Re: [EVDL] Do EVs make green sense?
Well then he’s wrong about solar panels. I went to a talk years back by Steven Chu who had headed up the department of Energy. Many interesting, candid, anecdotes, but, specifically, on PV he said how everyone was complaining that China was competing with us on panels due to low labor costs in panel assembly. However he visited one of their new plants and it was almost totally automated. Very few employees. China was competing by advancing manufacturing technology. Long term goals and investment. -Steve > On Jan 5, 2023, at 7:30 PM, Peter Gabrielsson via EV > wrote: > > He's definitely interesting to listen to but keep in mind that he is > selling a book or 3. His analysis seems a bit simplistic but makes for > great sound bites. > > In one video he claims solar panels will get more expensive due to labor > cost increasing, and according to him you just can't automate panel > production. Five minutes of research will show you how wrong that is. > (There are other factors that might drive panel cost up though) > > He's not wrong that EVs use more energy to build but he does seem to blow > that aspect out of proportion. Plenty of reputable research has shown that > EVs have lower emissions over the life of the car, including production. > > The resource consumption is a problem and for now EVs may remain a luxury > good and will definitely not save us from global warming. We can't consume > our way out of it. > > I don't detect any strong political bias except a hard-on for anyone with > an aggressive foreign policy. His target audience seems to be rather right > leaning and US centric though. > > While largely data driven his conclusions lean towards oil and gas being > the future and green tech being a silly distraction. He barely mentions > global warming. > > > > >> On Wed, Jan 4, 2023, 12:31 PM Michael Ross via EV wrote: >> >> That subject is a bit of a troll, but I would like to have some >> conversation about whether EVs really make green sense or even profitable >> manufacturing sense. >> >> This is a short YouTube video by Peter Zeihan. Entitled >> EV's Not-so-little Dirty Secret(s) >> https://youtu.be/Qf85EuQKWeQ >> or search on YouTube for the title >> >> I hate it that on many points he is correct, but some others are not, but >> not necessarily in a good way. >> >> PZ is a demographer and geographer. He says that globalization (which was >> enabled by the US Naval presence in the shipping lanes since WWII) has >> ceased to exist and a lot of unsuccessful geographies are at the tipping >> point of big failure. Also Russia is dying, and China is even worse off. >> 10% of the world's calories came from Ukraine. Russia is a major source of >> big ag fertilizers. In a year we will be talking about global famine like >> we have not seen if the geopols are right. >> >> Anyway he is worth listening to. >> >> Regarding green tech, it is one of many tech that are dependent on >> globalization and in many ways on oil production. There is a lot to say >> which I won't try to explain. If you want to hear educated guesses about >> the next decades with only a fraction of manufactured production worldwide, >> check out Zeihan or the other geopoliticians out there. >> >> Regarding EVs, and Tesla in particular, PZ has a very good grip on where >> the material inputs come from, how long, and what it takes to ramp up >> production of things like new production of nickel, cobalt, neon, lithium, >> zinc, semiconductors, the energy cost for special aluminum for bodywork, >> and so on, and on, and on. It is not good. The carbon footprint of Teslas >> is not good when you correctly factor in the manufacturing footprint. He >> also notes that they are still a luxury car that is very often not the >> primary vehicle, but is instead a third or even forth car. That makes for a >> very long payback period before EVs start to look C neutral. He makes a >> good point that the carbon side of this only really works for light duty >> vehicles. The Ford eF150 is what, $90k? >> >> >> -- >> Michael E. Ross >> (919) 585-6737 <http://voice.google.com/calls?a=nc,%2B19195856737> Land >> (919) 901-2805 <http://voice.google.com/calls?a=nc,%2B19199012805>Cell and >> Text >> (919) 576-0824 <https://www.google.com/voice/b/0?pli=1#phones> >> <http://voice.google.com/calls?a=nc,%2B19195760824> Tablet, Google Phone >> and Text >> -- next part -- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: < >> htt
Re: [EVDL] Do EVs make green sense?
He's definitely interesting to listen to but keep in mind that he is selling a book or 3. His analysis seems a bit simplistic but makes for great sound bites. In one video he claims solar panels will get more expensive due to labor cost increasing, and according to him you just can't automate panel production. Five minutes of research will show you how wrong that is. (There are other factors that might drive panel cost up though) He's not wrong that EVs use more energy to build but he does seem to blow that aspect out of proportion. Plenty of reputable research has shown that EVs have lower emissions over the life of the car, including production. The resource consumption is a problem and for now EVs may remain a luxury good and will definitely not save us from global warming. We can't consume our way out of it. I don't detect any strong political bias except a hard-on for anyone with an aggressive foreign policy. His target audience seems to be rather right leaning and US centric though. While largely data driven his conclusions lean towards oil and gas being the future and green tech being a silly distraction. He barely mentions global warming. On Wed, Jan 4, 2023, 12:31 PM Michael Ross via EV wrote: > That subject is a bit of a troll, but I would like to have some > conversation about whether EVs really make green sense or even profitable > manufacturing sense. > > This is a short YouTube video by Peter Zeihan. Entitled > EV's Not-so-little Dirty Secret(s) > https://youtu.be/Qf85EuQKWeQ > or search on YouTube for the title > > I hate it that on many points he is correct, but some others are not, but > not necessarily in a good way. > > PZ is a demographer and geographer. He says that globalization (which was > enabled by the US Naval presence in the shipping lanes since WWII) has > ceased to exist and a lot of unsuccessful geographies are at the tipping > point of big failure. Also Russia is dying, and China is even worse off. > 10% of the world's calories came from Ukraine. Russia is a major source of > big ag fertilizers. In a year we will be talking about global famine like > we have not seen if the geopols are right. > > Anyway he is worth listening to. > > Regarding green tech, it is one of many tech that are dependent on > globalization and in many ways on oil production. There is a lot to say > which I won't try to explain. If you want to hear educated guesses about > the next decades with only a fraction of manufactured production worldwide, > check out Zeihan or the other geopoliticians out there. > > Regarding EVs, and Tesla in particular, PZ has a very good grip on where > the material inputs come from, how long, and what it takes to ramp up > production of things like new production of nickel, cobalt, neon, lithium, > zinc, semiconductors, the energy cost for special aluminum for bodywork, > and so on, and on, and on. It is not good. The carbon footprint of Teslas > is not good when you correctly factor in the manufacturing footprint. He > also notes that they are still a luxury car that is very often not the > primary vehicle, but is instead a third or even forth car. That makes for a > very long payback period before EVs start to look C neutral. He makes a > good point that the carbon side of this only really works for light duty > vehicles. The Ford eF150 is what, $90k? > > > -- > Michael E. Ross > (919) 585-6737 <http://voice.google.com/calls?a=nc,%2B19195856737> Land > (919) 901-2805 <http://voice.google.com/calls?a=nc,%2B19199012805>Cell and > Text > (919) 576-0824 <https://www.google.com/voice/b/0?pli=1#phones> > <http://voice.google.com/calls?a=nc,%2B19195760824> Tablet, Google Phone > and Text > -- next part -- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20230104/e0036f83/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/20230105/88d85ddb/attachment.htm> ___ Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org No other addresses in TO and CC fields HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
Re: [EVDL] Do EVs make green sense?
*"Where do you think these idiots get their information about how much energy it takes to build a car...or the "carbon footprint"? * I know that people do try hard to put this sort of data in order and analyze it. In the case of prominent geographers and demographers they have teams of researchers and grad students cranking away at it. Just kill the messenger, eh? I have worked in manufacturing and the more money there is in it the more attention it gets. If you smelt pig iron and make a multitude of products from it, you can bet some people care a great deal how much effort and energy goes into it. It could be BS, or it might be solid. Comparisons can be made. Just because you would be bored by an effort doesn't mean it can't be done or done well. *"a different worker spends the weekend reading a book...does that affect the "carbon footprint"?"* *"what about energy needed for the workers to get to and from work?" etc.* Part of a good analysis is deciding what should be under consideration. If you can compare directly between an ICE and an EV then there may be value in knowing the differences and similarities. If you don't put in some effort, then you don't have a chance to make good decisions. I like this retort: The plural of anecdote is not data. On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 2:52 PM Lawrence Winiarski via EV 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. > \ > > SNIP -- Michael E. Ross (919) 585-6737 <http://voice.google.com/calls?a=nc,%2B19195856737> <http://voice.google.com/calls?a=nc,%2B19195856737> Land (919) 901-2805 <http://voice.google.com/calls?a=nc,%2B19199012805> <http://voice.google.com/calls?a=nc,%2B19199012805>Cell and Text (919) 576-0824 <https://www.google.com/voice/b/0?pli=1#phones> <http://voice.google.com/calls?a=nc,%2B19195760824> <http://voice.google.com/calls?a=nc,%2B19195760824> Tablet, Google Phone and Text -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20230105/73c1a4a4/attachment.htm> ___ Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org No other addresses in TO and CC fields HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
Re: [EVDL] Do EVs make green sense?
t 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 >> 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 >>>> 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/
Re: [EVDL] Do EVs make green sense?
n 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 > >> 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/
Re: [EVDL] Do EVs make green sense?
On 1/4/23 1:35 PM, John Lussmyer via EV 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. Don't forget to add in the carbon footprint of generating the gasoline necessary for the ICE. ___ Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org No other addresses in TO and CC fields HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
Re: [EVDL] Do EVs make green sense?
Michael Ross via EV wrote: I am trying to understand if Zeihan has an agenda... what does it take to make the unique aluminum alloy that Tesla has crafted to make body parts that are not steel... certainly the availability of lithium is not good. Nor is it good for cobalt, or nickel... if LiFePO is the future, we do not have a ready supply of phosphate. I think there is a lot of guesswork being presented to the effect that EVs are going to be with us soon, en masse. I agree, Michael. I can't provide anything but anecdotal evidence on any of these. I doubt that anyone else can, either. Our society has become an extremely complex machine -- so complex that no one can really understand it. So all we get are various "blind men" describing their view of the "elephant". They get some details right; but miss out on the big picture. Human nature also plays an important role. Let's face it; humans tend to be short-term thinkers. When they want something, they want it *now*; and will use the most expedient way to get it. Short-term quick/easy/cheap solutions may have bad long-term consequences; but they don't think about that. Humans also like things to stay the same. "We've always done it this way" is a powerful reason not to change. Things that no longer work become habits, and then bad habits. When people lived in forests, trees seemed inexhaustible; so they cut them down for wood. That became the norm; so a huge logging industry ran wild until the forests were gone. Only then did they think about sustainable logging. When coal could be dug up in your back yard with a shovel, people burned that for fuel. Again, whole industries developed around it, until the health and environmental effects became tragically obvious. Only then were standards developed to mitigate (but not stop) the damage. Cars initially burned gasoline not because it was a good choice; but because it was a cheap throw-away product. Again, a gigantic industry developed around it. Once the environmental harm became obvious, emission controls were mandated to mitigate the damage. But people still aren't willing to accept the full consequences of our massive use of oil. Sustainable long-term solutions take time to develop. There will always be a few that work on them, to improve and perfect them to eventually take over once the bad solutions are exhausted. So... I still think that EVs are a path to a solution. But our present EVs are using cheap/easy/expedient materials and methods, just like people have always done. In their own way, today's EVs are just as crude, dirty, and unsustainable as every other "first" technology. But over time, I think companies will learn. Once they need to make millions of EVs a year instead of thousands, they will come to depend on recycling and more sustainable environmentally friendly materials. Not out of altruism; but out of *necessity*! They will be *forced* to by material scarcity, government regulations and public pressure once the consequences of their short-sighted thinking become obvious! Lee -- The reasonable man adapts himself to the world. The unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw -- Lee Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, www.sunrise-ev.com -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com ___ Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org No other addresses in TO and CC fields HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
Re: [EVDL] Do EVs make green sense?
Tesla didn't invent using aluminum and they are not the only ones. https://www.motortrend.com/features/15-automotive-aluminum- warriors/ Money is what drives the world. If people are buying EV's they will solve all the problems to provide a product. On Thursday, January 5, 2023 at 02:20:17 AM CST, Michael Ross via EV 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 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 > 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 > >> 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
Re: [EVDL] Do EVs make green sense?
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 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 > 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 > >> 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/