Re: [EVDL] Do EVs make green sense?

[Lee Hart via EV]

Mark Laity-Snyder via EV wrote:

  John,  YOU ROCK dude!
That is hardcore. I guess it makes sense though if you are living in a city.  I 
have been out in the sticks for too long and have gotten used to having to 
commute.
I also totally agree with our Fearful leader/servant Dave when he says - EVs 
can be zero energy if you have enough PV.  The naysayers aren't interested in 
PV because that would take away from the Gasaholic lifestyle.

I spent 10 years living in Portland OR without a car. Commuted to work as an 
auto tech by bicycle or mass transit. Really the only sane way if one is 
concerned about the environment. It was also way less expensive.


Good for you both! There is hope. We have the power to change the 
future. We can make the world a better place for our children and future 
generations.


But it won't happen if we sit on our butts, and simply repeat the past, 
do what everyone else does, and expect "someone else" to solve all our 
problems for us.


I've been building and driving EVs since the 1970's. For most of that 
time, that meant driving cars with Ford model A class performance while 
everyone else drove cars more luxurious than their homes. The nay-sayers 
no doubt think I wasted my time and money. But I've learned so much, and 
helped many others see what is possible. And that makes me happy.


Those of you reading this list are also part of the solution. Yes, it 
costs us in money, comfort, and ego to invest in the future rather than 
instant gratification. But just as saving now pays big dividends when we 
retire, the work we do now will have a huge payback in the future of the 
world.


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?

[Mark Laity-Snyder via EV]

 John,  YOU ROCK dude!
That is hardcore. I guess it makes sense though if you are living in a city.  I 
have been out in the sticks for too long and have gotten used to having to 
commute.
I also totally agree with our Fearful leader/servant Dave when he says - EVs 
can be zero energy if you have enough PV.  The naysayers aren't interested in 
PV because that would take away from the Gasaholic lifestyle.

I spent 10 years living in Portland OR without a car. Commuted to work as an 
auto tech by bicycle or mass transit. Really the only sane way if one is 
concerned about the environment. It was also way less expensive.

John


  
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
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?

[John McIntire via EV]

There is no such thing as an environmentally friendly "green" automobile. ICEV, 
EV or something in between, they are all detrimental to life on earth. Like ice 
cream, just pick your favorite flavor and go with it.

>From my perspective of 40 years as a mechanic certified by ASE repairing cars, 
>trucks, tractors, snowmobiles, etc, all vehicles are designed to do one thing; 
>transfer your hard earned cash into someone else's pockets who already has 
>more than enough. If the vehicle does actually manage to transport you, 
>consider that a bonus!

I spent 10 years living in Portland OR without a car. Commuted to work as an 
auto tech by bicycle or mass transit. Really the only sane way if one is 
concerned about the environment. It was also way less expensive.

John
___
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?

[EV List Lackey via EV]

These EV naysayers are eternal.  They were around when I first started 
following EVs around 1967, they were a plague in the 1990s when they 
attacked the GM Impact (notably the infamous Carnegie-Mellon lead study), 
and they're still spreading their lying, agenda-driven propaganda today.  

Calculating vehicle emissions and environmental impact is highly complex. 
There are many places where someone with an agenda (which is anyone being 
paid) can put his finger on the scale.  

What anyone should be able to understand intiutively is that an EV sold 
today can be run on electricty from any source - including renewable sources 
that you personally own or control.

That isn't true of any ICEV, regardless of how efficient it might be.  
Nearly without exception, essentially all ICEVs run on fuel supplied by 
giant corporations whose sole objective by definition is their owners' and 
stockholders' profit, not environmental protection.

Suppose you live where coal-generated electricity dominates.  Depending on 
which numbers you emphasize, you can show that it's cleaner than an ICEV or 
that it's dirtier.  

So what? 

When you put PV on your roof, or even when you contract with a "green" 
energy supplier, your EV becomes a true ZEV.  No  mechanical changes  
whatsoever are needed.  Just plug it in.  What ICEV can claim that?

David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey

To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my 
offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

 Rags make paper
 Paper makes money
 Money makes banks
 Banks make beggars
 Beggars make rags

  -- anonymous, 18th c

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

___
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?

[Steves via EV]

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  Land
>> (919) 901-2805 Cell and
>> Text
>> (919) 576-0824 
>>  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: 
> 
> 

Re: [EVDL] Do EVs make green sense?

[Peter Gabrielsson via EV]

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  Land
> (919) 901-2805 Cell and
> Text
> (919) 576-0824 
>  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: 

___
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]

*"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 
 Land
(919) 901-2805 
Cell and Text
(919) 576-0824 

 Tablet, Google Phone
and Text
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
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?

[Steves via EV]

I agree - I can’t imagine a huge difference between cars, unless perhaps it is 
one of the newer cars that is designed to be low c02 in manufacturing and 
highly recyclable. Even then I wonder how much better they are. 

Let’s face it, the only ‘green’ car is the one that is not built. 

-Steve

> On 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.   
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   On Thursday, January 5, 2023, 12:20:43 AM PST, 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) 

Re: [EVDL] Do EVs make green sense?

[Lawrence Winiarski via EV]

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.   




   On Thursday, January 5, 2023, 12:20:43 AM PST, 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 

Re: [EVDL] Do EVs make green sense?

[Peter C. Thompson via EV]

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?

[Lee Hart via EV]

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?

[paul dove via EV]

 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  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  Tablet,
Google Phone and Text
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___

Re: [EVDL] Do EVs make green sense?

[Michael Ross via EV]

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  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  Tablet,
Google Phone and Text
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
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?

[(-Phil-) via EV]

Zeihan seems spot on with most of his information, and I listen to him
often, but he doesn't know everything.  He posits that Teslas are only
status symbols and there are superior EVs on the market.  The Vinfast SUV
that's somewhere close to 50% the range of a Model Y is telling.  I've
spent a lot of time tearing apart Teslas (I have a Youtube channel where I
explain this: https://youtube.com/ingineerix/ ), and nobody has caught up
to them yet.   Notably Tesla solved the range problem over 5 years ago.
They built the network before they even became popular.

He's right about some of the material challenges, but it can be solved, and
a well built EV will last longer than an ICE car, so the capital cost
comparison cannot be apples to apples.



On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 10:59 PM 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  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/
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
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?

[Steves via EV]

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  Tablet,
> Google Phone and Text
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> 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?

[Michael Ross via EV]

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  Tablet,
Google Phone and Text
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
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?

[John Lussmyer via EV]

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/

[EVDL] Do EVs make green sense?

[Michael Ross via EV]

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  Land
(919) 901-2805 Cell and
Text
(919) 576-0824 
 Tablet, Google Phone
and Text
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/