Electric Car-Owners Shocked: New Study Confirms EVs Considerably Worse For Climate Than Diesel Cars

Discussion in 'General' started by David Towle, Apr 23, 2019.

  1. David Towle

    David Towle Active Member

  2. Mowcowbell

    Mowcowbell Active Member

    Sounds like one of those studies that basically says humans are worse for the environment than any other factor.
     
  3. petteyg359

    petteyg359 Active Member Subscriber

    As if anything ever published by zerohedge was anything other than worthless illogical drivel...

    There are plenty of studies to point at showing dirty power plants charging EVs are much cleaner than a bunch of ICEs added together. And some of those power plants are solar or wind or hydro in the first place.
     
  4. Mowcowbell

    Mowcowbell Active Member

    We have a mix of all types of power plants in my area. Natural Gas is the predominant fuel source, followed by coal, wind and solar. That article is probably comparing the dirtiest coal plant in Romania compared to a fleet of the cleanest diesel vehicles in Germany.
     
  5. JCA

    JCA Active Member

    You can safely stop reading this "study" by "German researchers" at the point that they say "Given a lifetime of 10 years and an annual travel distance of 15,000 kilometres" -- they're starting assumption is that every single battery pack lasts 94,000 miles and that's it -- trash the whole thing and build a whole new one. All evidence is that they the average battery pack life is *much* higher, that only parts of the pack may need to be rebuilt/replaced, and that much of the material can be recycled. I also suspect they aren't fairly calculating *both* the costs of generating the electricity to run the car, and the energy/materials required to create the diesel fuel for their favored vehicles.

    I'm sorry, but only an idiot could believe that particulate-spewing diesel engines could ever be "cleaner" than another fuel source, whether gas or electricity. That's why I had little sympathy for the owners who fell for the VW scam, and felt their car registrations should have been immediately suspended and let them work directly with VW for a fix, and only allowed to drive them again when they met the regulations.

    [Rant off] :)
     
    Walt R and David Towle like this.
  6. Kranberry

    Kranberry Member

    Did they account for how much CO2 was generated in refining diesel or any other fuel source? I find a lot of these studies don't take every single thing into account. I didn't read the actual study, but if it is like anything mentioned in the article I find it lacking a lot of data points on both sides.
     
    David Towle likes this.
  7. petteyg359

    petteyg359 Active Member Subscriber

    No, they didn't. Electrek posted about it on their blog. They ignored the costs of producing the diesel because that would ruin their premeditated conclusion.
     
    David Towle likes this.
  8. David Towle

    David Towle Active Member

    Some other EV news, looks like Musk is really going off the rails. From Marketwatch:

    Despite not living up to previous statements, Musk is ramping up the rhetoric.

    “The fundamental message that consumers should be taking today is that it’s financially insane to buy anything other than a Tesla,” Musk said. “It will be like owning a horse in three years.”

    Musk likes to present Tesla as a new kind of car company, but with this display, he fits right into the stereotypical view of car dealers: Willing to say whatever it takes to get you to spend thousands of dollars on their cars. It is irresponsible and reprehensible, but what do you expect from a car salesman?

    So we are all financially insane, right? Personally I think Tesla will be gone within the next 3 years. The onslaught of EVs and PHEVs from real car manufacturers are going to kill Tesla demand and bankrupt the highly leveraged company. VW, BMW, Toyota, Honda etc. can all afford to sell EVs at a loss and Musk can't.

    Note that Tesla's highly leveraged total market value is only $46 billion, very close to what dieselgate cost VW. VW absorbed that "pittance" of a cost no problem.

    The Tesla brand may survive as part of a major company. Their battery factories will surely be scooped up.

    Here's the full article:
    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/e...-salesman-2019-04-22?mod=MW_story_top_stories
     
  9. Zor

    Zor Member

    I don't really think Tesla will be gone, but its importance will be lessened.

    Tesla is kind of the Apple of the car world. Its mostly show, nothing really unique or special. Telsa like Apple produces things that are on mostly on par other manufactures at a premium price. Showmanship is really what both are selling. Major car manufactures wont hurt Tesla sale of showmanship as they are selling cars, not shows.
     
  10. vin seeram

    vin seeram Member

    I really hope Tesla , with Musk, survive. Without characters like that the old established companies will see no reason to change and EVs will have a hard time making progress.
     
    Texas22Step and If So Equipped like this.
  11. David Towle

    David Towle Active Member

    I do think that Audi(VW), BMW, and M-B also sell shows and I think that's what will really hurt Tesla sales numbers. The cars from these German brands cost close to 50% more than competitors, especially at the high end, so they are indeed selling shows.

    I also think all of us feel that yes Tesla did an awful lot to poke these old manufacturers into action on EVs, and he should have a place of honor in automotive history.
     
  12. The Gadgeteer

    The Gadgeteer Active Member

    The article assumes the production of electricity is from dirty sources and makes some other assumptions that are flawed. The plain fact of the matter is EVs allow the use clean power sources both now and in the future while burning fuel is always burning fuel.
     
  13. coutinpe

    coutinpe Member

    Yes, more or less what I have heard from what we may call "climate deniers" all along. As with many other dogmatic assertions on either side, I have a hard time catching up with their math. They left out solar and wind energy out of their "equation" and I know in Europe there is a BIG deal of windmills. Still, nobody has been able to answer my childish question on how were the vikings able to crop wheat in Greenland from the 11th to the 13th centuries if there was no CO2 greenhouse effect or otherwise man-made global warming back then? But please, before anyone decides to send me to the Inquisition court, I'm 100% for clean renewable energy and getting ourselves independent from middle east oil!
     
  14. JulianClarity

    JulianClarity Active Member

    The recycled batteries do not go into US soil, no pollution at all.
     
  15. jdonalds

    jdonalds Well-Known Member

    #1) I did not buy the Clarity to save the world. I do care about the environment but that was far from the top of the list.

    #2) There are numerous reports on the internet that say the opposite of this report. Makes me wonder what the motivation was behind this report.

    #3) Coal fired electricity is on the way out. If this report looks forward 10 years it should factor in the decreasing amount of coal used over that period.

    #4) Our local electricity provider has not used coal fired generation, either local or purchased from a distance, since 2017.

    #5) If the report causes any authorities to clean up their electricity generation that would be a good thing.

    #6) If the report is in any way responsible for slower conversion from ICE to EV it would be a shame.

    #7) Their figures are based on averages which is fine. In our case our Clarity, which I intend to keep for at least 10 years, will have 200,000 miles on it which is double the figure in the report. This means cleaner air than they project.

    #8) As mentioned above the Clarity, with a smaller 17kw battery, has lower pollution figures for manufacturing and disposal. Once again I see the Clarity PHEV as the better fit for our family at the present time.
     
  16. Roger Lambert

    Roger Lambert Member


    Musk said that in a presentation NOT to the public, but to investors, and he said it specifically with regard to hi s announcement that fully autonomous driving in a Tesla is ready to go and would allow Tesla owners the opportunity to use their cars as autonomous driving vehicles to earn supplemental money like Uber drivers - without having to be in the car actually driving.

    Context matters.
     
  17. JulianClarity

    JulianClarity Active Member

    Human beings are selfish. I used to be strongly against EVs, but no more. The government wants you to buy EVs, they offer you chance to save big money, you don't take it, others will.
     
  18. PascoClarity

    PascoClarity New Member

    It was the same thing back in 2006 when I bought my Prius. There was a “study” that said the Hummer was more environmentally friendly than the Prius, this study is still quoted on deniers. This study was obviously the result of Big Oil giving money and a conclusion to a group of individuals who were educated beyond their intelligence, who then came up with assumptions to make the study support the conclusion. Two of the assumptions were;

    1) the usable life of a Prius is 100,000 miles
    2) The usable life of a Hummer is 300,000 miles

    Both wrong, both support the conclusion.
    I’d be willing to bet I can find more 300,000 mile Prius’ than they can find 100,000 mile Hummers.

    My wife is still driving our Prius at 225,000 miles and it still gets 45 mpg.
     
    Pushmi-Pullyu and petteyg359 like this.
  19. PHEV Newbie

    PHEV Newbie Well-Known Member

    That is a dodgy article. It is not a peer reviewed international publication. It's an in-house "publication" of the think tank and you know that think tanks are created with specific agendas in mind.
     
    Thevenin and KentuckyKen like this.
  20. insightman

    insightman Well-Known Member

Share This Page