Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
EV farce
Apr 11, 2022 9:31:05 GMT 12
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2022 9:31:05 GMT 12
when you calculate the hole you have to dig to collect the rare earth minerals required to make batteries for the number of e cars required to clean the atmosphere... You don't have much of the countries land left that your mining them from. The greens haven't a clue What are you on about? They just pump it out of the ground as geothermal water in Taupo and purify it. No digging involved. www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/442794/taupo-based-firm-secures-investment-in-lithium-extraction-for-ev-batteriesI do agree that the greens don't have a clue though. . What rare earth minerals are you talking about? Lithium-ion batteries are currently the dominant technology for EVs2. Typical automotive LIBs contain lithium (Li), cobalt (Co), and nickel (Ni) in the cathode, graphite in the anode, as well as aluminum and copper in other cell and pack components. That's a lot of holes making on one big mess... Then there is the chemicals , such as arsenic, used to extract the Minerals from the dirt, then there is the tailings that get dumped and contain high levels of poisonous chemicals. Then there is the high level of emmisions from the machinery that extract, process, ship, manufacture,ship, use, then dispose of these minerals/ batteries. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
EV farce
Apr 11, 2022 9:47:51 GMT 12
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2022 9:47:51 GMT 12
A Tesla battery - 900 pounds (408kg) www.tesla.com/blog/bit-about-batteries83 kg of lithium in the battery.. This leaves a lot of other " stuff", that is mined, in the battery. By weight percentage (g material/g battery), a typical lithium-ion battery comprises about: 7% Co, 7% Li (expressed as lithium carbonate equivalent, 1 g of lithium = 5.17 g LCE), 4% Ni, 5% Mn, 10% Cu, 15% Al, 16% graphite, and 36% other materials. |
|
|
|
Post by fish on Apr 11, 2022 9:57:53 GMT 12
That's a lot of holes making on one big mess... Then there is the chemicals , such as arsenic, used to extract the Minerals from the dirt, then there is the tailings that get dumped and contain high levels of poisonous chemicals. Then there is the high level of emmisions from the machinery that extract, process, ship, manufacture,ship, use, then dispose of these minerals/ batteries. You are talking as if the alternative is all roses. There was a recent thread about the smog cloud and smell from the Marsden Point refinery, not to mention the environmental impact of oil extraction. I'm talking the ones that work properly, major issue in Taranaki with oil dereks over your back fence, noise, earthworks etc. That is before we get into the deep sea oil exploration. And well before we get into the oil industry mis-haps. Major oil spills, fires. Oil exploration in countries where there is no environmental protection, and a good level of corruption so really dodgy things can happen, i.e. the US. Fracking, putting hydrocarbons into drinking water. Oil storage depots all over the world, the need for supertankers to cart the stuff all over the world, which isn't required for EV operation. You can't slam one energy source for certain impacts without considering the current energy source's major impacts. Most people would call that one-eyed. There is a strong arguement that EV's have a lower total environmental impact. You guys are making out that EV's have no environmental impact. No one has said that. No environmental impact would be to not drive a car anywhere. Some people do that. Some ride a bike religiously. Some turn themselves into hermit kingdom, grow all their own shit and never travel. It is an easier sell to shift transport to EV's than trying to tell people to simply not drive anywhere. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
EV farce
Apr 11, 2022 10:02:03 GMT 12
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2022 10:02:03 GMT 12
You're right you can't slam one over the other, but EVs are not as clean as they make out.
Compared to hydrogen?
|
|
|
|
Post by fish on Apr 11, 2022 10:55:00 GMT 12
You're right you can't slam one over the other, but EVs are not as clean as they make out. Compared to hydrogen? No, EV's aren't as clean as the make out. BUT, that is being pushed by the Greens, who are beyond incompetent. The Ute tax, puts the cost of an old 7 seater up from $15k to $18k. The sort of people that need an old 7 seater don't have any spare cash. Then, they take $8k off an $80k car. The sort of people that can afford an $80k car don't need a subsidy. I got a hybrid as a commuter, it was cheap and cost effective. Then we got a plug in EV 5 seater family wagon. This was all before the subsidy. I calculated saving $100/ month on petrol, back when you could afford petrol (about $2.30 a litre I think). I can get 1,300 km out of a tank of gas. 35 l tank, so about 32-33 l by the time the fuel light comes on. That is with 220 kWh of charge. We only get about 35 km range on the PHEV, but that covers 98% of our trips, and maybe 80% of our mileage. I pay 18.5 c/kWh, so that 220 kWh cost $40. The petrol cost $92... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
EV farce
Apr 11, 2022 12:28:22 GMT 12
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2022 12:28:22 GMT 12
To me phev's are a " cunis"...
|
|
|
|
Post by fish on Apr 11, 2022 12:34:19 GMT 12
To me phev's are a " cunis"... What is a cunis? |
|
|
|
Post by ComfortZone on Apr 11, 2022 13:02:59 GMT 12
. What rare earth minerals are you talking about? Rare earth minerals are trace elements many with names ending in "um" They are used in all sorts of consumer products and military hardware www.americangeosciences.org/critical-issues/faq/what-are-rare-earth-elements-and-why-are-they-importantChina currently dominates world production, using some very environmentally unfriendly processes to extract the element. They are not actually so rare but there was not a great deal of money to be made extracting them, so there was little inducement to produce them and it has only been relatively recently their strategic importance has been recognized. I did some work for this Australian producer more than 10 yrs ago lynasrareearths.com/ |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
EV farce
Apr 11, 2022 13:26:04 GMT 12
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2022 13:26:04 GMT 12
To me phev's are a " cunis"... What is a cunis? an old saying for " not one thing or the other"... Cunis is the mixing if two words.. C@nt and penis. Phev,s emmit pollution and create battery disposal issues. They take more energy and resources to build and have more moving parts. |
|
|
|
Post by fish on Apr 11, 2022 13:45:06 GMT 12
an old saying for " not one thing or the other"... Cunis is the mixing if two words.. C@nt and penis. Phev,s emmit pollution and create battery disposal issues. They take more energy and resources to build and have more moving parts. They also do 10cents / km combined mileage, at today's petrol prices. I think you might be being a bit one eyed there though. While they have an ICE engine, it is 2 l instead of 2.5 (for the non PHEV Outlander). And yes, while they have Li batteries, the batteries are a fraction of the size of a full EV. Further, they don't have a gearbox, so you don't have the heavy engineering and oil required for that. It has 2 x 60 kW electric motors. But electric motors are so mind-blowingly simple, they have minimal resources to make than an ICE engine. To balance the arguement, have you every looked at how many litres of petrol or diesel your ICE car or ute needs over a year? I'd take a punt it is somewhere between 2,500 l and up to maybe 5,000 l / year. How long does your car last for? 10 years? So you are potentially talking about 50,000 l of hydrocarbons for your car. Now, go back and re-visit your arguements against EV's, and image 3 large rainwater tanks of petrol on your driveway, ad in the cost of that at $2.80 / l, (so potentially $140,000 worth of hydrocarbons over the life of your car or ute) and then compare that to the lifetime cost of an EV... |
|
|
|
EV farce
Apr 11, 2022 16:39:36 GMT 12
via mobile
Post by Fogg on Apr 11, 2022 16:39:36 GMT 12
I agree the debate should be EV vs Hyrdrogen. The hybrids are just a point-in-time solution to attract the ‘not fully convinced but I’ll give it a try’ crowd.
Once petrol is too costly or no longer available then hybrids will be as redundant as ICEs.
|
|
|
|
Post by em on Apr 11, 2022 18:57:26 GMT 12
We have an outlander PHEV on its 2nd set of tyres after 4 years of almost no maintenance motoring . Uses feck all gas , tows a trailer really well and pulls 1 ton of boat and and 500kgs of trailer up the ramp on electric no sweat .
I won’t make a green argument for the PHEV cause I have a fleet a of ICE gadgets but fuck it what’s wrong with change ? . TNZS hydrogen chase boat is the dogs bollocks at first glance GD. Might be a knob but the tech in that boat is awesome and worthy of praise whether it’s commercially viable or not . The main takeaway for me is it’s another option possible option and these new development need to keep coming through . I think EVs at the very least have proven there is another way of driving about which paves the way for other disruptive tech to be accepted by a portion of society willing to make a change
|
|
|
|
Post by ComfortZone on Apr 11, 2022 19:34:01 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
EV farce
Apr 11, 2022 20:24:24 GMT 12
via mobile
Post by OLD ROPE 👀 on Apr 11, 2022 20:24:24 GMT 12
that is a brilliant rational summary of the Useless EV, Phev, ... Market and environmentals. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2022 3:48:05 GMT 12
|
|
