One thing I never see in the studies of how green the EVs are over their life as compared to ICE is what is the carbon footprint of recycling / disposing of the spent batteries. I have done some research into this and it ain't pretty. But, for some reason, that little tidbit is never included in the discussion. Plus, you have to drive an EV 15,000 - 20,000 miles to get to the break even point before it starts to have less carbon footprint than an ICE.
Analysis: When do electric vehicles become cleaner than gasoline cars?
You glide silently out of the Tesla (TSLA.O) showroom in your sleek new electric Model 3, satisfied you're looking great and doing your bit for the planet.www.reuters.com
Offsetting emissions from producing electric cars
Electric cars aren’t perfect. Producing and transporting them requires energy, and that means buying one has a carbon fowww.politifact.com
New EV vs. old beater: Which is better for the environment?
EVs require more energy to build, but they are far more efficient to operate.arstechnica.com
Even Consumer Reports dodged the question by saying that once the batteries are done in the car, they are used for home and business power supplies. That is all well and good, but what when the battery is done? What then?
Currently, the batteries are glued together with epoxy. You can't just take them apart and re-use the components when done. Current methods are to incinerate them and then gather up the "ash" and separate out the recyclable components or dissolve them in a very powerful, nasty and toxic acid and then again separate out the reusables. Then, the rest of the toxic sludge has to be disposed of. Or, the batteries are just dumped in a land fill. None of these options seem to be "environmentally" friendly to me, but then what do I know?
I would love to have a vehicle with an electric traction motor as they are ideal for that purpose. But where do you get the electricity from? That is where I have a problem.
I have to wonder if all this money and research going into EVs was instead used to find ways to make ICEs more adiabatic and have an efficiency upwards of 60% to 70% or more, what you that do in "saving" the environment?
For now, petroleum is the life blood of the planet. I think we should use it as efficiently as possible. I can't see a world where every country's seacoast and every hilltop is lined, several rows deep, with wind turbines and every piece of vacant land is paved over with solar panels. What would be the carbon footprint of that?
Many places are starting to add on extra fees to EVs for the lack of paying a gas tax. You know that state has to keep the money coming in.
I wouldn't mind a hybrid version of the Land Cruiser. That might be interesting. Toyota has the hybrid thing down pretty well.
Ive said many times, the batteries we currently have are stone age level technology.
But a lot of what you wrote is easily solved with nuclear power.
Which ironically is a fancy steam engine lol.
I don't personally don't care for any of the politics involved, but i will say both sides lean heavily into their camp rhetorics.
Pushy EV people are just as annoying as those who swear it will never work. They are not as clean as they are touted to be and involve a s***load of actual slave labor.
I dont think they should be disregarded though, we will have batteries that will change the game in big ways sooner than later.
Its just right now, its too rosey a picture being painted, and too pessimistic on the other side of the isle.
Even though im as cynical as it gets, and know for a fact we dont have nearly the plant and grid capacity for EVs (as much as gov is shoving them down our throats they are woefully unprepared), i still like having both at this juncture.
Its nice to have diverse systems, as a systems architect, why would i refuse that option.
