Posted on 04/29/2019 7:51:16 AM PDT by Red Badger
Another day, another lefty belief proven to be a bunch of bullhickey. Lefties like to tell us their electric cars are totally saving the planet from the evil, awful carbon monster. Except, those electric cars actually contribute more to carbon output than their diesel counterparts.
A Tesla Model 3 is touted as a zero-emissions car by government regulators, but it actually results in more carbon dioxide than a comparable diesel-powered car, according to a recent study. When the CO2 emissions from battery production is included, electric cars, like Teslas, are “in the best case, slightly higher than those of a diesel engine, and are otherwise much higher,” reads a release from the German think tank IFO.
Driving a Tesla Model 3 in Germany, for example, is responsible for 156 to 181 grams of CO2 per kilometer, compared to just 141 grams per kilometer for a diesel-powered Mercedes C220d — that includes emissions from producing diesel fuel.
I can already picture the reaction from eco-lefties who thought they were saving the planet.
Yeah, this isn’t surprising in the slightest. Pretty much everything on this rock produces carbon in one way or another. Every time you exhale, you’re putting a little more carbon in the atmosphere. Though, you might wanna keep that one from the lefties. Lest their ideas take a more “sinister” turn.
If you wanna see the environmental effects of electric cars, just take a look at a strip mine for the lithium inside batteries. Yes, even “green” cars have environmental trade-offs. The only question now is how long before lefties turn against their beloved Priuses.
This is why we think it’s insanity for lefties to think they can tax and regulate climate change out of existence. They don’t seem to ever question whether their ideas are actually better. This, among other reasons, is why we’ll be sitting out the left’s war on cow farts.
Liberals do that all by themselves......................
Hmmm...…. that has always been my rule when watching CNN. I actually get quite a bit of truth from them.... by assuming that the exact opposite of what they are saying is the truth.
Diesel is more efficient than EV, why does Europe have diesel vehicles and we don’t (en mass). Politics? It’s cheaper to convert too!
I've seen it suggested that diesels are better suited to the US than gasoline is,and that the reverse is true of Europe.
At least 90% of the miles I drive are at 65mph...that is,Interstate driving.I firmly believe that they're far better suited to the Interstate than is gasoline...while they're not well suited to city driving.Europe,being far more densely populated than is the US would surely do more "city" driving than we do.
What would you do if battery technology improved by a factor of 2.5 or 3x?
So, then about 800-1000 mile range, and the recharge cost was ~5.00$?
Right now, depending on many factors, electric vehicles are MORE expensive than IC. I drive a 585HP sports car. I am a technology guy, and for me it’s not about climate change (which is Not caused by man or cow farts), it’s about price/performance.
When/If battery tech improves, it would be a game changer.
Another consideration is the total amount of parts in the average car - a electric car has far fewer drive train parts. Of course, if batteries get cheap and dense, then a high performance car could cost *much* less than a high performance gas or diesel. Consider batteries are a mass-production device - that is, there is no hand assembly.
For now, advantage is to IC engines - which as you know have been steadily improving over 100 years.....but battery tech is in its infancy as it takes advances in chemistry and nanotechnology we are just now getting ready to exploit.
A conservative estimate is that in 5 years batteries will improve by 2X, while the lower estimate is 1.5x and upper is 3x.
Once you reach over 650 mile range, the average drive needs downtime - 650 miles divvied by 70mph is 9.2 hours....
I have to think that two cars that each cost $30,000 cost a very similar amount to produce. Steel has to be melted ,parts have to be moved, raw materials have to be moved people have to drive to work to assemble them. I also wonder if they are factoring in the amount of energy needed to produce a gallon of diesel fuel.
If my current car,or one similar to it (similar features,capabilities,etc) had an *electric* motor,had a range of 800+ miles on a full charge,and could be recharged in about 4 minutes at any one of 50,000 recharging stations nationwide (as is true of my current diesel) then I'd give it very careful consideration.
And I'd do so even if a full charge cost $40+...as a full tank costs for my diesel.
Tomorrow morning, I’ll leave my house north of Baltimore and drive to Greeneville, SC pulling a 16’ trailer with a F-150. I’ll be down there for a couple days for work. Friday, I drive home, stop and change out duffel bags and go up to Dover, DE for the weekend, from there I drive to Augusta, ME, then stop on Long Island getting home next Friday night.
I’ll be making plenty of gas stops, but they take five minutes, not five hours each
Remember that the batteries decline after just a few years and need replacing. Lots of dirty coal burned in other countries to make them — Out of sight, Out of the leftist mind (like the gulags)
*AND* That is ‘IF’ they have a lifetime anything like conventional cars do — a bought USED electric car almost always has to have its batteries replaced (leading to the cars in general having a far shorter lifespan — so that the carbon cost of the rest of the car is now far higher also). Also add in all the other pollutants the result of scrapping a car.
Also PLEASE remind the ignorant that burning fossil fuels STILL is used to create the majority of that electricity for those fraudulently labeled ‘zero emissions’ autos. (What does it matter as long as libtards, in their ignorance, can ‘Feel Good’ ????????????????)
.
.
A co-worker of mine got really angry when I told him he just moved the pollution from his tail pipe to the smokestack of the local Electrical company’s generating station..................
I think you could get 70% charge in 30-40 minutes (about the length of time for a meal + bathroom). That’s current tech right now (some of the current get batteries can do that).
So if you had a 650 mile stint and then could go another 70% of that, that’s 1100 miles...time to take a nap....I personally don’t think it’s safe to drive much more than 10-12 hours....
Technology changes - nobody wants to drive a 1935 V8, either. They produce about 140 HP for about 10 mpg.
If you drive a diesel truck, the fill-up is more like 80-90$. I put 350k miles on a Volkswagen TDI - I don’t care what the press says, that was ONE HELL of an engine. I got 45-50 Mpg (REAL Not EPA) and had a 650 mile range on one tank (about 14.5 gallons).
I had to replace the turbo at 240k - I used a non-name brand part and got the whole thing done for 475$, including labor. Volkswagen and Audi want a king’s ransom for the part - luckily the internet told me who REALLY makes the turbo and I bought it for 200$.
Another green fantasy. Wind mills produce energy.
Truth: A windmill will never produce enough energy in its lifetime to replace the fossil fuels burned to build it, install it and operate it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.