ever-more favouring the EV until it gains the edge by default).

Honestly - you're trying way too hard. You cannot alter current reality just so that you can justify your EV to yourself.
(You say you don't need to, and indeed you don't need to.... but clearly you feel that you have to. Why is that?).
The EV today - is objectively much more expensive and has far more constraints, limitations & difficulties than its ICE counterpart. That - is just how it is. It does not matter how many obscure and inventive ways you try to smokescreen that reality - it remains the reality!

Horse. Flogging. Dead.

 

[m_c]

Good grief. What else is there to say.
You'd go to the ends of the earth to try and find any way you can (no matter how tenuous or totally unrelated) - to try to show the EV in a positive light (or rather, show anything else in a negative light).
The EV doesn't stand up on its own merits against alternatives for the vast majority of people. The Govt have moved the goalposts massively to help overcome this (& show every sign of continuing to tilt the field ever-more favouring the EV until it gains the edge by default).

Honestly - you're trying way too hard. You cannot alter current reality just so that you can justify your EV to yourself.
(You say you don't need to, and indeed you don't need to.... but clearly you feel that you have to. Why is that?).
The EV today - is objectively much more expensive and has far more constraints, limitations & difficulties than its ICE counterpart. That - is just how it is. It does not matter how many obscure and inventive ways you try to smokescreen that reality - it remains the reality!

Horse. Flogging. Dead.

And you seem to be going to the ends of the earth to justify why EVs are never going to be the answer...

 

[rhubarb7]

It’s not confusing at all. Running an old car makes sense because all the emissions in manufacturing have already been done. Might as well run it until it expires….

But, and here’s the thing - eventually there will be new cars sold. If they weren’t then at some point we’d all be back in horse and carts because there’s now no more secondhand cars…

So if you “replace” the ice car the new car buyer was getting anyway with an ev the lifetime emissions will be lower. No one’s suggesting that anyone replace their 20 year old motor with a new ev - what happens is that the natural buying habits of new car buyers, be they private or fleet, change gradually.

But also take into account that that there are emissions produced to provide the power to for the EV to use.

Also a basic Tesla weighs 2 tonne. That's like driving around in an unladen Transit Custom. Extra weight to damage the already damaged roads.

A Tesla Grand X weighs 2 and a half tonne?!! Thats's equivalent to a tradesman in his Transit Custom with some tools.

Getting really critical I bet the Tesla shreds more tyre and brake pad particles in use due to it's weight.

 

[daleyd]

Good grief. What else is there to say.
You'd go to the ends of the earth to try and find any way you can (no matter how tenuous or totally unrelated) - to try to show the EV in a positive light (or rather, show anything else in a negative light).
The EV doesn't stand up on its own merits against alternatives for the vast majority of people. The Govt have moved the goalposts massively to help overcome this (& show every sign of continuing to tilt the field ever-more favouring the EV until it gains the edge by default).

Honestly - you're trying way too hard. You cannot alter current reality just so that you can justify your EV to yourself.
(You say you don't need to, and indeed you don't need to.... but clearly you feel that you have to. Why is that?).
The EV today - is objectively much more expensive and has far more constraints, limitations & difficulties than its ICE counterpart. That - is just how it is. It does not matter how many obscure and inventive ways you try to smokescreen that reality - it remains the reality!

Horse. Flogging. Dead.

You’ll have to argue with the IMF if you disagree with their figures, I’m only passing the info on - I’d assume if subsidies are a bad thing then it should be applied across the board.

Do you want one of my Rennie?

 

[willie.macleod]

Note the scale, pollution when driving in measured in cubic metres of pollution, everything else (mining the raw materials, shipping them around the world to be processed, and everything else) is measured in millions of cubic meters of pollution.
View attachment 403990

There was no way that the above is even close to being correct. I don't know where you got it from, but if you read the source quoted you will find the graphic is incorrect, the report for item 4 "driving the car" is actually 1016 MILLION cubic metres of polluted air per car. That rather changes the scenario. I have no doubt that the "typo" was not an error, someone wanting to make whatever point they were trying to make and distorting the figures to suit and as usual these things will circulate around and become gospel when it is patently obvious that the exhaust volume is going to be a huge figure! Also, our mining, transport, manufacturing and end of life processes have significantly improved so those figures will be lower now than when the report was written.

 

[daleyd]

But also take into account that that there are emissions produced to provide the power to for the EV to use.

Also a basic Tesla weighs 2 tonne. That's like driving around in an unladen Transit Custom. Extra weight to damage the already damaged roads.

A Tesla Grand X weighs 2 and a half tonne?!! Thats's equivalent to a tradesman in his Transit Custom with some tools.

Getting really critical I bet the Tesla shreds more tyre and brake pad partials in use due to it's weight.

That’s been done to death - brake pads get comparatively little use in an ev due to regen braking. See my post above, it does indeed take into account emissions depending on the electricity mix on the grid - in heavily fossil fuel dependant areas the difference is smaller, whereas in areas where green energy is used a lot the difference is greater. As an extreme example Norway the in use emissions are very low as most of their electricity is from hydro.

 

[rhubarb7]

That’s been done to death - brake pads get comparatively little use in an ev due to regen braking. See my post above, it does indeed take into account emissions depending on the electricity mix on the grid - in heavily fossil fuel dependant areas the difference is smaller, whereas in areas where green energy is used a lot the difference is greater. As an extreme example Norway the in use emissions are very low as most of their electricity is from hydro.

The bulk of the EV's in my area are driven hard in short bursts, the regen braking wouldn't come into it around the back streets here.

I don't think it's fair, a 2.5 tonne Tesla gets free road tax, a Vauxhall Vivaro pays 350 a year.

The EV is tearing around en-route to the school/office, the Van owner is out working.

Another think that bugs me, is people trailing leads across the pavements to charge them. Illegal too.