E-car Sales Collapse

[specinho + 470]

17 hours ago, Jeroen Goudswaard said:

Y-on-Y Inflation in the euro-area is currently standing at 5%, with a peak of 10% around March 2023. The ECB interest rate is 3.75%.

Y-on-Y inflation in the USA is at 3%, with a peak of 9% around June 2022. Your Fed interest rate is 5%.

Not a big difference, and most of it can be explained by the Russian invasion (EU) and the slow recovery from the COVID crisis (USA).

According to an online course macroeconomy and sustainable future, calculation on average inflation is based on weight assigned or index given. All essential items are excluded including oil and gas. This gives skewed impression, a huge disparity between theoretical value and reality. For examples,

a) petrol was priced at $ 1.25.  it was increased to 1.45, 1.85, 1.95, 2.10 within a short year or two.

Inflation = ( 2.10 - 1.25)/1.25 * 100% = 68%

 

b) royal umbrella rice was at $ 23.50. Price increased to 25, 28, 33, 45, 55, 65, and now more than 70 e.g. 76.

Inflation = ( 76 - 23.50)/23.50 * 100% = 223.40%

On average, essential items have increased 50 % to more than 100 % within a few years.

Over here, it was caused by GST introduced. Government is taxing on goods that they do not produce and services they do not render. The reason given is "this would provide extra spending money for the government. " 

Covid locked down might have worsen it. Starting from queueing for toilet paper, containers stucked at Doha football stadium until world cup completed, businesses closed down for a long time etc, prices have gone up to compensate for the lost of time, revenue and shortage of goods.

It might be appropriate to say inflation started way before the war... will not change until proper corrective strategy is in place.

Increase in interest rate helps those with basic saving get through daily requirements at ease. For example,

For a saving of $ 100, 000, interest rate 3% would give $ 3000 per year or 250 per month.

For a saving of $ 10, 000, it would be $ 300 per year or $ 25 per month.

For a saving of $ 100, it would be $ 3 per year or $ 0.25 per month.

Banks use public saving to invest. It would be reasonable to share the fruit via interest paid. Russia has announced an interest rate of more than 12% prior to war...... Hope the world will follow suit... 'o' ^.^ 

 

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

EVs can be dirtier than fossil fuel cars over their lifetime.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/New-Study-Some-EVs-Are-Dirtier-Than-Conventional-Vehicles.html

"According to the report, the possibilities of GHG emissions for EVs is much wider than for ICEs mainly due to the much wider variances in upstream (mining+ manufacturing) emissions by EVs. The differences are such that the dirtiest EVs can have more than double the emissions of the cleanest internal combustion engines."

 

 

Edited July 18, 2023 by Ecocharger

[notsonice + 1,255]

13 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

EVs can be dirtier than fossil fuel cars over their lifetime.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/New-Study-Some-EVs-Are-Dirtier-Than-Conventional-Vehicles.html

"According to the report, the possibilities of GHG emissions for EVs is much wider than for ICEs mainly due to the much wider variances in upstream (mining+ manufacturing) emissions by EVs. The differences are such that the dirtiest EVs can have more than double the emissions of the cleanest internal combustion engines."

 

 

no surprise that you did not report the conclusions of the article

But overall, electric vehicles are much kinder on the environment than ICEs. 

According to the U.S. Department Of Energy, the average all-electric vehicle in the U.S. produces 2,817 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year; plug-in hybrids emit 4,824 pounds of CO2 equivalent, hybrid vehicles generate 6,898 pounds while gasoline-powered vehicles produce 12,594 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year.

 

[notsonice + 1,255]

16 hours ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Ya Don't say....

Dealers Now Have Nearly Two Million New Cars Sitting On Their Lots

Electric vehicles are leading the way when it comes to sitting unsold on dealer lots.

 

The big reason for this 53-day average supply comes down to one thing: EVs. According to the outlet, those vehicles have a 103-day supply. That makes it the only segment other than ultra-luxury and high-end luxury to have supplies on the other side of 100 days. However, Cox does point out that full-size cars were close at 99 days, but that’s not really that surprising.

 

https://jalopnik.com/dealers-now-have-nearly-two-million-new-cars-sitting-on-1850647358

 

Cox does point out that full-size cars were close at 99 days, but that’s not really that surprising....

 

huh ....sales of cars are slow right now.......must be summer

 

you basically pointed a nothing burger in your post

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

6 hours ago, notsonice said:

Cox does point out that full-size cars were close at 99 days, but that’s not really that surprising....

 

huh ....sales of cars are slow right now.......must be summer

 

you basically pointed a nothing burger in your post

This shows that the EV market is saturated, any potential EV buyers have already made their misguided purchases of EVs, and there is a demand barrier for further EV sales.

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

6 hours ago, notsonice said:

no surprise that you did not report the conclusions of the article

But overall, electric vehicles are much kinder on the environment than ICEs. 

According to the U.S. Department Of Energy, the average all-electric vehicle in the U.S. produces 2,817 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year; plug-in hybrids emit 4,824 pounds of CO2 equivalent, hybrid vehicles generate 6,898 pounds while gasoline-powered vehicles produce 12,594 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year.

 

No, look at the chart, those older studies are now in the trash can.

Even after 120,000 miles, the EVs lead in CO2 production, especially in those states where coal production supports electricity availability.

"The differences are such that the dirtiest EVs can have more than double the emissions of the cleanest internal combustion engines."

 

 

[notsonice + 1,255]

11 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

No, look at the chart, those older studies are now in the trash can.

Even after 120,000 miles, the EVs lead in CO2 production, especially in those states where coal production supports electricity availability.

"The differences are such that the dirtiest EVs can have more than double the emissions of the cleanest internal combustion engines."

 

 

No ???? you posted the article and this is what was the conclusion of the article is...........

 

from the article.......

But overall, electric vehicles are much kinder on the environment than ICEs. 

According to the U.S. Department Of Energy, the average all-electric vehicle in the U.S. produces 2,817 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year; plug-in hybrids emit 4,824 pounds of CO2 equivalent, hybrid vehicles generate 6,898 pounds while gasoline-powered vehicles produce 12,594 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year.

 

Now denying that your own post states the opposite of what you are commenting is not very smart of you. Go back and read the conclusion....oh I saved you the time and posted it here.....Enjoy your own article that you posted....

 

again here it is one more time

But overall, electric vehicles are much kinder on the environment than ICEs. 

According to the U.S. Department Of Energy, the average all-electric vehicle in the U.S. produces 2,817 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year; plug-in hybrids emit 4,824 pounds of CO2 equivalent, hybrid vehicles generate 6,898 pounds while gasoline-powered vehicles produce 12,594 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year.

 

and thanks for supporting  EV's with your article

great facts ........... the average all-electric vehicle in the U.S. produces 2,817 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year; plug-in hybrids emit 4,824 pounds of CO2 equivalent, hybrid vehicles generate 6,898 pounds while gasoline-powered vehicles produce 12,594 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year.

 

Oh oh your BS babble that clunkers are great is just BS

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

6 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

especially in those states where coal production supports electricity availability.

The decline in US coal fired powergen is happening at an astonishing rate, so this is a short term issue.

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/electricity-in-the-us-generation-capacity-and-sales.php

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

Tata confirms £4billion Somerset gigafactory which will create 4,000 jobs

https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/1792697/tata-gigafactory-Somerset-jaguar-land-rover

Good news for EV's and the UK!

[notsonice + 1,255]

8 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

No, look at the chart, those older studies are now in the trash can.

Even after 120,000 miles, the EVs lead in CO2 production, especially in those states where coal production supports electricity availability.

"The differences are such that the dirtiest EVs can have more than double the emissions of the cleanest internal combustion engines."

 

 

especially in those states where coal production supports electricity availability.????

North Korean State supports coal production.........

US is dumping coal fast 

the dead cat production jump in the US last year is now sitting in stockpiles

last I checked Appalachian coal price crashed and is now at $70 a ton.....

No one is buying coal in the US right now as all the coal power plants that are left are stuffed to the gills with coal

PS

WyoFile

Report: Pace of coal plant retirements likely to increase

The trend is expected to hit thermal coal-producing regions, such as Wyoming's Powder River Basin, even quicker than previously thought.

.

Apr 5, 2023

 

 

Edited July 19, 2023 by notsonice

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

20 hours ago, notsonice said:

No ???? you posted the article and this is what was the conclusion of the article is...........

 

from the article.......

But overall, electric vehicles are much kinder on the environment than ICEs. 

According to the U.S. Department Of Energy, the average all-electric vehicle in the U.S. produces 2,817 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year; plug-in hybrids emit 4,824 pounds of CO2 equivalent, hybrid vehicles generate 6,898 pounds while gasoline-powered vehicles produce 12,594 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year.

 

Now denying that your own post states the opposite of what you are commenting is not very smart of you. Go back and read the conclusion....oh I saved you the time and posted it here.....Enjoy your own article that you posted....

 

again here it is one more time

But overall, electric vehicles are much kinder on the environment than ICEs. 

According to the U.S. Department Of Energy, the average all-electric vehicle in the U.S. produces 2,817 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year; plug-in hybrids emit 4,824 pounds of CO2 equivalent, hybrid vehicles generate 6,898 pounds while gasoline-powered vehicles produce 12,594 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year.

 

and thanks for supporting  EV's with your article

great facts ........... the average all-electric vehicle in the U.S. produces 2,817 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year; plug-in hybrids emit 4,824 pounds of CO2 equivalent, hybrid vehicles generate 6,898 pounds while gasoline-powered vehicles produce 12,594 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year.

 

Oh oh your BS babble that clunkers are great is just BS

No, you really are confused, that is not the conclusion of the study, just the government, who are as silly as usual.

Here is the article, and a reference to Moore's Law, which I believe someone tried to involve in this discussion. I guess Jay reads comic books, according to this evaluation.

https://manhattan.institute/article/electric-vehicles-for-everyone-the-impossible-dream?utm_source=wsj&utm_medium=feature

"The notion that we’re witnessing a tech-like acceleration for EVs is worse than a canard—it’s nonsensical in the energy physics of moving people and cargo versus moving data. If battery chemistry—the pillar of EV inevitability—could follow the arc of computing’s progress, we would soon see a peanut-size battery power a car for its lifetime on a single charge. Only in comic books does energy tech advance at the pace of information tech, such as in Moore’s Law (Figure 11)."

 

Edited July 19, 2023 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

11 hours ago, notsonice said:

especially in those states where coal production supports electricity availability.????

North Korean State supports coal production.........

US is dumping coal fast 

the dead cat production jump in the US last year is now sitting in stockpiles

last I checked Appalachian coal price crashed and is now at $70 a ton.....

No one is buying coal in the US right now as all the coal power plants that are left are stuffed to the gills with coal

PS

WyoFile

Report: Pace of coal plant retirements likely to increase

The trend is expected to hit thermal coal-producing regions, such as Wyoming's Powder River Basin, even quicker than previously thought.

.

Apr 5, 2023

 

 

Because of  EVs, coal production is ramping up worldwide.

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

20 hours ago, notsonice said:

No ???? you posted the article and this is what was the conclusion of the article is...........

 

from the article.......

But overall, electric vehicles are much kinder on the environment than ICEs. 

According to the U.S. Department Of Energy, the average all-electric vehicle in the U.S. produces 2,817 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year; plug-in hybrids emit 4,824 pounds of CO2 equivalent, hybrid vehicles generate 6,898 pounds while gasoline-powered vehicles produce 12,594 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year.

 

Now denying that your own post states the opposite of what you are commenting is not very smart of you. Go back and read the conclusion....oh I saved you the time and posted it here.....Enjoy your own article that you posted....

 

again here it is one more time

But overall, electric vehicles are much kinder on the environment than ICEs. 

According to the U.S. Department Of Energy, the average all-electric vehicle in the U.S. produces 2,817 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year; plug-in hybrids emit 4,824 pounds of CO2 equivalent, hybrid vehicles generate 6,898 pounds while gasoline-powered vehicles produce 12,594 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year.

 

and thanks for supporting  EV's with your article

great facts ........... the average all-electric vehicle in the U.S. produces 2,817 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year; plug-in hybrids emit 4,824 pounds of CO2 equivalent, hybrid vehicles generate 6,898 pounds while gasoline-powered vehicles produce 12,594 pounds of CO2 equivalent per year.

 

Oh oh your BS babble that clunkers are great is just BS

Read the chart. EVs are just polluting junk.

"The differences are such that the dirtiest EVs can have more than double the emissions of the cleanest internal combustion engines."

 

 

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

12 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Tata confirms £4billion Somerset gigafactory which will create 4,000 jobs

https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/1792697/tata-gigafactory-Somerset-jaguar-land-rover

Good news for EV's and the UK!

The public purses of European governments will not be able to afford the energy revolution or the EV revolution being proposed.

The brick wall has already sprung up.

The futile attempt by European governments to buffer their citizens from high energy prices has resulted in a gigantic failure. Now the devastating impact of the misguided fight against CO2 is coming home to roost, as the standard of living of millions of people comes under relentless destruction.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Mounting-Deficits-Force-Euro-Minsters-To-Cut-Energy-Support-Measures.html

"Euro zone finance ministers have decided to gradually withdraw energy support measures in 2023 and 2024 and use the savings to cut government deficits.

This move aligns with the recommendations of the European Fiscal Board, which suggested tighter fiscal policy to help the European Central Bank fight inflation and prevent interest rates from rising too high.

Despite the potential impact on energy prices, ministers believe determined, gradual, and realistic fiscal consolidation is necessary to strengthen sustainability and rebuild fiscal buffers, while structural reforms are deemed essential."

[turbguy + 1,544]

21 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

No, look at the chart, those older studies are now in the trash can.

Even after 120,000 miles, the EVs lead in CO2 production, especially in those states where coal production supports electricity availability.

"The differences are such that the dirtiest EVs can have more than double the emissions of the cleanest internal combustion engines."

 

 

It's suspect when the error bounds on measurements are almost half as large as the largest plotted variable.

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

40 minutes ago, turbguy said:

It's suspect when the error bounds on measurements are almost half as large as the largest plotted variable.

It still indicates a range of possible outcomes showing that EVs exceed fossil fuel cars in CO2 production, that is all that is necessary to explode the myths about EVs being a pathway for CO2 reduction.

[TailingsPond + 1,008]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

It still indicates a range of possible outcomes showing that EVs exceed fossil fuel cars in CO2 production, that is all that is necessary to explode the myths about EVs being a pathway for CO2 reduction.

But you don't care about CO2 reduction so why complain?

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

2 minutes ago, TailingsPond said:

But you don't care about CO2 reduction so why complain?

To show the lunacy of the Green movement.

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

EVs vs. ICEs: which is better for the environment?

https://news.energysage.com/evs-vs-ices-full-lifecycle-environmental-impact-analysis/

Have a read!

You cant cherry pick up to a certain mileage, it has to be the lifecycle of the vehicle!

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

9 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

EVs vs. ICEs: which is better for the environment?

https://news.energysage.com/evs-vs-ices-full-lifecycle-environmental-impact-analysis/

Have a read!

You cant cherry pick up to a certain mileage, it has to be the lifecycle of the vehicle!

This is more than 120,000 miles, which is regarded as a long-term mileage for vehicles.

https://manhattan.institute/article/electric-vehicles-for-everyone-the-impossible-dream?utm_source=wsj&utm_medium=feature

"The differences are such that the dirtiest EVs can have more than double the emissions of the cleanest internal combustion engines."

"Appendix: Details Underlying Figure 6

Anatomy of CO₂ “Guesstimates” and Known Unknowns: Estimated Lifetime EV Emissions Range from 50% Less to 50% More than ICE

To illustrate the uncertainties in estimating EV lifetime CO₂ emissions, we use Volvo’s analysis as a baseline because it is thorough and incorporates many, though not all, variables.[194] Per Volvo: “Choice of methodology has significant impact on the total carbon footprint. . . . [C]are should be taken when comparing results from this report with those from other vehicle manufacturers.” The company showed that, compared with an internal combustion engine’s knowable emissions, the estimated EV emissions range from an idealized 50% lower to a realistic 8% lower.[195]

While theoretical scenarios allow for estimating lower EV emissions, the outcome is not a fact or a measurement. On the other hand, as illustrated below, if the Volvo analysis is adjusted to include some, but not all, known variabilities (discussed in this report), EV lifetime CO₂ emissions can be 15% higher than the baseline ICE car, or if the comparison is with a 30% more fuel-efficient engine, estimated EV lifetime emissions can be more than 50% higher.

Below, we summarize six key known unknowns for four upstream materials features that Volvo estimates cause 18 tons of a total of 25 tons of CO₂ emitted to build the EV, and we add two downstream sets of variables for the baseline of the additional 16 tons emitted from vehicle charging. (The outcome is illustrated in Figure 6 of this report.)

1. Battery size and refueling anxiety: 18 tons CO₂ → 22 tons
   
   EV buyers prefer large batteries, not to address “range anxiety” per se but because that minimizes the frequency of on-road fueling that, even with fast chargers, takes 4x–10x longer than with gasoline. Volvo assumes a 71–78 kWh battery. But 90–100 kWh is common, and, as IEA notes, the trend is up. Bigger batteries mean more materials. Assuming a 25% larger battery than Volvo changes the 18 tons of CO₂ from materials and refining to 22 tons.
    
2. Emissions from energy used producing battery materials: 22 tons → 25 tons
   
   Volvo shows nonaluminum minerals contributing two-thirds of upstream CO₂ based on energy supplied by the “average global grid.” But most “energy materials” are refined in China with a grid that has 50% higher CO₂ per kWh. Assuming half the materials are China-sourced adds three tons to revised factor no. 1 above, thus raising the total to 25 tons.[196]
    
3. Energy/emissions from near-future mining: 25 tons → 34 tons
   
   The unprecedented expansion of mining to meet massive EV minerals demands means that each new ton produced will come from mines with declining ore grades (a long-run geological reality), which increases energy use. Energy per ton of copper mined has doubled in the past decade. Assuming only a 50% increase in CO₂ per ton for (nonaluminum) materials adds another nine tons to the adjustment in no. 2 above, raising the upstream total to 34 tons.[197]
    
4. Aluminum sourcing: 34 tons → 36 tons
   
   The Volvo baseline shows six tons of CO₂ emissions from aluminum production. Specific manufacturers may source aluminum from low-emissions countries, but China is over 55% of the world’s supply.[198] Producing a ton in China emits 20 tons of CO2.[199] The average EV has 0.5 tons of aluminum and rising.[200] Assuming that half the aluminum comes from China adds two tons to the baseline, raising the total battery embodied CO₂ to 36 tons.
    
5. Balance of materials: 36 tons → 43 tons
   
   The Volvo baseline includes 7 tons of CO₂ from fabricating the balance of hardware (battery module assembly, electronics, other materials, etc.). We ignore for this illustration the known variabilities for those factors but note, for example, that the 200 extra pounds of non-battery copper used for EV wiring and motors entails wide emissions variabilities. Thus, many EVs manufactured now and in the near future will arrive at a dealer, before the first mile driven, with upstream CO₂ emissions totaling at least 43 tons.
   
   After the emissions from supplying upstream materials (44 tons) to build the EV, one then adds the variables in downstream emissions, from fueling the EVs battery.
    
6. Drive on U.S. grids, not the EU grid: downstream 16 tons CO₂ → 22 tons
   
   Emissions due to battery charging vary, depending on the electricity used (also the time of day, as discussed elsewhere). Average emissions from all U.S. grids, as well as for many regional grids, are about 40% greater than the EU average.[201] With the contemplated expansion of wind and solar, we assume instead a 35% increase. Thus the 16 tons emitted over 120,000 miles of EU charging (per Volvo analysis) becomes 22 tons in many U.S. states.
    
7. Drive vigorously, or use the heater or air conditioner: 22 tons → 24 tons
   
   Using air conditioning, heat, or vigorous driving increases EV energy use from 10% to 50%. Assume that many users will experience at least a 10% increase in electricity used per mile over the rated efficiency, and the 22 tons in no. 5 above increases to 24 tons of CO₂.
    

The Bottom Line: 43 Tons of Estimated Emissions Rises to 67 Tons

The realistic potential of 43 tons of upstream emissions combined with operating realities of 24 tons of downstream emissions (over a vehicle lifetime) yields a total of 67 tons of EV CO₂. This is 15% more than the 59-ton baseline for a comparable gasoline-fueled SUV. Or, assume instead that a consumer purchases an ICE car with 30% better fuel efficiency; that vehicle’s lifetime CO₂ emissions drop to 40 tons, which is ~27 tons, or 50% less than many possible EV scenarios.

Endnotes

Please see Endnotes in PDF"

Are you interested in the qualifications of this author? I just knew that you would be,

"Mark P. Mills is a Manhattan Institute senior fellow, a faculty fellow at Northwestern University’s engineering school, and a partner in Montrose Lane, an energy-tech venture fund. He is author of the books The Cloud Revolution: How the Convergence of New Technologies Will Unleash the Next Economic Boom and a Roaring 2020s (2021), Digital Cathedrals (2020), Work in The Age of Robots (2018), and The Bottomless Well (2006). He served as chairman and CTO of ICx Technologies, helping to take it public in 2007. Mills served in the Reagan White House Science Office. Before that, he was an experimental physicist and development engineer in microprocessors and fiber optics."

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 20, 2023 by Ecocharger

[notsonice + 1,255]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

This is more than 120,000 miles, which is regarded as a long-term mileage for vehicles.

https://manhattan.institute/article/electric-vehicles-for-everyone-the-impossible-dream?utm_source=wsj&utm_medium=feature

"The differences are such that the dirtiest EVs can have more than double the emissions of the cleanest internal combustion engines."

"Appendix: Details Underlying Figure 6

Anatomy of CO₂ “Guesstimates” and Known Unknowns: Estimated Lifetime EV Emissions Range from 50% Less to 50% More than ICE

To illustrate the uncertainties in estimating EV lifetime CO₂ emissions, we use Volvo’s analysis as a baseline because it is thorough and incorporates many, though not all, variables.[194] Per Volvo: “Choice of methodology has significant impact on the total carbon footprint. . . . [C]are should be taken when comparing results from this report with those from other vehicle manufacturers.” The company showed that, compared with an internal combustion engine’s knowable emissions, the estimated EV emissions range from an idealized 50% lower to a realistic 8% lower.[195]

While theoretical scenarios allow for estimating lower EV emissions, the outcome is not a fact or a measurement. On the other hand, as illustrated below, if the Volvo analysis is adjusted to include some, but not all, known variabilities (discussed in this report), EV lifetime CO₂ emissions can be 15% higher than the baseline ICE car, or if the comparison is with a 30% more fuel-efficient engine, estimated EV lifetime emissions can be more than 50% higher.

Below, we summarize six key known unknowns for four upstream materials features that Volvo estimates cause 18 tons of a total of 25 tons of CO₂ emitted to build the EV, and we add two downstream sets of variables for the baseline of the additional 16 tons emitted from vehicle charging. (The outcome is illustrated in Figure 6 of this report.)

1. Battery size and refueling anxiety: 18 tons CO₂ → 22 tons
   
   EV buyers prefer large batteries, not to address “range anxiety” per se but because that minimizes the frequency of on-road fueling that, even with fast chargers, takes 4x–10x longer than with gasoline. Volvo assumes a 71–78 kWh battery. But 90–100 kWh is common, and, as IEA notes, the trend is up. Bigger batteries mean more materials. Assuming a 25% larger battery than Volvo changes the 18 tons of CO₂ from materials and refining to 22 tons.
    
2. Emissions from energy used producing battery materials: 22 tons → 25 tons
   
   Volvo shows nonaluminum minerals contributing two-thirds of upstream CO₂ based on energy supplied by the “average global grid.” But most “energy materials” are refined in China with a grid that has 50% higher CO₂ per kWh. Assuming half the materials are China-sourced adds three tons to revised factor no. 1 above, thus raising the total to 25 tons.[196]
    
3. Energy/emissions from near-future mining: 25 tons → 34 tons
   
   The unprecedented expansion of mining to meet massive EV minerals demands means that each new ton produced will come from mines with declining ore grades (a long-run geological reality), which increases energy use. Energy per ton of copper mined has doubled in the past decade. Assuming only a 50% increase in CO₂ per ton for (nonaluminum) materials adds another nine tons to the adjustment in no. 2 above, raising the upstream total to 34 tons.[197]
    
4. Aluminum sourcing: 34 tons → 36 tons
   
   The Volvo baseline shows six tons of CO₂ emissions from aluminum production. Specific manufacturers may source aluminum from low-emissions countries, but China is over 55% of the world’s supply.[198] Producing a ton in China emits 20 tons of CO2.[199] The average EV has 0.5 tons of aluminum and rising.[200] Assuming that half the aluminum comes from China adds two tons to the baseline, raising the total battery embodied CO₂ to 36 tons.
    
5. Balance of materials: 36 tons → 43 tons
   
   The Volvo baseline includes 7 tons of CO₂ from fabricating the balance of hardware (battery module assembly, electronics, other materials, etc.). We ignore for this illustration the known variabilities for those factors but note, for example, that the 200 extra pounds of non-battery copper used for EV wiring and motors entails wide emissions variabilities. Thus, many EVs manufactured now and in the near future will arrive at a dealer, before the first mile driven, with upstream CO₂ emissions totaling at least 43 tons.
   
   After the emissions from supplying upstream materials (44 tons) to build the EV, one then adds the variables in downstream emissions, from fueling the EVs battery.
    
6. Drive on U.S. grids, not the EU grid: downstream 16 tons CO₂ → 22 tons
   
   Emissions due to battery charging vary, depending on the electricity used (also the time of day, as discussed elsewhere). Average emissions from all U.S. grids, as well as for many regional grids, are about 40% greater than the EU average.[201] With the contemplated expansion of wind and solar, we assume instead a 35% increase. Thus the 16 tons emitted over 120,000 miles of EU charging (per Volvo analysis) becomes 22 tons in many U.S. states.
    
7. Drive vigorously, or use the heater or air conditioner: 22 tons → 24 tons
   
   Using air conditioning, heat, or vigorous driving increases EV energy use from 10% to 50%. Assume that many users will experience at least a 10% increase in electricity used per mile over the rated efficiency, and the 22 tons in no. 5 above increases to 24 tons of CO₂.
    

The Bottom Line: 43 Tons of Estimated Emissions Rises to 67 Tons

The realistic potential of 43 tons of upstream emissions combined with operating realities of 24 tons of downstream emissions (over a vehicle lifetime) yields a total of 67 tons of EV CO₂. This is 15% more than the 59-ton baseline for a comparable gasoline-fueled SUV. Or, assume instead that a consumer purchases an ICE car with 30% better fuel efficiency; that vehicle’s lifetime CO₂ emissions drop to 40 tons, which is ~27 tons, or 50% less than many possible EV scenarios.

Endnotes

Please see Endnotes in PDF"

Are you interested in the qualifications of this author? I just knew that you would be,

"Mark P. Mills is a Manhattan Institute senior fellow, a faculty fellow at Northwestern University’s engineering school, and a partner in Montrose Lane, an energy-tech venture fund. He is author of the books The Cloud Revolution: How the Convergence of New Technologies Will Unleash the Next Economic Boom and a Roaring 2020s (2021), Digital Cathedrals (2020), Work in The Age of Robots (2018), and The Bottomless Well (2006). He served as chairman and CTO of ICx Technologies, helping to take it public in 2007. Mills served in the Reagan White House Science Office. Before that, he was an experimental physicist and development engineer in microprocessors and fiber optics."

 

 

 

 

 

thanks for posting garbage.....again and again

Here is reality

The major source of EV emissions is the energy used to charge their batteries. Which makes the great case for renewables and the need to dump coal...........

 

Are electric vehicles definitely better for the climate than gas-powered cars?

 

Yes: although electric cars' batteries make them more carbon-intensive to manufacture than gas cars, they more than make up for it by driving much cleaner under nearly any conditions.

 

October 13, 2022

Although many fully electric vehicles (EVs) carry “zero emissions” badges, this claim is not quite true. Battery-electric cars may not emit greenhouse gases from their tailpipes, but some emissions are created in the process of building and charging the vehicles. Nevertheless, says Sergey Paltsev, Deputy Director of the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, electric vehicles are clearly a lower-emissions option than cars with internal combustion engines. Over the course of their driving lifetimes, EVs will create fewer carbon emissions than gasoline-burning cars under nearly any conditions.

“We shouldn't claim victory that with this switch to electric cars, problem solved, we are going to have zero emissions,” he says. “No, that's not the case. But electric cars are actually much, much better in terms of the impact on the climate in comparison to internal combustion vehicles. And in time, that comparative advantage of electric cars is going to grow.”

One source of EV emissions is the creation of their large lithium-ion batteries. The use of minerals including lithium, cobalt, and nickel, which are crucial for modern EV batteries, requires using fossil fuels to mine those materials and heat them to high temperatures. As a result, building the 80 kWh lithium-ion battery found in a Tesla Model 3 creates between 2.5 and 16 metric tons of CO₂ (exactly how much depends greatly on what energy source is used to do the heating).¹ This intensive battery manufacturing means that building a new EV can produce around 80% more emissions than building a comparable gas-powered car.²

But just like with gasoline cars, most emissions from today’s EVs come after they roll off the production floor.³ The major source of EV emissions is the energy used to charge their batteries. These emissions, says Paltsev, vary enormously based on where the car is driven and what kind of energy is used there. The best case scenario looks like what’s happening today in Norway, Europe’s largest EV market: the nation draws most of its energy from hydropower, giving all those EVs a minuscule carbon footprint. In countries that get most of their energy from burning dirty coal, the emissions numbers for EVs don’t look nearly as good—but they’re still on par with or better than burning gasoline.

To illustrate how EVs create fewer emissions than their counterparts, Paltsev points to MIT’s Insights Into Future Mobility study from 2019.⁴ This study looked at comparable vehicles like the Toyota Camry and Honda Clarity across their gasoline, hybrid, plug-in hybrid, battery electric, and hydrogen fuel cell configurations. The researchers found that, on average, gasoline cars emit more than 350 grams of CO₂ per mile driven over their lifetimes. The hybrid and plug-in hybrid versions, meanwhile, scored at around 260 grams per mile of carbon dioxide, while the fully battery-electric vehicle created just 200 grams. Stats from the U.S. Department of Energy tell a similar story: Using the nationwide average of different energy sources, DOE found that EVs create 3,932 lbs. of CO₂ equivalent per year, compared to 5,772 lbs. for plug-in hybrids, 6,258 lbs. for typical hybrids, and 11,435 lbs. for gasoline vehicles.⁵

MIT’s report shows how much these stats can swing based on a few key factors. For example, when the researchers used the average carbon intensity of America’s power grid, they found that a fully electric vehicle emits about 25 percent less carbon than a comparable hybrid car. But if they ran the numbers assuming the EV would charge up in hydropower-heavy Washington State, they found it would emit 61 percent less carbon than the hybrid. When they did the math for coal-heavy West Virginia, the EV actually created more carbon emissions than the hybrid, but still less than the gasoline car.

In fact, Paltsev says, it’s difficult to find a comparison in which EVs fare worse than internal combustion. If electric vehicles had a shorter lifespan than gas cars, that would hurt their numbers because they would have fewer low-emissions miles on the road to make up for the carbon-intensive manufacture of their batteries. Yet when the MIT study calculated a comparison in which EVs lasted only 90,000 miles on the road rather than 180,000 miles, they remained 15 percent better than a hybrid and far better than a gas car.

And while internal combustion engines are getting more efficient, EVs are poised to become greener by leaps and bounds as more countries add more clean energy to their mix. MIT’s report sees gasoline cars dropping from more than 350 grams of CO₂ per mile to around 225 grams by the year 2050. In that same span, however, battery EVs could drop to around 125 grams, and perhaps even down to 50 grams if the price of renewable energy were to drop significantly.

“Once we decarbonize the electric grid—once we get more and more clean sources to the grid—the comparison is getting better and better,” Paltsev says.

 

[notsonice + 1,255]

21 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

No, you really are confused, that is not the conclusion of the study, just the government, who are as silly as usual.

Here is the article, and a reference to Moore's Law, which I believe someone tried to involve in this discussion. I guess Jay reads comic books, according to this evaluation.

https://manhattan.institute/article/electric-vehicles-for-everyone-the-impossible-dream?utm_source=wsj&utm_medium=feature

"The notion that we’re witnessing a tech-like acceleration for EVs is worse than a canard—it’s nonsensical in the energy physics of moving people and cargo versus moving data. If battery chemistry—the pillar of EV inevitability—could follow the arc of computing’s progress, we would soon see a peanut-size battery power a car for its lifetime on a single charge. Only in comic books does energy tech advance at the pace of information tech, such as in Moore’s Law (Figure 11)."

 

 

Your author posts garbage ...your author ???? Phd in anything???? Masters degree????? Teaching anywhere NOPE NOPE NOPE ....his credentials ......really has none...published papers.....his research???? nothing ever published.......um none just  a sci fi writer no different than Mark from down under.......

His EV article.... a joke

so lets look at Figure 11

figure 11......trying to compare gains in battery performance to Moores law ....Moore's law is the observation that the number of transistors in an integrated circuit (IC) shows your author is an idiot.......

.

and then you repost it......why would anyone try to compare the two as they are so unrelated that if shows that your author uses horrible comparisons (not based in science). And the  rest of his article........junk science 

the joke that he posted it and  that you bought it and reposted it. Idiots hang together.......Moores law compared to battery energy density.........what one would expect from a 6th grade science fair...........

 

has anyone been making the claim that battery energy density should be anywhere near the density of gasoline???? and the topper to compare battery energy density to the observation of the number of transistors in an integrated circuit (IC)........The author sold you BS.......

 

Edited July 20, 2023 by notsonice

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

3 hours ago, notsonice said:

thanks for posting garbage.....again and again

Here is reality

The major source of EV emissions is the energy used to charge their batteries. Which makes the great case for renewables and the need to dump coal...........

 

Are electric vehicles definitely better for the climate than gas-powered cars?

 

Yes: although electric cars' batteries make them more carbon-intensive to manufacture than gas cars, they more than make up for it by driving much cleaner under nearly any conditions.

 

October 13, 2022

Although many fully electric vehicles (EVs) carry “zero emissions” badges, this claim is not quite true. Battery-electric cars may not emit greenhouse gases from their tailpipes, but some emissions are created in the process of building and charging the vehicles. Nevertheless, says Sergey Paltsev, Deputy Director of the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, electric vehicles are clearly a lower-emissions option than cars with internal combustion engines. Over the course of their driving lifetimes, EVs will create fewer carbon emissions than gasoline-burning cars under nearly any conditions.

“We shouldn't claim victory that with this switch to electric cars, problem solved, we are going to have zero emissions,” he says. “No, that's not the case. But electric cars are actually much, much better in terms of the impact on the climate in comparison to internal combustion vehicles. And in time, that comparative advantage of electric cars is going to grow.”

One source of EV emissions is the creation of their large lithium-ion batteries. The use of minerals including lithium, cobalt, and nickel, which are crucial for modern EV batteries, requires using fossil fuels to mine those materials and heat them to high temperatures. As a result, building the 80 kWh lithium-ion battery found in a Tesla Model 3 creates between 2.5 and 16 metric tons of CO₂ (exactly how much depends greatly on what energy source is used to do the heating).¹ This intensive battery manufacturing means that building a new EV can produce around 80% more emissions than building a comparable gas-powered car.²

But just like with gasoline cars, most emissions from today’s EVs come after they roll off the production floor.³ The major source of EV emissions is the energy used to charge their batteries. These emissions, says Paltsev, vary enormously based on where the car is driven and what kind of energy is used there. The best case scenario looks like what’s happening today in Norway, Europe’s largest EV market: the nation draws most of its energy from hydropower, giving all those EVs a minuscule carbon footprint. In countries that get most of their energy from burning dirty coal, the emissions numbers for EVs don’t look nearly as good—but they’re still on par with or better than burning gasoline.

To illustrate how EVs create fewer emissions than their counterparts, Paltsev points to MIT’s Insights Into Future Mobility study from 2019.⁴ This study looked at comparable vehicles like the Toyota Camry and Honda Clarity across their gasoline, hybrid, plug-in hybrid, battery electric, and hydrogen fuel cell configurations. The researchers found that, on average, gasoline cars emit more than 350 grams of CO₂ per mile driven over their lifetimes. The hybrid and plug-in hybrid versions, meanwhile, scored at around 260 grams per mile of carbon dioxide, while the fully battery-electric vehicle created just 200 grams. Stats from the U.S. Department of Energy tell a similar story: Using the nationwide average of different energy sources, DOE found that EVs create 3,932 lbs. of CO₂ equivalent per year, compared to 5,772 lbs. for plug-in hybrids, 6,258 lbs. for typical hybrids, and 11,435 lbs. for gasoline vehicles.⁵

MIT’s report shows how much these stats can swing based on a few key factors. For example, when the researchers used the average carbon intensity of America’s power grid, they found that a fully electric vehicle emits about 25 percent less carbon than a comparable hybrid car. But if they ran the numbers assuming the EV would charge up in hydropower-heavy Washington State, they found it would emit 61 percent less carbon than the hybrid. When they did the math for coal-heavy West Virginia, the EV actually created more carbon emissions than the hybrid, but still less than the gasoline car.

In fact, Paltsev says, it’s difficult to find a comparison in which EVs fare worse than internal combustion. If electric vehicles had a shorter lifespan than gas cars, that would hurt their numbers because they would have fewer low-emissions miles on the road to make up for the carbon-intensive manufacture of their batteries. Yet when the MIT study calculated a comparison in which EVs lasted only 90,000 miles on the road rather than 180,000 miles, they remained 15 percent better than a hybrid and far better than a gas car.

And while internal combustion engines are getting more efficient, EVs are poised to become greener by leaps and bounds as more countries add more clean energy to their mix. MIT’s report sees gasoline cars dropping from more than 350 grams of CO₂ per mile to around 225 grams by the year 2050. In that same span, however, battery EVs could drop to around 125 grams, and perhaps even down to 50 grams if the price of renewable energy were to drop significantly.

“Once we decarbonize the electric grid—once we get more and more clean sources to the grid—the comparison is getting better and better,” Paltsev says.

 

The fact remains that EVs are CO2 heavy...sorry. You won't get CO2 free grids anywhere, with Asia and Africa increasing coal usage.

[notsonice + 1,255]

10 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

The fact remains that EVs are CO2 heavy...sorry. You won't get CO2 free grids anywhere, with Asia and Africa increasing coal usage.

The fact remains that EVs are CO2 heavy????? your facts are fake

here are real facts......

EVs are CO2 light ....Enjoy it

Stats from the U.S. Department of Energy tell a similar story: Using the nationwide average of different energy sources, DOE found that EVs create 3,932 lbs. of CO₂ equivalent per year, compared to 5,772 lbs. for plug-in hybrids, 6,258 lbs. for typical hybrids, and 11,435 lbs. for gasoline vehicles.⁵

 

^{and the more renewables generating electricity the better it gets}

^{Thanks for supporting the Green Agenda ...your tax dollars are well spent on the transition}

^MAGA

^{Making Americas Green Agenda}

 

 

Edited July 20, 2023 by notsonice

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

36 minutes ago, notsonice said:

The fact remains that EVs are CO2 heavy????? your facts are fake

here are real facts......

EVs are CO2 light ....Enjoy it

Stats from the U.S. Department of Energy tell a similar story: Using the nationwide average of different energy sources, DOE found that EVs create 3,932 lbs. of CO₂ equivalent per year, compared to 5,772 lbs. for plug-in hybrids, 6,258 lbs. for typical hybrids, and 11,435 lbs. for gasoline vehicles.⁵

 

^{and the more renewables generating electricity the better it gets}

^{Thanks for supporting the Green Agenda ...your tax dollars are well spent on the transition}

^MAGA

^{Making Americas Green Agenda}

 

 

The facts are otherwise, as ascertained by this outstanding researcher.

https://www.mccormick.northwestern.edu/research-faculty/directory/faculty-fellows.html

Here is your take on the Moore's Law section.

"why would anyone try to compare the two as they are so unrelated that if shows that your author uses horrible comparisons (not based in science). "

Man, you really missed this one, it went right over your head. He was criticizing those like Jay who were trying to apply Moore''s Law to EV uptake. How could you misunderstand that? Jay must have read it in an EV promotional blurb.

Edited July 20, 2023 by Ecocharger