I think the main point of banning ICE cars is to remove nasty emissions from the cars' tail pipes, which the pedestrians, cyclists and population have to breathe.
"The Road to Hell is paved with good intentions" It wasn't a problem before, and is well under control now. Cars are so clean now they aren't really the cause of the problem.
100lbs of gas is what I buy per week (15-16 gallons). Every week. For the life of my car. If like you say 20 years of use that is 100k+ lbs or 50 tons of gas. What does it take to extract, ship, store, refine, deliver that amount of gas for my car. Also once you burn that amount of gas the Co2 is 3 to 1. 1 car for its lifespan creates 150 tons of Co2 without calculating all of the above production and delivery costs.
"What's the total life cycle carbon footprint of this vehicle?" Here ya go: "Over their lifetime, battery electric vehicles produce far less global warming pollution than their gasoline counterparts-and they’re getting cleaner. " "On average, BEVs representative of those sold today produce less than half the global warming emissions of comparable gasoline-powered vehicles, even when the higher emissions associated with BEV manufacturing are taken into consideration." "EVs will become even cleaner as more electricity is generated by renewable sources of energy." - This one is important. A decade ago, coal accounted for over half of the US' electricity production. It's now under a third. The emissions associated with electricity in the US are decreasing, and every time a coal plant goes offline and is replaced by something cleaner, every EV powered by it gets cleaner, too. For comparison, how difficult is it to make VW diesels cleaner? The rapid change in cleanliness of grid power is an extremely powerful argument for EVs. www.ucsusa.org/clean-vehicles/electric-vehicles/life-cycle-ev-emissions#.WBYucysehD0 This report is "cradle to grave" and not "cradle to cradle," but considering that recycling benefits the results for batteries, you can consider the results in the report as conservative, thus "cradle to cradle" numbers would be even better (more in favor) of battery EVs. Battery recycling: "Toyota already has a battery collection rate of more than 90 percent, but said it is now widening its strategy and targeting a 100 percent recuperation result." www.hybridcars.com/toyota-europe-aiming-for-100-percent-hybrid-battery-recycling/ But that's NiMH, not Li-Ion. For Li-Ion, this paper claims that one reason there are so few recycling programs is because they last so long: "Recycling of automotive lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries is more complicated and not yet established because few end-of-life batteries will need recycling for another decade." The paper does suggest that smaller consumer products like cell phones and computers may be sufficient to best determine the best process for recycling. Overall, the main reason recycling poses a problem is that the lithium isn't worth enough to extract, i.e., the element is too cheap and plentiful to warrant recycling. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214993714000037
Not exactly as you tell it! Recycling lithium battery is hazardous! Most electricity is still generated by coal burn plants in the U.S. Only 1% is generated by solar and wind power! As more electricity is needed, more power plants are needed! Nuclear is the only solution but hard to get one built in the U.S. since after all the environmentalists blocks take a regulator process over 30 years to get approval and 5 years to built. Coal plants are the worse solution but are easier to built since the environmentalists are more friendly towards this type now!
Your claims about electricity supply are wrong. Per the EIA, the percentage from coal is close to 30%. More electricity comes from natural gas. In 2015, wind and and solar made up just over 5% of the US' electricity generation. The trend for less coal will not change as there are more plant shutdowns still planned. I have no criticisms against supporting nuclear. However, you have to get your data correct to be taken seriously.
Only 7% is renewables as of 2015! Here is the breakout: Biomass = 1.6% Geothermal = 0.4% Solar = 0.6% Wind = 4.7% As more electric cars get added to the total vehicles population, more electric power consumption will be needed. Renewables are not going take up the slack!
The 7% you cite is "other renewables." It does not include hydroelectric (6%), which is considered a renewable energy source. Thus, the total renewable amount is 13%. www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3 The Union of Concerned Scientists report is for current electricity supply, and as their report notes, the use of coal is decreasing and natural gas and renewables are increasing. Therefore, EVs continue to cause less pollution, regardless of whether all the growth is completely from renewables.
It would be cool if FCA and Mitsubishi went into a partnership to build small Chrysler cars in the United States. Seems like a simple win win to me.
Even though I'm all for electrification. I do take a wink to the NSX and the Porsche 911 Carrera because of the way they handle. Supercar Accessible.
love Honda !
I think the main point of banning ICE cars is to remove nasty emissions from the cars' tail pipes, which the pedestrians, cyclists and population have to breathe.
"The Road to Hell is paved with good intentions" It wasn't a problem before, and is well under control now. Cars are so clean now they aren't really the cause of the problem.
100lbs of gas is what I buy per week (15-16 gallons). Every week. For the life of my car. If like you say 20 years of use that is 100k+ lbs or 50 tons of gas.
What does it take to extract, ship, store, refine, deliver that amount of gas for my car. Also once you burn that amount of gas the Co2 is 3 to 1. 1 car for its lifespan creates 150 tons of Co2 without calculating all of the above production and delivery costs.
For calculations, use your overall mpg & expected vehicle life in terms of miles. It's a much better calculation and doesn't depend on time variables.
This car makes my gibblits tingle!
"What's the total life cycle carbon footprint of this vehicle?"
Here ya go:
"Over their lifetime, battery electric vehicles produce far less global warming pollution than their gasoline counterparts-and they’re getting cleaner. "
"On average, BEVs representative of those sold today produce less than half the global warming emissions of comparable gasoline-powered vehicles, even when the higher emissions associated with BEV manufacturing are taken into consideration."
"EVs will become even cleaner as more electricity is generated by renewable sources of energy." - This one is important. A decade ago, coal accounted for over half of the US' electricity production. It's now under a third. The emissions associated with electricity in the US are decreasing, and every time a coal plant goes offline and is replaced by something cleaner, every EV powered by it gets cleaner, too. For comparison, how difficult is it to make VW diesels cleaner? The rapid change in cleanliness of grid power is an extremely powerful argument for EVs.
www.ucsusa.org/clean-vehicles/electric-vehicles/life-cycle-ev-emissions#.WBYucysehD0
This report is "cradle to grave" and not "cradle to cradle," but considering that recycling benefits the results for batteries, you can consider the results in the report as conservative, thus "cradle to cradle" numbers would be even better (more in favor) of battery EVs.
Battery recycling:
"Toyota already has a battery collection rate of more than 90 percent, but said it is now widening its strategy and targeting a 100 percent recuperation result."
www.hybridcars.com/toyota-europe-aiming-for-100-percent-hybrid-battery-recycling/
But that's NiMH, not Li-Ion.
For Li-Ion, this paper claims that one reason there are so few recycling programs is because they last so long: "Recycling of automotive lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries is more complicated and not yet established because few end-of-life batteries
will need recycling for another decade." The paper does suggest that smaller consumer products like cell phones and computers may be sufficient to best determine the best process for recycling. Overall, the main reason recycling poses a problem is that the lithium isn't worth enough to extract, i.e., the element is too cheap and plentiful to warrant recycling.
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214993714000037
Not exactly as you tell it! Recycling lithium battery is hazardous! Most electricity is still generated by coal burn plants in the U.S. Only 1% is generated by solar and wind power! As more electricity is needed, more power plants are needed! Nuclear is the only solution but hard to get one built in the U.S. since after all the environmentalists blocks take a regulator process over 30 years to get approval and 5 years to built. Coal plants are the worse solution but are easier to built since the environmentalists are more friendly towards this type now!
Your claims about electricity supply are wrong. Per the EIA, the percentage from coal is close to 30%. More electricity comes from natural gas. In 2015, wind and and solar made up just over 5% of the US' electricity generation.
The trend for less coal will not change as there are more plant shutdowns still planned. I have no criticisms against supporting nuclear. However, you have to get your data correct to be taken seriously.
Only 7% is renewables as of 2015! Here is the breakout:
Biomass = 1.6%
Geothermal = 0.4%
Solar = 0.6%
Wind = 4.7%
As more electric cars get added to the total vehicles population, more electric power consumption will be needed. Renewables are not going take up the slack!
The 7% you cite is "other renewables." It does not include hydroelectric (6%), which is considered a renewable energy source. Thus, the total renewable amount is 13%.
www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3
The Union of Concerned Scientists report is for current electricity supply, and as their report notes, the use of coal is decreasing and natural gas and renewables are increasing. Therefore, EVs continue to cause less pollution, regardless of whether all the growth is completely from renewables.
if they developed it all in japan, it would prob look much better inside/out and prob sell a lot more lol
lol. "a vehicle that's accessible". Right. Only for the rich.