Environmental impact of lithium ion battery manufacturing

FutureTeashock

I get that you're all saving vast sums on fuel, but in this age of environmental concern, shouldn't we be more worried about the deleterious effects these vehicles will have on the planet? Particularly if rolled out on a mass scale?:(

it requires the energy equivalent of about 100 barrels of oil to fabricate one battery capable of storing the energy contained in a single barrel of oil.

Embracing batteries at automotive scales would lead to an unprecedented global expansion in mining, with all the accompanying negative environmental effects that tend not to be palliated in developing countries.

https://www.city-journal.org/electric-vehicle-batteries

Mod Note: To all posters, keep it civil and researched, any trolling will be met with a warning, followed by thread ban if it continues

Kramer

FutureTeashock wrote: »

shouldn't we be more worried about the deleterious effects these vehicles will have on the planet?

Arra yeah, ICE FTW .

krissovo

Yawn, that article must be up there for the most fake of fake news at a fake news conference.

FutureTeashock

krissovo wrote: »

Yawn, that article must be up there for the most fake of fake news at a fake news conference.

It's fake news that the materials in batteries have to be mined and that mining is energy intensive? LOL!

Black_Knight

Nope. Not at all. Gotta break a few eggs to make an omlette.

Same for ICE, but ICE it's far from clean or efficient. Electric is the lesser evil of the 2, and in respect to the alternatives it's not too evil at all. Petrol/diesel have just been normalised, like forgetting alcohol is still a drug.

Moghead

FutureTeashock wrote: »

I get that you're all saving vast sums on fuel, but in this age of environmental concern, shouldn't we be more worried about the deleterious effects these vehicles will have on the planet? Particularly if rolled out on a mass scale?:(




" it requires the energy equivalent of about 100 barrels of oil to fabricate one battery capable of storing the energy contained in a single barrel of oil. "




"Embracing batteries at automotive scales would lead to an unprecedented global expansion in mining, with all the accompanying negative environmental effects that tend not to be palliated in developing countries."

https://www.city-journal.org/electric-vehicle-batteries

What do you propose as an alternative to EV?

krissovo

FutureTeashock wrote: »

It's fake news that the materials in batteries have to be mined and that mining is energy intensive? LOL!

I am still yawning, I suggest you educate yourself and come back when you are better informed.

Black_Knight

Moghead wrote: »

What do you propose as an alternative to EV?

Probably ICE

FutureTeashock

krissovo wrote: »

I am still yawning, I suggest you educate yourself and come back when you are better informed.

This is hilarious. You are suggesting that mining is NOT energy intensive. Baffling.

Lumen

FutureTeashock wrote: »

it requires the energy equivalent of about 100 barrels of oil to fabricate one battery capable of storing the energy contained in a single barrel of oil.

When I finally get my Tesla I'm going to throw it away as soon as the battery is empty, but at least it'll be the most exciting 400km driving of my life.

FutureTeashock

Lumen wrote: »

When I finally get my Tesla I'm going to throw it away as soon as the battery is empty, but at least it'll be the most exciting 400km driving of my life.

Of course the energy used to charge your Tesla will just magically appear with no environmental impact.

Lumen

FutureTeashock wrote: »

Of course the energy used to charge your Tesla will just magically appear with no environmental impact.

I can charge it? Elon is a genius!

Moghead

FutureTeashock wrote: »

Of course the energy used to charge your Tesla will just magically appear with no environmental impact.

But what should we drive instead of EV so?

liamog

It's all fine guys, here's another study, this time not funned by the Koch Foundation and published by a neo-con US thinktank.

https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/EV-life-cycle-GHG_ICCT-Briefing_09022018_vF.pdf

It's a multi literature review which roughly concludes that an EV reaches CO2/kg parity at 75,000km and anything after that results in fewer emissions.
Numbers are based on the EU average grid, of which we are a part.

FutureTeashock

liamog wrote: »

It's all fine guys, here's another study, this time not funned by the Koch Foundation and published by a neo-con US thinktank.

https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/EV-life-cycle-GHG_ICCT-Briefing_09022018_vF.pdf

It's a multi literature review which roughly concludes that an EV reaches CO2/kg parity at 75,000km and anything after that results in fewer emissions.
Numbers are based on the EU average grid, of which we are a part.

LOL! I wonder what the battery quality will be like after 75 k kms!:o

Moghead

FutureTeashock wrote: »

LOL! I wonder what the battery quality will be like after 75 k kms!:o

But what should we drive instead of an EV?

krissovo

FutureTeashock wrote: »

This is hilarious. You are suggesting that mining is NOT energy intensive. Baffling.

I have suggested nothing of the sort, I have suggested that you read up and educate yourself before you start trolling.

FutureTeashock

Moghead wrote: »

But what should we drive instead of an EV?

I'm in favour of preserving current vehicles. I oppose scrapping a 15 year old car in decent working order as is the current approach.



It works in Cuba.

SlowBlowin

I feel guilty about every impact on the environment.

Fossil fuels are not sustainable, electric is, that should be enough. If not then apply commonsense and you will drive an EV.

liamog

Based on anyone driving a non-Nissan EV, about the same capacity as the day they got the car. Nissan EVs may have dropped around 8%.
Really they've both dropped about 8%, but Nissan sell using gross capacity instead of net, this causes the car to appear to degrade at a faster rate.

krissovo

FutureTeashock wrote: »

I'm in favour of preserving current vehicles. I oppose scrapping a 15 year old car in decent working order as is the current approach.



It works in Cuba.

It only works in Cuba as they are using old reliable Mechanical tech from the late 50's that can be made in a shed. We scrapped most of our qualifying vehicles during the various scrappage schemes. There are only so many toyota corollas to go around.

FutureTeashock

SlowBlowin wrote: »

I feel guilty about every impact on the environment.

Fossil fuels are not sustainable, electric is, that should be enough. If not then apply commonsense and you will drive an EV.

Sooooo sustainable.:o


"Embracing batteries at automotive scales would lead to an unprecedented global expansion in mining, with all the accompanying negative environmental effects that tend not to be palliated in developing countries."

liamog

Mod Note: @FutureTeashock the tone of your posts is coming across as trolling. Keep it civil.

krissovo

FutureTeashock wrote: »

LOL! I wonder what the battery quality will be like after 75 k kms!:o

Teslas are designed for 500k miles and looking like the long range versions will hit 1 million.

BMW batteries look like they will do 800k km's

Some of the early tech batteries are suffering.

Lumen

FutureTeashock wrote: »

LOL! I wonder what the battery quality will be like after 75 k kms!:o

Most current EVs have a battery warranty of at least 150,000 Kms, and recycling of old EV battery packs into immobile energy storage is increasingly normal.

liamog

Lumen wrote: »

Most current EVs have a battery warranty of at least 150,000 Kms, and recycling of old EV battery packs into immobile energy storage is increasingly normal.

That's a good point, the ID.3 will be sold next year will have a 58 kWH usable pack (62 kWh gross). By the time that degrades to 70% it can still store 43.4 kWh. Stationary storage of energy is going to be a big market for post-automotive batteries. Lithium-Ion batteries can be 100% recycled, it's not done yet as it makes more sense to repurpose them.

BorneTobyWilde

I expect diesel will make a huge come back.

FutureTeashock

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

I expect diesel will make a huge come back.

Ironically, this used to be the Green lobby's savior of the environment. In reality it's highly noxious and toxic.



I have a feeling EVs will be similarly exposed in time.

KCross

FutureTeashock wrote: »

I get that you're all saving vast sums on fuel, but in this age of environmental concern, shouldn't we be more worried about the deleterious effects these vehicles will have on the planet? Particularly if rolled out on a mass scale?:(

To answer your question from the thread title... no, its the lesser of two evils.

FutureTeashock wrote: »

LOL! I wonder what the battery quality will be like after 75 k kms!:o

That question shows that you dont have much knowledge in the area and are working from google rather than first hand experience and reading what google is returning in your biased searches.

FutureTeashock wrote: »

I'm in favour of preserving current vehicles. I oppose scrapping a 15 year old car in decent working order as is the current approach.

I've heard this argument plenty of times but I've not seen our government encouraging people to take perfect vehicles off the road.

The switch to EV will be a long slow process over decades, where the old ICE stock will naturally get retired.

No one could advocate that crushing a perfectly good car just to have an EV would be environmentally friendly.... you've put up a strawman argument.


Do you see any positives for moving to EV? I'll give you one.... removal of local emissions where our kids are breathing. I'd rather see those emissions at a highly regulated power plant with a significant percentage of it being from renewable sources than to continue breathing oil fumes on the streets.

Can you think of any positives or is it all bad from your point of view and we should continue to burn oil until it runs out?

Skatedude

I'll be keeping my 20 year old 4.4L v8 petrol car for many years to come, best way is to maximize the use of used cars before even considering the construction of a new replacement vehicle.

FutureTeashock

Skatedude wrote: »

I'll be keeping my 20 year old 4.4L v8 petrol car for many years to come, best way is to maximize the use of used cars before even considering the construction of a new replacement vehicle.

I 100% agree with you, but sadly the govt. will tax your balls off for doing so.

Doff

Poor Greta must be turning in her grave

elperello

That was quick.
Two pages and we have new EV vs. 20 year old 4.4 petrol.
The vast majority drive neither.
Most ordinary cars won't be taxed off the road.

Orebro

Skatedude wrote: »

I'll be keeping my 20 year old 4.4L v8 petrol car for many years to come, best way is to maximize the use of used cars before even considering the construction of a new replacement vehicle.

Vroom vroom! Good man, had to mention it was a big engine too just to get a reaction from us tree huggers. In reality, we all hope you have many more years use out of your pen1s extension

SteM

FutureTeashock wrote: »

I'm in favour of preserving current vehicles. I oppose scrapping a 15 year old car in decent working order as is the current approach.



It works in Cuba.

Well then it's the insurance companies you should be moaning at and not EV drivers. They're the ones making it difficult to insure and therefore keep cars older than 15 years on the road.

Mike9832

You've figured it out OP

With batteries using less and less of cobalt, nickel is now the main ingredient

The average electric car is using about 50kg of nickel and with chemistries going to 8-1-1 (nickel, cobalt, manganese), that will go up and up ( buy nickel if you want to make easy money, it's going to get expensive )

50kg of nickel by even 50% of yearly car sales is 500 million kg of nickel, its crazy

Nothing to worry about anyway, most in the industry believe the ramp up is going to be extremely slow

adunis

My 36 year old 3.5 Lt V8 did 1002 mike's last year ,both my EV are heading for 33k each

Lumen

Mike9832 wrote: »

50kg of nickel by even 50% of yearly car sales is 500 million kg of nickel, its crazy

But there's enough nickel in the earth's crust for about 4 billion years worth of that production level.

Mike9832

Lumen wrote: »

But there's enough nickel in the earth's crust for about 4 billion years worth of that production level.

We should be reusing the crazy quantities we have already extracted from the earth, rather than mining the **** out of even further

If everything gets electricified it will be like the 1800s mining days again lol 😂

Going backwards

KCross

Mike9832 wrote: »

We should be reusing the crazy quantities we have already extracted from the earth, rather than mining the **** out of even further

If everything gets electricified it will be like the 1800s mining days again lol ��

Going backwards

You better take back all those deposits you have on EV's so!

There's life in that Fabia yet!

slave1

FutureTeashock wrote: »

LOL! I wonder what the battery quality will be like after 75 k kms!:o

LOL, mates Leaf 24 just passed 270,000kms and only lost two bars so I’d say battery quality perfectly fine after 75k

Mike9832

KCross wrote: »

You better take back all those deposits you have on EV's so!

There's life in that Fabia yet!

I hope so

Still waiting for that 250bhp/400km/15min charging Focus size EV for €30k

Getting closer, Tesla especially, just price

Mike9832

slave1 wrote: »

LOL, mates Leaf 24 just passed 270,000kms and only lost two bars so I’d say battery quality perfectly fine after 75k

Thats pretty impressive for a Lead

Original battery?

FutureTeashock

Another aspect to consider is the high level of radiation emitted by such a powerful battery in close proximity to the passangers.






"In recent years there have been concerns about magnetic fields emanating from EV electric systems."


"In 2008, Jim Motavalli wrote a report for the New York Times pointing out that these fears do indeed have a certain legitimacy, acknowledged by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI)."


https://interestingengineering.com/how-safe-are-electric-vehicles


I'm sticking with ICE definitely,indefinitely.

Gumbo

FutureTeashock wrote: »

Another aspect to consider is the high level of radiation emitted by such a powerful battery in close proximity to the passangers.






"In recent years there have been concerns about magnetic fields emanating from EV electric systems."


"In 2008, Jim Motavalli wrote a report for the New York Times pointing out that these fears do indeed have a certain legitimacy, acknowledged by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI)."


https://interestingengineering.com/how-safe-are-electric-vehicles


I'm sticking with ICE definitely,indefinitely.

As long as people sit in front of microwaves watching their lunch heat up, hold their phones up to their brains while talking, I don’t think we need to be worried.

FutureTeashock

kceire wrote: »

As long as people sit in front of microwaves watching their lunch heat up, hold their phones up to their brains while talking, I don’t think we need to be worried.

I don't recommend anyone do any of those things. Ireland has the 3rd highest cancer rates in the world. Let's not add to that stat.

_dof_

FutureTeashock wrote: »

Another aspect to consider is the high level of radiation emitted by such a powerful battery in close proximity to the passangers.

"In recent years there have been concerns about magnetic fields emanating from EV electric systems."


"In 2008, Jim Motavalli wrote a report for the New York Times pointing out that these fears do indeed have a certain legitimacy, acknowledged by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI)."


https://interestingengineering.com/how-safe-are-electric-vehicles

Despite not wanting to feed the troll, I decided to read those links for the laugh, and basically, they all say the same thing, people concerned about electromagnetic fields based on no real evidence. Science investigates and finds that there is nothing to be concerned about.

To quote the last line of the last article:
"All that makes EVs very safe indeed, and certainly a lot safer than a conventional tin can with a load of petrol sloshing around."

I'm sticking with ICE definitely,indefinitely.

Okay off with you so, don't let the virtual forum door hit you on the way out.

I think we've reached the limit of trolling now mods?

liamog

Mod Note: Closing thread, given the OPs sources, it's clear they have an agenda which is not compatible with the purpose of this forum