Join Early Retirement Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 06-10-2013, 06:50 AM   #181
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
HFWR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Lawn chair in Texas
Posts: 12,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malcolm2 View Post
As far as the environmental considerations, as long as someone doesn't claim the vehicle is 'saving the planet' no problem. Many Prius buyers mistakenly had that idea - just not true.
Not sure about saving the planet, and I could care less, but I'm too lazy, but I've consumed about 550 fewer gallons of gasoline in the 1.5 years I've owned a Prius, vs. the pickup I used to drive. I can live with that...
__________________

__________________
Have Funds, Will Retire

...not doing anything of true substance...
HFWR is offline  
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 06-10-2013, 07:56 AM   #182
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Naples
Posts: 2,161
Quote:
Originally Posted by HFWR View Post
Not sure about saving the planet, and I could care less, but I'm too lazy, but I've consumed about 550 fewer gallons of gasoline in the 1.5 years I've owned a Prius, vs. the pickup I used to drive. I can live with that...
+1. The only thing I'm interested in is saving my wallet. I got a Prius this year and so far I've cut my gasoline purchases in half. Probably won't pay for the car but it makes me feel good. Kind of like a "good investment".
__________________

__________________
JOHNNIE36 is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 08:46 AM   #183
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zathras View Post
ERD, I am looking for more data on the environmental front.
If you have any, I would appreciate it.
I recently came across a very interesting article on this - trouble is, it definitely had a bias to it. But still, many of the points he made have some validity. I'm trying to sort the wheat from the chaff on that one, and came across another article trying to debunk the first, and they did agree with many of his points, with some adjustment. It might be a few more days before I get a chance to go through that, but I might be able to kick out some of the points one-by-one before then. Some of the issues were NOx and SOx output (smog and acid rain components), and what is the baseline for comparison.

Maybe you can help me on something? One of the points he brought up (and that I hadn't considered) was how much energy is used while a Tesla is parked. This varies with temperature, in hot or cold weather the amount of heating/cooling required for these batteries was pretty significant. And you don't typically see this included in the calculations, they just use the kWh charge and miles numbers. But it's complicated as it is very dependent on location and driving habits. Do you have any data on this?

Quote:
Here is an article I found on the solar panel manufacturing pollution you previously referred to.
Solar Companies Creating Millions Of Pounds Of Polluted Sludge, Contaminated Water CBS DC
...

I still feel solar is better than coal, oil or natural gas"
Agreed - IIRC, I was just pointing out that there is a enviro-cost to build the panels. That is offset in a fairly short time, so overall they sound very good eco-wise, when properly sited (no shade, at the proper angle, exposed all-day-everyday).

But as I've mentioned, solar PV is not an EV issue. They each stand on their own, there is no combined effect, other than a simple sum of the benefits of each, independent of each other.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zathras View Post
...
Gasoline/oil is subsidized by our government. While I am not one to claim the only reason our military is in the Middle East, it does play a role. In some cases a very significant role.

Over the lifetime of the EV credit, each model vehicle will receive government tax credits of 1.5 Billion. That is, if the sell 200,000 vehicles.

Estimates I have seen on the expenditures by our government for oil is about 10 Billion every year ( the higher range of the estimates go much higher than that).

...

Another way to think about it is that approximately 1.3 Million EVs would need to be sold to be equal to government expenditures for one year of government oil subsidies.
I agree with your first line I quoted here - it's hard to parse out the real costs here. And even though I don't like subsidies of almost any kind, some (most?) of those gas subsidies are for exploration, which could have the effect of lowering gas costs for us, and reducing reliance on foreign sources. I'm not saying that justifies it, but just maybe we are all benefiting (even EV drivers, who have goods shipped to them by petro-based truck/rail/air) - it's not all just a 'gift' to Big Oil (but I still don't like it).

But even if we did get those 1.3 million EVs on the road (we have less that 1/10 that today - and how much of a role would the subsidies have played in that?), that would eliminate less than 2 days gasoline consumption per year. Would that materially change anything we are doing in the Middle East? That's only ~ 0.41% reduction. We have had drops of about 6% w/o EVs, - this seems like a noise level change to me. See below.

How much gasoline does the United States consume? - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Quote:
In 2011, the United States consumed about 134 billion gallons (or 3.19 billion barrels) of gasoline, a daily average of about 367.08 million gallons (8.74 million barrels). This was about 6% less than the record high of about 142.38 billion gallons (or 3.39 billion barrels) consumed in 2007.
I'm glad to see you want to discuss this. Some people here seem to think I'm just bashing EVs (and you see those types pop up in comments section of any critical EV article), but I'm just trying to understand the issues. Should I promote subsidies for EVs? Should I tell friends and family to consider an EV? Is it significant, or just a 'feel good' distraction from real progress?


Quote:
Originally Posted by JOHNNIE36 View Post
+1. The only thing I'm interested in is saving my wallet. I got a Prius this year and so far I've cut my gasoline purchases in half. Probably won't pay for the car but it makes me feel good. Kind of like a "good investment".
This is kinda funny, but I'm almost 180 degrees the opposite (and that's not judgemental in any way, I'm just pointing out a different view). My cars are driven pretty low miles, so a Prius probably makes no economic sense for me. But, since it is more eff%, it does produce less pollution. I kinda feel like I should be driving one, regardless of my wallet, for the enviro-benefit over a conventional ICE.

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 09:10 AM   #184
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Naples
Posts: 2,161
This is kinda funny, but I'm almost 180 degrees the opposite (and that's not judgemental in any way, I'm just pointing out a different view). My cars are driven pretty low miles, so a Prius probably makes no economic sense for me. But, since it is more eff%, it does produce less pollution. I kinda feel like I should be driving one, regardless of my wallet, for the enviro-benefit over a conventional ICE.
-ERD50[/QUOTE]



I understand you viewpoint. I try many ways also to aid the environment, such as recycling, but I am not into it when it comes to emissions. As to the Prius, I probably can't justify it based on investment payback but I feel better about the added cost of the vehicle. I am saving about $1500 over the life of the lease or $41/mo.
__________________
JOHNNIE36 is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 09:53 AM   #185
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,666
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
I recently came across a very interesting article on this - trouble is, it definitely had a bias to it. But still, many of the points he made have some validity. I'm trying to sort the wheat from the chaff on that one, and came across another article trying to debunk the first, and they did agree with many of his points, with some adjustment. ...
Separating the wheat from the chaff is definately a challenge.
And I liked the article I linked simply because it not only looked at solar as an isolated issue, but compared it to other sources.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
Maybe you can help me on something? One of the points he brought up (and that I hadn't considered) was how much energy is used while a Tesla is parked. This varies with temperature, in hot or cold weather the amount of heating/cooling required for these batteries was pretty significant. And you don't typically see this included in the calculations, they just use the kWh charge and miles numbers. But it's complicated as it is very dependent on location and driving habits. Do you have any data on this?
I would be happy to try.
From what I have read, and what I have experienced in 12,000 miles of driving the Model S, battery power is not used to warm or cool the battery while the car is unplugged. Although, I have not parked the car in conditions that would require cooling yet.

The car does use battery power while parked for other purposes though, typically called 'vampire draw' by owners. Typically the numbers I have seen have been about a 3.5 kWh draw per day.

In addition to this vampire draw, the car, upon starting will expend additional energy, if needed, to warm or cool the battery pack to proper operating temperatures.

Tesla has stated many times that they will be lowering this vampire draw soon. Sometime over the next three months seems to be the consensus.

I keep track of miles/kWh reported by the car for purposes of discussing range capabilities. I also track the total kWh from the wall which includes vampire draw, charging loss, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
Agreed - IIRC, I was just pointing out that there is a enviro-cost to build the panels. That is offset in a fairly short time, so overall they sound very good eco-wise, when properly sited (no shade, at the proper angle, exposed all-day-everyday).
Most definately, I did not mean to imply there was not. Anything we construct has an environmental cost of one sort or another. The American Lung association actually adores EVs as, in Minneapolis, 30% of our particulate pollution is due to vehicles. To them, the point source of the vehicle is the biggest issue. EVs solve that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
But as I've mentioned, solar PV is not an EV issue. They each stand on their own, there is no combined effect, other than a simple sum of the benefits of each, independent of each other.
This is true on the surface. It does dovetail into the conversation when talking about environmental benefits of EVs. I'm fine leaving it out of the conversation other than noting many people feel that EVs are more environmentally friendly and so that plays a role in their purchase decision.
The true benefit, or lack thereof depends largely upon what area of the US, or world, one lives in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
... I'm not saying that justifies it, but just maybe we are all benefiting (even EV drivers, who have goods shipped to them by petro-based truck/rail/air) - it's not all just a 'gift' to Big Oil (but I still don't like it).
Agreed. But basically it is lowering the cost of oil, for the benefit of society. While EV drivers benefit from lower cost of oil, gasoline drivers benefit more than the EV drivers. So if someone wants to discuss how awful the EV credits are, I think that is a very valid topic. At the same time, we shouldn't ignore the subsidies that go towards oil, small businesses, big businesses, coal, etc.
In addition, the gasoline drivers also benefit from the EV credits, in terms of cleaner local air, less demand for gas, new industries and jobs, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
But even if we did get those 1.3 million EVs on the road (we have less that 1/10 that today - and how much of a role would the subsidies have played in that?), that would eliminate less than 2 days gasoline consumption per year. Would that materially change anything we are doing in the Middle East? That's only ~ 0.41% reduction. We have had drops of about 6% w/o EVs, ...
Please note, that 1.3 Million number is in annual sales to each the same level of subsidies.
As for the overall affect, I agree with over 200 million vehicles on the road it will take more time to have an impact.
However, that is irrelevant for my purchase. I know there is virtually nothing I can do myself to affect the nations trade deficit, CO2 emmissions, even local pollution. However, I can minimize my personal contribution to the harm being done.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
This is kinda funny, but I'm almost 180 degrees the opposite (and that's not judgemental in any way, I'm just pointing out a different view). My cars are driven pretty low miles, so a Prius probably makes no economic sense for me. But, since it is more eff%, it does produce less pollution. I kinda feel like I should be driving one, regardless of my wallet, for the enviro-benefit over a conventional ICE.

-ERD50
Hehe, we are actually very similar. We drove a pair of Prius. I didn't drive it because I thought my personal contribution would mean much in the big picture. I never would have imagined myself in a luxury sedan, but had the means and felt strongly that I should put my money where my mouth is.
__________________
"We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children.
(Ancient Indian Proverb)"
Zathras is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 11:10 AM   #186
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Midpack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 11,978
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOHNNIE36 View Post
The only thing I'm interested in is saving my wallet. I got a Prius this year and so far I've cut my gasoline purchases in half. Probably won't pay for the car but it makes me feel good. Kind of like a "good investment".
+1. I am using half the gas I did with my Honda Element. Though it may take a long time (or never to break even, compared to?), I feel good about lower emissions and using less gasoline. YMMV
__________________
No one agrees with other people's opinions; they merely agree with their own opinions -- expressed by somebody else. Sydney Tremayne
Retired Jun 2011 at age 57

Target AA: 60% equity funds / 35% bond funds / 5% cash
Target WR: Approx 2.5% Approx 20% SI (secure income, SS only)
Midpack is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 02:49 PM   #187
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,862
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malcolm2 View Post
I saw a special on the S version Tesla. It said the battery alone costs $30k and that the company will be challenged to get the price below $50k. I think after the large government rebate of $7500 the car is now still 70,000.

Also Tesla has large loans from the U.S. government that are dragging them down .

Seems pricey with little net environmental benefit.
At Tesla's $10k-$12k for a new battery in 8 years and my maybe 2500 miles per year driving I've been thinking a Model S would cost me way more per mile than my current old 14 mpg Porsche. Hopefully the battery lasts longer with low usage, but that cost has to be added in when comparing to ICE gas consumption.
__________________
Animorph is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 05:21 PM   #188
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
clifp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,451
Quote:
Originally Posted by Animorph View Post
At Tesla's $10k-$12k for a new battery in 8 years and my maybe 2500 miles per year driving I've been thinking a Model S would cost me way more per mile than my current old 14 mpg Porsche. Hopefully the battery lasts longer with low usage, but that cost has to be added in when comparing to ICE gas consumption.

Only 2500 miles a year, and I thought my 6,000 miles a year was low. Heck you maybe economically better off taking a cab...
__________________
clifp is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 06:50 PM   #189
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by clifp View Post
Only 2500 miles a year, and I thought my 6,000 miles a year was low. Heck you maybe economically better off taking a cab...
And it might be better for the environment. There's a LOT of embodied energy in a car, one that's out there moving people all the time is amortizing that energy over many more passenger miles.
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is online now  
Old 06-10-2013, 06:54 PM   #190
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
clifp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,451
Quote:
Originally Posted by samclem View Post
And it might be better for the environment. There's a LOT of embodied energy in a car, one that's out there moving people all the time is amortizing that energy over many more passenger miles.
I am pretty sure that any cab is better than Porsche that gets 14 MPG for the environment. On the other hand, it is pretty clear which will get you to your destination faster and more fun. .
__________________
clifp is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 11:00 PM   #191
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zathras View Post
Separating the wheat from the chaff is definately a challenge.
Going back to the article I said I was reviewing - I found a counter to it that questioned pretty much the same things I did, and I think those numbers look reasonable.

As you say, the 'vampire draw' is something that should be resolved by Tesla, and this guy also backed that draw out of the calculations. The heating/cooling of the battery - I'm not sure if that is captured anywhere. Here are some excerpts:

Does The Tesla Model S Electric Car Pollute More Than An SUV? | Popular Science

Quote:
Not every kilowatt-hour of energy that comes out of the wall plug ends up in the Model S battery. Citing EPA figures and reports from owners, Weiss estimates the Model S's real-world charging efficiency at about 85 percent. I've measured charging losses of 10-15 percent in my own car. Tesla quotes a "peak charging efficiency" of 92 percent on its website. An average charging efficiency of 85 percent seems plausible.
That means a Model S typically draws 17 percent more power from the plug than it uses to power the car.
So now our Model S carbon emissions are up to 254 gm/mi, ....
The 15% mentioned here is for battery upstream GHG....

Quote:
We'll go with the consensus mainstream number of 15 percent, which brings total Model S carbon emissions up to 292 gm/mi,

We've arrived at a number for the real-world effective CO2 emissions of a Model S of 292 g/mi. Admittedly, that's lot higher than Tesla claims on its website ...


The background on this is apparently the Tesla gm/mile CO2 is calculated from the battery draw while cruising. Tesla says 283 Wh/mile, but real-world numbers seem closer to 375 Wh/mile. Plus accounting for power delivered from the plant, plus the more conservative 15% adder for battery production gets to this 292 gm/mile. FWIW, the website:

Beyond Tailpipe Emissions: Results

gave a GHG rating of 280 gm/mile for N-IL, and 311 gm/mile for Minneapolis, so in the range of his calcs also. It seems odd that Tesla is reporting a number below the government site - Tesla reports 170 and 214 gm/mile for IL and MN!

That same site rates a Prius V as 211 +53 (upstream) gm/mile, for 264 gm/mile. So even for GHG, it seems a Prius V is 'greener' than a 'zero emissions' rated Tesla in IL and MN.


Now onto 'other pollutants':


Quote:
With all the growing concern about global warming and carbon emissions, old-fashioned "smog" air pollution--primarily nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sulfur dioxide (SO2)--has receded into the background. Due to strict emissions laws, modern gasoline cars emit very little of these lung-threatening pollutants. The same cannot be said, unfortunately, about coal-fired powerplants.

Weiss calculates that powerplant emissions give the Model S an effective level of NOx pollution about triple that of the EPA limit for gas cars. (I'm discounting his suspect inclusion of vampire losses.)

The situation for sulfur dioxide is much worse. Weiss calculates that effective Model S sulfur dioxide emissions equal that of about 400 gas cars. (Again, the suspect vampire data is discounted.)

Frankly, I can't argue with these disturbing numbers, and I have not seen them refuted anywhere. ... I'm feeling a bit guilty about the sulfur dioxide spewing out of my Tesla's virtual tailpipe.

At least I live in New York state, which uses coal for only about 10 percent of its power production. That's about one quarter of the U.S nationwide percentage, so presumably I'm "only" 100 times worse than a gas car when it comes to sulfur dioxide emissions.
I'm pretty shocked at those numbers. For years, our IL environmental test for cars measured NOx, and we'd need to get our car fixed if it was out of spec. And now, a Tesla is legal emitting 3x what a car does, and they are lauded as being 'green'?!!!!!

And a 400x number for SOx (the stuff that makes acid rain)!!!! Holy Cow!

Now there might be some offsetting factor for moving this pollution away from urban areas, but I'm sure that many EVs will be in suburban areas that don't really have a concentration issue like a downtown city. And I don't think acid rain is a local issue. But at multiples of 3 and 400 - I don't think local versus distributed is the issue. That's a lot of extra SOx and NOx!


So GHG is worse than a Prius, NOx and SOx are much worse - what's to like with EVs as far as the environment? You can talk about how we can 'green' the power - but until that happens, the story doesn't change. Makes no sense to pollute today based on cleaner power tomorrow.

To be honest, this is much worse than I thought.

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 11:02 PM   #192
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by clifp View Post
I am pretty sure that any cab is better than Porsche that gets 14 MPG for the environment. On the other hand, it is pretty clear which will get you to your destination faster and more fun. .
Have you been in a Chicago cab lately? Man, those guys go fast!!!! Trying to get back for another run I guess. It can be 'fun', if you like roller-coaster rides

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 11:29 PM   #193
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,666
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
...
So GHG is worse than a Prius, NOx and SOx are much worse - what's to like with EVs as far as the environment? You can talk about how we can 'green' the power - but until that happens, the story doesn't change. Makes no sense to pollute today based on cleaner power tomorrow.

To be honest, this is much worse than I thought.

-ERD50
I'll have to look over the article, but it seems this conclusion is cherry picking. Minneapolis is one of the worst areas in the country for GHG emissions from power generation.
45% of the population in 2009 lived in an area of the country where the GHG emissions of the typical EV is better than that of the Prius. The Tesla is an inefficient EV, so say 40%.

The other pollutants you mention, were those the numbers before or after the scrubbers? If after, I agree completely with you and those coal plants should be required to clean up or close down. But we are getting into the area that really doesn't matter, does it?

The coal plants should clean up weather or not EVs exist?

Once again, I highly recommend the research called State of Charge by the Union of Concerned Scientists. I think you will find a very high quality level of data in there.
__________________
"We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children.
(Ancient Indian Proverb)"
Zathras is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 11:49 PM   #194
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zathras View Post
I'll have to look over the article, but it seems this conclusion is cherry picking. Minneapolis is one of the worst areas in the country for GHG emissions from power generation.
No, I threw in MN since I entered IL for myself (you are in MN, right?). Just a couple data points for my own curiosity - he is using national averages.


Quote:
45% of the population in 2009 lived in an area of the country where the GHG emissions of the typical EV is better than that of the Prius. .
So for 55% of the population, the EV is worse. That's what these numbers seem to say - on average, EVs are worse than a Prius. Yes, a Tesla in this case, so maybe a little worse than other EVs could be - but in the ballpark. Any way you slice it, the EVs are simply not providing a significant enviro-benefit compared to alternatives we have today (the Prius). And in many cases, the EV is worse.


Quote:
The other pollutants you mention, were those the numbers before or after the scrubbers?
I'm assuming he is using national average numbers for the grid as it exists today, but I'll try to verify that. Remember, this guy is trying to debunk the claims that the EV isn't so green - he owns a Tesla, he's a fan, not someone trying to tear down Tesla. Again, if the grid is cleaner in the future, we can update these numbers at that time. But big things like coal plants move kinda slow. And 'clean coal' plants use a lot more fuel (30% IIRC), so that means more coal mining, habitat destruction, etc. For people buying EVs today, these numbers appear to be the situation they face.


Quote:
The coal plants should clean up whether or not EVs exist?
Sure, but that has nothing to do with whether an EV today is greener than a Prius today (or in practical terms, for the next ten years also).


Quote:
Once again, I highly recommend the research called State of Charge by the Union of Concerned Scientists. I think you will find a very high quality level of data in there.
I will take a look, thanks.

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline  
Old 06-11-2013, 06:25 AM   #195
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,666
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
No, I threw in MN since I entered IL for myself (you are in MN, right?). Just a couple data points for my own curiosity - he is using national averages.

So for 55% of the population, the EV is worse. That's what these numbers seem to say - on average, EVs are worse than a Prius. Yes, a Tesla in this case, so maybe a little worse than other EVs could be - but in the ballpark. Any way you slice it, the EVs are simply not providing a significant enviro-benefit compared to alternatives we have today (the Prius). And in many cases, the EV is worse...

I'm assuming he is using national average numbers for the grid as it exists today,
Very good, sorry I missed why you picked those as we do happen to live in some of the highest GHG areas around. And yes, I am in Minnesota and am working hard on getting them to clean up their act:-)

Please note the time frame I mentioned. The study was using 2009 electrical grid data. The grid has gotten much cleaner overall since then.
We are used 14% less coal iin 2012 than we used in 2009 (Electricity Data Browser) (sorry for the long link, very cool site though).

And, the typical, and I would argue all EVs (ok, maybe not the Fisker) are cleaner than the average light duty vehicle (24 mpg)

I do agree that in some sections of the country the Prius is cleaner in terms of the GHGs. However, as I have stated before, the GHGs are not the only reason I buy EVs.

For someone that does buy transportation solely on GHG emissions I would recommend a Prius, or better yet a bike.
__________________
"We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children.
(Ancient Indian Proverb)"
Zathras is offline  
Old 06-11-2013, 11:02 AM   #196
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zathras View Post
....

And, the typical, and I would argue all EVs (ok, maybe not the Fisker) are cleaner than the average light duty vehicle (24 mpg)

I do agree that in some sections of the country the Prius is cleaner in terms of the GHGs. However, as I have stated before, the GHGs are not the only reason I buy EVs.

For someone that does buy transportation solely on GHG emissions I would recommend a Prius, or better yet a bike.
I probably won't get to those articles until tonight/tomorrow, but let me throw out some more casual observations while I have a moment:

Sure, an EV is going to do relatively better when compared to the average of the fleet, rather than to a 2013 Prius V. But, if we are looking at this from the "I want to be green" angle, then I think most prospective green buyers would be looking at their practical choices among relatively green vehicles. And certainly a Tesla S and the Prius are in different classes, but when we start talking about larger sales, the EVs that lots of people might buy will be in that Prius class. So, in terms of 'green-ness', I do think that a Prius V or other high-mpg car should be the comparison.

But, even being in different classes - if a Tesla S owner is going to 'brag' about his green-ness, then I think a reasonable question would be - "Why didn't you buy a Prius if you want to be green?'

And as I learned and posted recently, it isn't just GHG. Those NOx and SOx numbers for EVs are huge! I'll need to dig, but I also saw sources that included particulates, and IIRC, these were worse for EVs even in the cleanest grid areas (subject to some fact checking later!).

The crux of this for me is - why are EVs getting dollars and public 'mind-share' as some significant path to environmental improvements? To quote the old line, "Where's the beef?" I really think this is a missed opportunity - those dollars could go towards other areas that would likely provide far, far more bang for the buck, and much higher environmental improvements in absolute terms. How about all those diesel trucks? Urban ones can benefit from hybrid tech, but apparently not long-haul trucks. I bet some improvements here would outweigh the benefits of EVs, w/o the added problems like SOx, NOx (and maybe particulates). Oh, and what about mercury from coal plants? AFAIK, cars don't emit mercury - I bet that's another area that works against EVs.

Again, I'll need to do more reading, but doesn't Tesla make a significant part of it's revenue from selling carbon credits? It's another way we are funding EVs, and it may be very questionable based on what I'm learning.

As far as the other reasons to buy an EV, that's fine with me, people should do as they see fit. The environmentalist in me is just shaking his head that these things are being 'sold' to the public as being green (ZERO (tailpipe) EMISSIONS!) - and the subsidies would sure seem to be telling the average person that this is something worth promoting. But is it? That's my question.


-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline  
Old 06-11-2013, 11:38 AM   #197
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Chuckanut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: West of the Mississippi
Posts: 6,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
I really think this is a missed opportunity - those dollars could go towards other areas that would likely provide far, far more bang for the buck, and much higher environmental improvements in absolute terms.
+1

As much as I like the idea of fully electric vehicles whose power comes from very low polluting sources, I do think the subsidy would be far better spent on something else - like cleaning up a coal fired plant, or refitting holder buildings to be more energy efficient.

The greenest car is the one that stays parked.
__________________
The worst decisions are usually made in times of anger and impatience.
Chuckanut is offline  
Old 06-11-2013, 12:10 PM   #198
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,666
Agreed. I am only defending the rebates on the basis that it somewhat levels the playing field.
I would far rather remove all car, and fuel subsidies.

I do my best though to sort through and show bad data/arguments for what they are. I also enjoy learning about other arguments to better learn.
I used to like the idea of ethanol for example;-)

Every purchase that everyone makes is a combination of needs and wants.
Once considering all of our wants and needs for a car, the EV was the clear winner.
On environmental it was still the winner although it came in behind in terms of GHG. It came out way ahead in terms of local pollution.

And, I would suggest that no single aspect of a car can't be better served by a different car or vehicle.

I applaud SUV drivers that get more than 30mpg. Obviously they would do better in that single aspect with a Prius. But they need/want something that can carry more, or tow, or something.
I likewise have no problem with the 30mpg SUV driver bragging about the high mpg. I may chuckle a bit, but I have no issue with it.

The calculations for each car buyer is different and the GHG emissions depend upon the source of their electricity, which typically depends upon their location. Just because it isn't the best GHG balance for my local grid doesn't mean it is a poor solution for everyone.
__________________
"We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children.
(Ancient Indian Proverb)"
Zathras is offline  
Old 06-11-2013, 12:18 PM   #199
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
FinanceDude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 12,484
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zathras View Post
I used to like the idea of ethanol for example;-)
I'm glad you said "USED TO", I think we all understand the folly and fallacy of that subsidy....currently about $6 BILLION a year..........

Quote:
The calculations for each car buyer is different and the GHG emissions depend upon the source of their electricity, which typically depends upon their location. Just because it isn't the best GHG balance for my local grid doesn't mean it is a poor solution for everyone.
No doubt tesla designed the car for a place like Hawaii, with high gas prices due to supply issues and not a lot of real estate to roam.

I have to poke around and find a study that came out a few years ago when there was a full court press trying to chase all the big gas guzzling SUVs off the road. The study pointed out from a raw materials cost and production standpoint, that a Prius cost a LOT more to produce than a Chevy Tahoe, and the gas savings would take many years to recover that huge discrepancy in front end cost. I see very few studies anymore like that.........
__________________
Consult with your own advisor or representative. My thoughts should not be construed as investment advice. Past performance is no guarantee of future results (love that one).......:)


This Thread is USELESS without pics.........:)
FinanceDude is offline  
Old 06-11-2013, 02:30 PM   #200
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinanceDude View Post
I have to poke around and find a study that came out a few years ago when there was a full court press trying to chase all the big gas guzzling SUVs off the road. The study pointed out from a raw materials cost and production standpoint, that a Prius cost a LOT more to produce than a Chevy Tahoe, and the gas savings would take many years to recover that huge discrepancy in front end cost. I see very few studies anymore like that.........
I'd suggest you take a critical look at any study like that first. There were/are some real hack jobs going around that try to pass as 'information'. It happens on both sides, that's why I'm trying to dig deep enough to separate some of the wheat from the noise level (to mix metaphors).

-ERD50
__________________

__________________
ERD50 is offline  
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Moment of Truth easysurfer FIRE Related Public Policy 246 06-28-2012 11:13 AM
The Danger of Low Carb Diets.. REattempt Health and Early Retirement 121 05-07-2012 08:28 PM
How do you treat taxes on ROTH transfers? walkinwood Life after FIRE 44 04-02-2012 12:03 PM
Car Fix/Replace Decision TromboneAl Other topics 99 03-31-2012 08:54 PM
Navy Federal "Add On" CD jazz4cash FIRE and Money 2 03-28-2012 09:05 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:32 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.