Submitted by rentalfloss t3_zsw98f in worldnews
MadCat360 t1_j1afh6f wrote
Reply to comment by strontiumdogs in Canada moves to mandate electric vehicle sales starting in 2026 by rentalfloss
Edit: you edited your post, so I will preface by saying I wrote this when you only argued infrastructure in your comment.
There's an Engineering Explained video that debunks this. Even if you replace all vehicles on the road with EVs, and make them all charge every day at peak times, it's only 30% more draw than current. If you incentivize people to charge overnight or in the mornings by varying kWh cost based on usage, then the charging overhead needed for entire fleet replacement fits within the current infrastructure. Also realize that refineries take shit tons of power, so if those are not working as much to provide gasoline, then that frees up more electrons for EVs.
Mecha-Dave t1_j1asxkb wrote
Gasoline takes approximately 5 kWh/gal to refine and transport to the consumer's gas tank. That's about 15 miles in my Leaf.
zenzukai t1_j1axggr wrote
I don't think you've even addressed a single argument he brought up. How does one charge an electric car on a 120V 15A circuit that is available to people who live in condos and apartments?
How about full lifecycle of a battery? There is no infrastructure in place to recycle enough batteries, let alone building the batteries to begin with. It would require mining completely 80% of all known lithium sources, even the sources that we can't refine yet just to replace the vehicles we have.
How about cost? How many people can afford a new vehicle? Basically only the 1%. The 99% will be told by the 1% to eat cake.
Also how do you "make people charge them every day at peak times"? You plan on having a special police force going around ensuring people are following your orders? Don't you think that sounds a bit oblivious to reality? Not just idealistic oblivious, like childish 'don't understand basic reality' oblivious.
MadCat360 t1_j1az5vz wrote
They edited their post after I replied. But ok.
Many apartment complexes have charging stations. My complex has level 3 stations that charge an average car in under 2 hours. If a charger is not available for you, you can buy a used hybrid or ICE.
Full lifecycle of batteries is between 300 and 500k miles. After a full battery lifecycle an EV is still between 6% and 20% more energy and carbon efficient than an ICE depending on what the grid uses to charger those EVs. There are numerous studies reporting this.
I make 50k a year. Definitely not 1%. I just ordered a brand new Bolt. Why? Because my ICE Audi costs 35 cents a mile and I drive 25k miles a year. For the same cost as I'm spending on gas and maintenance, I could simply have a newer more valuable car (my Audi is worth about 6k now after 200k miles) and I can increase my net worth while consolidating my vehicle costs into one payment each month. My charging is free at my apartment. Do you understand that this is only for new cars, and that you will still be able to buy a a used car if you can't afford a new one?
Your last point misses what I was trying to say. Worst case, if you replaced every car on the road with EVs, AND made them charge at peak times (worst case scenario), it's still only 30% more draw than now.
pollo316 t1_j1behvt wrote
Just read this and calm down. You are reciting lies from big oil lobbyists at alarming rates. Motortrend covered all of this. https://www.motortrend.com/features/truth-about-electric-cars-ad-why-you-are-being-lied-to/amp/
zenzukai t1_j1bk4sw wrote
Like usual, they don't even mention recycling batteries. What is the carbon cost associated with recycling old batteries into new ones? Not sure because it isn't at an industrial scale. Yet entirely dismissed by articles like this.
Did the article address mutli-dwelling infrastructure? The effects of exploding mineral demand?
I know the energy economics of batteries and EVs, and I know the recycling costs of the battery lifecycle put a huge '?' on the real costs.
These hard limits imposed so early are going to be reversed. Businesses are going to fail to properly adapt, government funded services are to fail to properly adapt, private individuals aren't going to be able to afford to adapt.
If you think inflation is bad now, just wait until costs across all society run up a vertical wall.
Electric vehicles are the future, no doubt. The problem is ham-fisting them into society will create distortions in the market, and it'll cost much more than we can estimate today.
Uncle_Rabbit t1_j1c0lhg wrote
We need to be living less materialistic consumer focused lives without all the new tech and junk every year, but that's not profitable so that message won't get pushed, instead they want to sell everyone a new car. The materials used to make the cars will be mined, refined, and shipped with fossil fuels and the cars themselves will be manufactured and charged with fossil fuels. Why do EV's need to be connected to the internet to charge as well? Probably so corporations can monitor your habits, locations, everything and then sell the data to other corporations or governments that will pay for it. Hooray! More ads! In theory EV's sound great (if you believe they will all be charged from renewable sources), but I'm skeptical at best about the real world roll out of EV's. It seems like one more cash grab without addressing the underlaying issues society has.
zenzukai t1_j1c2n9r wrote
The vast majority of energy use globally is for travel, food, heating and electricity. We can cut down on travel, even food and electricity, hard to do for heating.
The most significant things you can do is stop eating meat, stop going on vacations, bike to work. Everything else is trivial.
pdp10 t1_j1ilbpf wrote
> hard to do for heating.
Not fundamentally difficult. It's called "insulation". Difficult to economically retrofit in many cases, however. That 1937 farmhouse with minimal insulation and originally fitted with a coal-burning boiler, will be hard to adapt into a highly insulated, tight-envelope modern house with a heat pump.
WikiSummarizerBot t1_j1ildcb wrote
>"Passive house" (German: Passivhaus) is a voluntary standard for energy efficiency in a building, which reduces the building's ecological footprint. It results in ultra-low energy buildings that require little energy for space heating or cooling. A similar standard, MINERGIE-P, is used in Switzerland. The standard is not confined to residential properties; several office buildings, schools, kindergartens and a supermarket have also been constructed to the standard.
^([ )^(F.A.Q)^( | )^(Opt Out)^( | )^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)^( | )^(GitHub)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
bigcaprice t1_j1c9vcz wrote
>How does one charge an electric car on a 120V 15A circuit that is available to people who live in condos and apartments?
Same way people who don't have gas pumps in their condo fuel up, you build the infrastructure they need.
>How about full lifecycle of a battery? There is no infrastructure in place to recycle enough batteries, let alone building the batteries to begin with. It would require mining completely 80% of all known lithium sources, even the sources that we can't refine yet just to replace the vehicles we have.
Build a battery recycling plant. Find and produce more lithium (like we've done with oil for decades)
>How many people can afford a new vehicle? Basically only the 1%.
This can't be a serious statement.
>Also how do you "make people charge them every day at peak times"? You plan on having a special police force going around ensuring people are following your orders?
You vary the price of electricity throughout the day to encourage people to charge when demand is lower. Devices that do this for large appliances have existed for years, speaking of oblivious to reality.
[deleted] t1_j1afywj wrote
[removed]
Sea-Abbreviations-51 t1_j1axxft wrote
Where do we ethically source lithium for batteries?
MadCat360 t1_j1b05zw wrote
Where do we ethically source oil for gasoline?
Sea-Abbreviations-51 t1_j1b2q3h wrote
Alberta Canada Texas coast of Newfoundland
Much more ethical than the child slaves they use in Africa
MadCat360 t1_j1b3loe wrote
Barely any lithium comes from Africa. Just like barely any crude oil comes from Russia. In fact most lithium comes from the highly oppressive regime of check notes Australia
YeahIveDoneThat t1_j1bhj52 wrote
Yeah, except nearly all of the cobalt comes from Africa, genius. It's all coming from child labor and "artisanal" mining in the Congo.
MadCat360 t1_j1biw76 wrote
Most of the cobalt is used in shit you already buy and use every day. If you're gonna go after EVs for being unethical because a small amount of the current battery technology is using cobat, then drop your laptop in a lake.
By the way, significant money is being invested by the US and almost every car manufacturer like Tesla to go cobalt free in EV batteries.
YeahIveDoneThat t1_j1c0m7b wrote
Um, EVs use roughly 1000x the Cobalt of my laptop. Also, don't know if you read the headline of the article we're talking about but we're aligning National policy to push for greater quantities of EV sales. Now, do you think that will make the demand for Cobalt go up or down? I know it's a hard problem to think about for you, but let me make it clear: if you demand more Cobalt, then more kids are dragged into the mines, more kids die in mining accidents and an entire population of people halfway round the world suffers toxic metal poisoning so that you stroke yourself off about how "green" you are.
https://www.blackenterprise.com/apple-microsoft-sued-congo-cobalt-mine-child-labor-deaths/
MadCat360 t1_j1c4ldv wrote
Sure sounds like you're saying you're not complicit because you buy the products from the companies listed in the lawsuit. Sounds like you are complicit to me. That's why there's a lawsuit.
Cobalt free batteries exist and are being implemented. I wouldn't be surprised at all if cobalt in batteries gets banned in the next 10 years as a stepping stone to 100% EV sales.
For the record I do not support 100% EV only sales. For most people that drive less than 40 miles a day, a plug in hybrid with 30-50 miles of EV-only range is much more resource conscious. I personally drive 150 miles per work day, so I need a full EV with that range. And because the average driver doesn't need it (the resources for those large Tesla batteries that get used maybe 20 miles a day is a big waste), I think you'll see the government back off on the EV sales once more of the market gets saturated to the point where the manufacturing pressure from impending legislation isn't required.
Also, your attempt to expose my virtue signaling is hilarious. I fly big gas guzzling airplanes for a living. I'm not an eco warrior. I'm buying an EV because it's gonna save me 4k a year vs my current car.
reid0 t1_j1cughq wrote
It’s a damned good thing you’ve brought up this point that as I’m sure none of the thousands of businesses and engineers involved in designing, developing, building, distributing, maintaining and repairing these EVs would have ever considered.
I’m certain they will appreciate your learned and well informed concerns that aren’t at all laced with absurd nonsense fed to you by your chosen media sources who definitely aren’t backed by companies that stand to lose out in the shift to EVs.
And of course, anyone who would prefer to drive a car that is quieter, more efficient, requires less maintenance, has better tech, and allows them to refuel at home, overnight must definitely only be buying that car to show off how green they are.
It would be unbelievable to think that electric motors are already being designed which don’t require cobalt, or batteries which use sodium instead of lithium. Absurd! Impossible! Because nobody has ever considered your brilliant position that using more cobalt will increase the demand for it and that there are concerns about its sourcing.
And of course, the only possible way to get cobalt is through deadly child slave labour and that definitely could not possibly change despite the enormous potential income available to other mining companies that might want to get in on that windfall.
What sensible and original thoughts you offer us, oh learned one.
Strank t1_j1b5mss wrote
I mean, Australia (like Canada) is indeed highly oppressive if you're Indigenous
Five_bucks t1_j1bihlk wrote
Indigenous communities are chronically underserved and the history of the Crown-indigenous relationship on Canada is ghastly.
But 'highly oppressive' is a bit much.
rascible t1_j1bk4au wrote
The new plants at the Salton Sea should supply domestic demand for decades. It was on 60 minutes..
Pim_Hungers t1_j1b9guw wrote
Alberta
swordfish1221 t1_j1ap9ci wrote
Incentivizing people to charge at certain times is nothing but a way to make more money. It’s not going to change people’s habits.
MadCat360 t1_j1aq56z wrote
Source to any data that supports this? Varying toll prices has been mitigating traffic for decades, and doing so with significant effect.
swordfish1221 t1_j1axu1u wrote
You got a source varying toll prices have been used for mitigating traffic. IDK about the only time i go on tolls is when i go to work which i can’t control what time that is.
MadCat360 t1_j1azxwd wrote
The fact that you don't take toll roads when not going to work shows that it works dude. Tolls discourage use during certain times or using certain routes.
gburgwardt t1_j1arz3v wrote
What are you talking about, a way to make more money?
Are you unfamiliar with the concept of peak load?
swordfish1221 t1_j1ay1io wrote
The comment above was suggesting charging more money for charging your vehicle during peak load. Often times people have schedules and have places to be a certain times. Often people can’t chose what time they charge so rather than reduce load during peak times, they just make more money
gburgwardt t1_j1ay6gs wrote
That is not the power company’s problem, the whole point is to get you to change your lifestyle
swordfish1221 t1_j1aygcb wrote
You’re right fuck paying bills and commuting to remote areas to make a living.
gburgwardt t1_j1aylz2 wrote
If you choose a lifestyle that requires more resources yes you should pay for them
concerned_citizen128 t1_j1ay7ed wrote
Just have to setup schedules on chargers. Most EV owners charge at night, when they arrive home. If they changed rates, and set a cheaper rate for late night charging, I would simply schedule it on my charger.
Currently, I pay the same rate for electricity, no matter when I charge. This isn't difficult to do, and doesn't necessarily mean implementing penalties.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments