I agree - I can’t imagine a huge difference between cars, unless perhaps it is one of the newer cars that is designed to be low c02 in manufacturing and highly recyclable. Even then I wonder how much better they are.
Let’s face it, the only ‘green’ car is the one that is not built. -Steve > On Jan 5, 2023, at 2:52 PM, Lawrence Winiarski via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org> > wrote: > > > Where do you think these idiots get their information about how much energy > it takes to build a car...or the "carbon footprint"? > > If you are actually trying to measure "energy" you need to be able to isolate > what you are actually measuring. > > Where do you draw the line about how much energy it takes to build a car? > Is it the energy consumption of a factory? What about the energy consumption > of the factories of the suppliers who make the > parts...tires...glass..plastic, the hoses, the clamps, If a factory buys > parts from a supplier or makes them in house, how does that enter into the > equations? Then if you pay a worker at your factory, and the worker spends > his wages driving monster trucksfor fun on weekends and goes through 100 > gallons of gas, or a different worker spends the weekend readinga book...does > that affect the "carbon footprint"? > > And then what about energy needed for the workers to get to and from work? > How about the energy needed to run the streetlights on the road they use to > get to work? How about the energy needed to heat the homes of the people who > mine the raw materials? How about the energy to make the food to feed the > workers? How about the energy used by the teachers? The schools and > universities? The asphalt for the roads? > > Call me cynical but my guess is these people who claim to analyze carbon > footprints are 99% full of hot air. They don't actually go out an measure > anything, they just repeat something they read or heard, (and often the most > provocative things tend to get repeated) which leads to an endless repeating > cycle of baloney by people who crave endless attention. > > I don't claim to have measured anything, but my common sense says an EV is a > car and and ICE is a car and that my "guess" is that it is highly likely that > the energy required to make them is (or could be) pretty damn comparable. > By weight and volume the EV and the ICE are more alike than different. > > > > > On Thursday, January 5, 2023, 12:20:43 AM PST, Michael Ross via EV > <ev@lists.evdl.org> wrote: > > I am trying to understand if Zeihan has an agenda. His expertise is > understanding geography and demographics. Knowing what ingredients go into > making the world go around, and details like, what does it take to make the > unique aluminum alloy that Tesla has crafted to make body parts that are > not steel. The claim is that this is significant and the carbon > footprint of an ICE made from steel is significantly better. > > Regarding the inputs to EVs, certainly the availability of lithium is not > good. Nor is it good for cobalt, or nickel. I have spent some time > thinking about the battery business, even had conversations with Jeff Dahn > and Aaron Cross (the Tesla cell life engineer). The time and commitment to > mine and process more of these material inputs could be a serious > impediment to EV growth. Regarding LiFePO, we have enough phosphate for > current use like fertilizer for crops. It takes years to build and start > operating a phosphate mine. If LiFePO is the future, we do not have a ready > supply. > > I posted so maybe I could get some wisdom that is not anecdotal. Does > anyone know about the supply side of Li batteries? In 2013 when I was > studying this topic, it did not look like a sure thing. Do we know what > sort of carbon cost is built into them? Only JB Straubel is working the > recycling angle. How is that going? > > At this moment in time, EV production is nowhere near the scale necessary > to make headway reducing carbon in the atmosphere. It could be we are years > or decades from solving this. That is the gist of Zeihan's assertion. Now > that we are getting shale oil in North America, that cost is way less for > us in the US. That alone can damage the transition to EVs from ICE. > > I think there is a lot of guesswork being presented to the effect that EVs > are going to be with us soon, en masse. > > >> On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 1:59 AM Steves via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org> wrote: >> >> Haven’t read the article, but perhaps he assumes virgin aluminum, which is >> very energy intensive. However even if virgin aluminum is used, 90% of big >> scrap (like car) aluminum is recycled, so that energy is essentially >> reclaimed out the back end. >> >> One has to read this kind of stuff very carefully. My dad was a staunch >> conservative and listened religiously to Rush Limbaugh. RL was ranting one >> day about laws to give up regular lightbulbs for CFLs, and if you broke a >> CFL your house became a hazmat area due the (minuscule) amount of mercury. >> I had to explain that since most of our energy comes from coal, and coal >> has mercury, that regular bulbs, being so inefficient, cause much more >> mercury to be spewed into the atmosphere over the bulbs lifetime. >> >> That’s why I haven’t bothered reading the article. Beware of people with >> agendas. >> >> -Steve >> >>> On Jan 4, 2023, at 11:36 PM, Michael Ross via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org> >> wrote: >>> >>> Zeihan says ICE looks a lot better and leans on the aluminum in the >> Tesla >>> bodywork. I wonder about this, but don't know how to evaluate it. >>> >>>> On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 4:36 PM John Lussmyer via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Just one of the many issues to point out: >>>> >>>>> On 1/4/2023 12:29 PM, Michael Ross via EV wrote: >>>>> The carbon footprint of Teslas >>>>> is not good when you correctly factor in the manufacturing footprint. >>>> >>>> >>>> Do the same calcs for a Gas car - which makes the EV look far better. >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org >>>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields >>>> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/ >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Michael E. Ross >>> (919) 585-6737 Land >>> (919) 901-2805 Cell and Text >>> (919) 576-0824 <https://www.google.com/voice/b/0?pli=1#phones> Tablet, >>> Google Phone and Text >>> -------------- next part -------------- >>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >>> URL: < >> http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20230104/0b4625d1/attachment.htm >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org >>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields >>> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/ >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org >> No other addresses in TO and CC fields >> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/ >> >> > > -- > Michael E. Ross > (919) 585-6737 Land > (919) 901-2805 Cell and Text > (919) 576-0824 <https://www.google.com/voice/b/0?pli=1#phones> Tablet, > Google Phone and Text > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20230105/f0f49aac/attachment.htm> > _______________________________________________ > Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org > No other addresses in TO and CC fields > HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/ > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20230105/ce9ba25f/attachment.htm> > _______________________________________________ > Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org > No other addresses in TO and CC fields > HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/ > _______________________________________________ Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org No other addresses in TO and CC fields HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
