Tom Kirkman

New German Study Shocks Electric Cars: “Considerably” Worse For Climate Than Diesel Cars, Up To 25% More CO2

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Just for amusement...

A show of hands please, who actually recycles your dead AA batteries and AAA batteries rather than tossing them in the dustbin (which end up in a landfill) ?

I throw them in the trash like 99% of people do. When the government mandates special disposal AND provides a way to dispose of batteries I will happily follow the rule. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/21/2019 at 12:57 AM, Tom Kirkman said:

Oopsie, looks like EVs perhaps aren't so "green" after all.

Expect screams to the contrary, foaming at the mouth, insults, denials, and general brickbats from the Mainstream Media, and cries of ZOMG heresy from the Holy and Infallible Church of Global Warming.

Or maybe they will call the Germans who made the study ... literally Nazis (that would amuse me endlessly).

New German Study Shocks Electric Cars: “Considerably” Worse For Climate Than Diesel Cars, Up To 25% More CO2

Germany’s Stuttgarter Zeitung here reports that electric cars are in fact pretty bad for the climate, it turns out. So, once activists are done banning fossil fuel powered vehicles, then electric ones will soon follow.

According to a new German study, electric cars have “significantly higher CO2 emissions than diesel cars”, and especially the Tesla Model 3 “performs particularly poorly” as it emits over 150 grams of CO2 for each kilometer it travels!

Up to 28% more CO2!

According to a study led by Christoph Buchal of the University of Cologne released by the Ifo Institute in Munich, when one takes into account Germany’s current energy mix — where the share of coal and gas still remains considerable — and the amount of energy used for electric car battery production, CO2 emissions by electric cars are higher than comparable diesel powered cars.

Co-authors of the study were energy expert Hans-Dieter Karl and renowned economist Professor Hans-Werner Sinn.

Citing the results of the study, the Stuttgarter Zeitung writes that when the production of the batteries is accounted for, an e-car “burdens the climate 11 – 28% more than a diesel car”.

...

The biggest lies promoted and shoved down peoples throats are these "wind, solar and EV's" are green and clean , when in fact they are the furthest from being anywhere near clean or green. Getting all the raw materials to put together these solar panels, their electronics, chips, wafers, REE's  and all the metals and composites  etc etc etc etc etc etc , use coal oil , gas with no end in sight!!! China's REE regions are total dead zones and environmental disasters. Same thing in LATAM . Just so people feel good running around town or going across the country in their TESLA's and Volts and Hybrids etc and cooling and heating their homes, offices etc with solar and wind dont see the emissions and environmental destruction doesnt mean it didnt happen !!

  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

That's good news!  Although the Battery Man caped superhero guy strikes me as .... odd.  In an amusing sort of way.  But that's supposed to be the idea, apparently.  Nacho Libre!

Over here in Malaysia, there is no designated facility or area that I am aware of to recycle batteries of any kind.  Into the garbage they go, and then end up either in a landfill or incinerator.  I've given up trying to recycle batteries here, as nobody here seems to know what to do with their dead batteries except dustbin them.

In Switzerland, there is a legally anchored obligation for trade to return used batteries. An obligatory advance disposal fee applies to batteries and accumulators since  2001. This finances the collection, transport and the environmentally recycling of used batteries and accumulators. This means: Batteries and accumulators can be brought back everywhere where they are sold, free of charge. Switzerland has more than 12,000 of these collection points and you can find the closest collection point on https://recycling-map.ch/en Just insert the postal code of the locality (for instance 3000 for Bern or 1200 for Geneva) and select the kind of stuff you want to recyle (in our case batteries) and you'll see on a map the local collection points.

For Malaysia it's obviously way more tricky to find collection points but you can bring back batteries to the IKEA stores if you have one in your area. There are also some possibilities in Kuala Lumpur.  https://happygokl.com/recycling-in-kl-batteries-e-waste-bulbs/

Batteries are hazardous waste, and if they are thrown in landfills where their contents leak into the soil, groundwater, streams, rivers, they will ultimately end up in the water you drink and bathe in.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Just for amusement...

A show of hands please, who actually recycles your dead AA batteries and AAA batteries rather than tossing them in the dustbin (which end up in a landfill) ?

Vast difference with a big car battery.  These will pile up in dealerships etc.  Just as lead acid battery cores do.  Just as all of the nickel cadmium batteries were recycled for forklifts.  Why?  Nickel is pricey and valuable even though cadmium is a PITA.  Lithium bats have lots of nickel, lithium etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ceo_energemsier said:

The biggest lies promoted and shoved down peoples throats are these "wind, solar and EV's" are green and clean , when in fact they are the furthest from being anywhere near clean or green. Getting all the raw materials to put together these solar panels, their electronics, chips, wafers, REE's  and all the metals and composites  etc etc etc etc etc etc , use coal oil , gas with no end in sight!!! China's REE regions are total dead zones and environmental disasters. Same thing in LATAM . Just so people feel good running around town or going across the country in their TESLA's and Volts and Hybrids etc and cooling and heating their homes, offices etc with solar and wind dont see the emissions and environmental destruction doesnt mean it didnt happen !!

In the real world, a lot of things are dirty. This includes REE extraction and disposal of various kinds of batteries. In an ideal world one would have a fully circular economy. Globally, the human race simply doesn't do that. Whether the 'waste' is plastic bags, CO2, particulate matter from coal or diesel, or dead EV batteries is a bit of a detail at this point, the big issue is whether we're going to clean it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Wastral said:

Vast difference with a big car battery.  These will pile up in dealerships etc.  Just as lead acid battery cores do.  Just as all of the nickel cadmium batteries were recycled for forklifts.  Why?  Nickel is pricey and valuable even though cadmium is a PITA.  Lithium bats have lots of nickel, lithium etc. 

EV batteries will not go directly to recycling. They will have a second life for instance as stationary batteries for storing renewable energy.

 

Lithium-ion batteries can collect and discharge electricity for another seven to 10 years after being taken off the roads and stripped from chassis—a shelf life with significant ramifications for global carmakers, electricity providers and raw-materials suppliers.

https://www.virtuosoenergy.com/ev-batteries-second-life/

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/21/2019 at 2:57 AM, Tom Kirkman said:

Oopsie, looks like EVs perhaps aren't so "green" after all.

 

...

This study as well as most of the others like it do not take into account the CO2 produced by the refining process. Once that is done, them EVs produce less CO2 in nearly all circumstances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/23/2019 at 3:40 AM, Tim Turley said:

There will be more EV’s in landfills in 10-20 years than used condoms and toilet paper.  The technology is just not sustainable with limited resources for batteries and their disposal, and the inefficiencies of dead weight loss and charging times, not to mention when they go off and self destruct in a ball of flames...!

https://qz.com/1601177/a-video-showed-a-parked-tesla-model-s-exploding-in-shanghai/

Where to begin with this?

The number of EVs in landfills will be fewer than the number of gasmobiles because EVs are so much more durable.

Again, if the number of gas cars is sustainable, than so are EVs. Lithium is one of the more common elements and other chemistries are on the horizon. 

EVs are vastly more efficient than ICE under all circumstances.

Charge times are coming down and are only even an issue for about 2% of driving. Most will find EVs more convenient as they only spend seconds per day charging from home, always starting with a “full tank”, and if well planned, never having to make a special trip to “fuel up.”

ICE catches on fire 10x as often as EVs on a per mile driven basis. And EV fires go much more slowly than ICE fires giving occupants more time to escape the car. So, only continue driving ICE if you want to be burned to a crisp.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ceo_energemsier said:

The biggest lies promoted and shoved down peoples throats are these "wind, solar and EV's" are green and clean , when in fact they are the furthest from being anywhere near clean or green. Getting all the raw materials to put together these solar panels, their electronics, chips, wafers, REE's  and all the metals and composites  etc etc etc etc etc etc , use coal oil , gas with no end in sight!!! China's REE regions are total dead zones and environmental disasters. Same thing in LATAM . Just so people feel good running around town or going across the country in their TESLA's and Volts and Hybrids etc and cooling and heating their homes, offices etc with solar and wind dont see the emissions and environmental destruction doesnt mean it didnt happen !!

The biggest lies are the ones that say EVs are not VASTLY greener than ICE. The mining requirements for EVs vs ICE are similar, only the battery is different and that is only a small part of the overall mining impact of car production. After that, mining is done for EVs, but ICE requires continuous mining and drilling to support it. The electrical grid is using some coal and gas right now, but that is getting less and less every year.

  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bill the Science Nerd said:

This study as well as most of the others like it do not take into account the CO2 produced by the refining process. Once that is done, them EVs produce less CO2 in nearly all circumstances.

Once the refineries are on a closed loop system there are no emissions!!! CO2 is captured and reused for other purposes as are other "waste" by products. Heat is also reused along with the water.

The fact of the matter is no matter what one labels these EV's etc, they are by no means "green" and or "clean"

So if we left those false advert words out, they are just another type of vehicle which may reduce use of oil!!! improve efficiency!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me put this in perspective for you. Even the electricity used in fuel production carries this cost. It takes about half a kilowatt to make a gallon of gasoline so you are already starting at a deficit even in the refinery.

But you also have distribution costs that get ignored in gasoline production but get accounted for in EV lifetime costs. All of these small on their own costs add up so EVs are more efficient about not producing as much CO2 just about anywhere.

Nothing is ever perfect, but EVs are far cleaner than even the best ICE vehicles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Wastral said:

YOu never read it did you?  YOu just posted a link backing up my statement... 5000 gigatons 300 yrs... Thanks man!  You are Great!

Of course they added T additions but not Wind velocity additions that go with  the T additions.  They KNOW this is the DOMINANT driving factor as the amount of CO2 sequestration goes by the 4th power of wind speed, but hey, why bother with science...

Appears your so called "scientists" aren't scientists at all.  Just hacks who ignore the #1 biggest contributor to CO2 ocean sequestration.  Smooth. 

Got some more BS to splatter?

No clue what you are blathering on about.  Yes I have read the paper, there are 1000 Gt, 2000 Gt and 5000 Gt emission estimates.  The middle one is the most reasonable emissions estimate, about 20% of the CO2 emissions remains in the atmosphere for about 10,000 to 50,000 years according to the paper.  So take the 5000 Gt emissions estimate if you are cornucopian that believes that fossil fuels will last essentially forever (100s of years), that suggests 1000 Gt of carbon or 3664 Gt of CO2 would be added to the atmosphere.  So atmospheric CO2 levels would rise from preindustrial of about 275 ppm to about 740 ppm in response to 5000 Gt of carbon emissions (18320 Gt of CO2 emissions), with about 80% of this sequestered by land and ocean over the first 500 years following emissions and the rest (20%) remaining for at least 10,000 years.

Mainstream climate science suggests average global temperature would rise by about 3 C above preindustrial average temperature for each doubling of atmospheric CO2 (if we assume a simple linear relationship, this may not hold above first doubling).  So 550 ppm suggests a 3 C rise in average global temperature and 740 ppm suggests a 4.3 C rise in average global temperature.

For the more reasonable 2000 Gt emissions scenario, average Global temperature would rise by about 2.23 C above preindustrial average Holocene temperature (roughly similar to the 1971-2000 average Global Temperature), if the equilibrium climate sensitivity is about 3 C.

 

Curious, did you read the paper? It is about the sequestration of CO2 by the Earth System.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Bill the Science Nerd said:

Let me put this in perspective for you. Even the electricity used in fuel production carries this cost. It takes about half a kilowatt to make a gallon of gasoline so you are already starting at a deficit even in the refinery.

But you also have distribution costs that get ignored in gasoline production but get accounted for in EV lifetime costs. All of these small on their own costs add up so EVs are more efficient about not producing as much CO2 just about anywhere.

Nothing is ever perfect, but EVs are far cleaner than even the best ICE vehicles. 

Lets say , we shut down all refineries for a month? 2 weeks?  and see how far EV's go? and how efficient they are? ;);)

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, ronwagn said:

Share of coal and gasoline please Tom. Gas means natural gas to many around the world. I think you mean coal and gasoline. 

I think they mean natural gas not gasoline.  They are talking about the coal and natural gas used to produce the electricity that powers the BEV, generally these cars use no gasoline and generally no gasoline is used to produce electricity (perhaps a bit in portable generators, but it is negligible).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/22/2019 at 10:40 PM, Okie said:

And now for something completely different:

https://electrek.co/2019/04/22/study-electric-cars-dirtier-diesel-debunked/

Also, there are a lot of good comments there that spell out the specific math as to why this study is false.

I think if you just look at the waste heat involved with ICE that would prove your point. 

The real problem is getting the price of electric cars down to where they need to be for the average person. Then there is the long distance problem for some. 

I have nothing against renewables or electric vehicles so long as they can compete with natural gas on an even footing. I consider it to be the immediate answer for eliminating coal use. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Guillaume Albasini said:

EV batteries will not go directly to recycling. They will have a second life for instance as stationary batteries for storing renewable energy.

 

Lithium-ion batteries can collect and discharge electricity for another seven to 10 years after being taken off the roads and stripped from chassis—a shelf life with significant ramifications for global carmakers, electricity providers and raw-materials suppliers.

https://www.virtuosoenergy.com/ev-batteries-second-life/

A nice article about regulations, which I hope come to fruition. The projections about battery and electric vehicle use seem specious to me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ronwagn said:

I have nothing against renewables or electric vehicles so long as they can compete with natural gas on an even footing. I consider it to be the immediate answer for eliminating coal use. 

I looked at buying a natural gas Honda Civic once a few years back.  The problem was, there were only four places in the entire St. Louis area to refuel it.  I suppose I could have spent a lot of money installing some kind of system in my home, but it probably would have been prohibitively expensive, especially compared to what it would cost to install a battery charging system in my garage.  Natural gas has the same problem from a logistical standpoint as does battery electric: it does not have the infrastructure to support it.  Although with battery electric, that is changing rapidly.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Okie said:

I looked at buying a natural gas Honda Civic once a few years back.  The problem was, there were only four places in the entire St. Louis area to refuel it.  I suppose I could have spent a lot of money installing some kind of system in my home, but it probably would have been prohibitively expensive, especially compared to what it would cost to install a battery charging system in my garage.  Natural gas has the same problem from a logistical standpoint as does battery electric: it does not have the infrastructure to support it.  Although with battery electric, that is changing rapidly.

I also looked into natural gas. The home refueling can be done economically. A few years ago the Department of Energy handed out millions of dollars in grants to come up with a $500 home fueling device. I have not been able to find the results of that research. 

Please see https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/natural_gas_locations.html#/find/nearest?fuel=CNG This shows some growth. It is just a matter of time. 

Are you aware that there are more natural gas vehicles in the world than electric ones? They are also larger and consist of trucks, ships, buses, cars etc.   http://www.ngvglobal.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Bill the Science Nerd said:

This study as well as most of the others like it do not take into account the CO2 produced by the refining process. Once that is done, them EVs produce less CO2 in nearly all circumstances.

The electricity used generally comes from the same processes.  Coal is the worst. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One would think reading some of these these comments that developing alternative and renewable energy is just a pipe dream that has come and gone. But, it sure is going to take a lot of coal to propel the next spacecraft to reach Mars. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Richardo said:

One would think reading some of these these comments that developing alternative and renewable energy is just a pipe dream that has come and gone. But, it sure is going to take a lot of coal to propel the next spacecraft to reach Mars. 

When you get to Mars flying in a Tesla , email me or rather send me a Tesla-mail and I will ship you a case of DOM.... the finest if you like something else , I will ship you that on the next Tesla Mars craft ;)🍾;)

Not against developing alternative techs and resources, just stop with the LIES!!! not you but in general...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.