Electric cars - where does the electricity come from?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118431724#Comment_118431724

It was a rhetorical question to the poster I quoted, I'd have thought that was obvious to most posters... Apparently not

Furze99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118431131#Comment_118431131

And of course, wind farms have substantial carbon footprints in themselves. The fossil fuel industry has been justifiably criticised for many years for not including the environmental destruction as part of their costs of production. We see the same pattern with the wind energy industry. EVs may be a little less polluting overall in the long run but generally speaking, it's a three card trick to churn the market and generate new industries.

Bottom line, if you wanna be a Green - then walk or cycle. Live, Work and Play locally. Give up yer old cars, EVs or ICEs.

Gregor Samsa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118431797#Comment_118431797

Rhetorical questions are still worth answering. A rhetorical question is done to make a point, a statement of fact disguised as a question. However, the factual answer to the rhetorical question does not always make the point that the person posing the question thinks it does.

In this case, the rhetorical question was intended to nullify the claim that the environmental efficiency of coal fired power generation relative to the environmental impact of vehicular traffic was nullified by the fact that coal has to be transported to the power station. And it's true - there is an impact from the transportation of the coal.

However, the fact that it's transported by ship - and not road - is significant in determining whether centralised coal fired generation is more efficient and less environmentally impactful than the equivalent input energy burned bu ICE vehicles. Shipping is significantly better than road transport in this regard.

Also the fact that coal burning there is being imminently phased out s significant to the debate at hand.

Furthermore, this is a public debate, and not everyone here knows where Moneypoint is or how the coal gets there.

So your the point made by your rhetorical question - while I'm sure you got some satisfaction from the pithy nature of it - was not sufficiently complete.

So in short, my lack of psychic abilities regarding your front door, your view or even your rhetorical expression don't matter. The point being made by your rhetorical question required being expanded upon.

Gregor Samsa

Companies do certainly overblow their green credentials, and every technology has an environmental impact. And quite clearly no cars would be much, much better than some cars of any kind.

But there's an environmental impact to existing at all. The question is, at what point do we say it's too much. We've clearly already gone past an acceptable limit, so we have to pull back. But how much can we pull back in a realistic sense, and can we find a balance between the benefits of the technologies and lifestyles that we've developed, and the negative impacts they have? Should we not do something just because it isn't a complete solution? Perfect is the enemy of good.

I think one of the benefits of EVs is the very fact that they shift the mode of distribution of energy from specific physical bulk to electricity - which is neutral to how the energy is generated in the first place. This is a shift that only needs to be made once - no matter what advances are made in the generation of energy in the future, the mode of distribution is already in place. Had we shifted to something like hydrogen for private transport, there would be clear benefits on emissions, but we'd be replacing one network of matter distribution with another, and then locked into it. EV's don't lock us into anything. If someone in the future comes up with a safe, efficient way of generating power from nuclear fusion, we don't have to think about how to miniaturise it and put a little reactor into every car like in Back To The Future - we do the generation at scale (where it's always going to be more efficient and therefore cheaper), and just feed it into the network we already have.

That they're only a little greener (for want of a better word) than their ICE counterparts now is not the whole picture. The future potential in the conceptual and practical shift away from every vehicle having it's own personal portable power plant that's stuck on on burning one type of physical matter is significant in itself.

kirving

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118431646#Comment_118431646

Equally though, that assumes that your own time has zero value.

A 5km round trip to the shops, taking 6 minutes would cost 10c in an EV, or 85c in an ICE.

EV: 10c/kWh * 20kWh/100km * 5km

ICE: 170c/l * 10l/100km * 5km

But it would take the guts of an hour to walk it.

By the time I got the bike out of the shed and back in again, it would take at least 25 minutes. Some days I'd walk or cycle that journey, but some days I value saving 20 mins of my time (vs bike) at more than 10c.

But I agree - it's a complete false dilemma to market new EV's a green and old ICE as bad when all cars have a huge carbon footprint relative to cycling, walking, or public transport of any kind.

Manion

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118431109#Comment_118431109

As others have stated, efficiency of energy generation is the big advantage. The laws of thermodynamics would be a good place to start your Google.

Secondly, it allows us to generate power in places where people aren't, making for cleaner urban environments.

Lastly, because the power is generated from a mix of sources, even if efficiency levels where the same, electricity would had less of an environmental impact due to a portion of the power being generated from renewable and sustainable sources. In the UK and France for instance you have much higher rates of nuclear power, which are carbon free.

Burning coal to power electric cars wouldn't be a great idea.

MTU

It was all the vogue of having a suv on the school run now it an ev and recycle coffee cup.

monkeybutter

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118431844#Comment_118431844

what carbon footprint or environmental destruction from wind?

I mean we have a carbon footprint just existing or cycling or making a bike, or making the shoes you walk in

El Tarangu

@kirving

If your EV was built in China and charged in Poland from a coal fired power station, it would take years of driving to break even.

A European built EV, run in Sweden is a much greener option.

I'm with you as far as the coal-fired power station, but surely a European-built EV is still using Chinese lithium batteries? Insofar as I understand the process, the mining and processing of this material is an environmental catastrophe.

El Tarangu

@monkeybutter

what carbon footprint or environmental destruction from wind?

Building thousands upon thousands of wind turbines uses enormous amounts of steel and concrete - particularly considering that they only work at partial efficiency, part of the time. And that every watt produced needs to be backed up with (usually) fossil fuel-powered infrastructure.

I mean we have a carbon footprint just existing or cycling or making a bike, or making the shoes you walk in

True, but the 10-12kg raw materials required to build a bicycle uses an order of magnitude less resources than the 1,000kg of materials required to manufacture a car of any type - and that's even before the carbon emissions required to run the latter.

Ah Jesus **** Christ.

Here we go again with the lie of "Oh, every unit has to be backed up by conventional sources". How is it then that in the last couple of decades we've added a few GW of wind power while not adding new burners and in fact closing down the peat place (though it was a stupid errand from the start) and closing Moneypoint soon.

Please, explain your logic behind your lie.

Gregor Samsa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432285#Comment_118432285

At present, this is certainly true.

But out-an-out revolutions where every problem is solved in one fell swoop rarely work or happen. I think things need to be taken a step at a time. Lithium mining is a problem, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done or that EVs shouldn't be made. There will be better, cleaner more efficient alternatives to lithium batteries - there's just no way that we've reached the peak of our abilities in electricity storage this soon. There's already a host of candidates being explored and developed. But the switch to using them won't require the same sea-change for end users and transport infrastructure that moving from ICE to EVs has required. It will be an evolutionary change.

For example, if (and it's a big if at present) Sodium-ion batteries could be developed that matched the potential of Lithium-ion ones, it would severely reduce the impact of mining and processing, while opening up the possibility of production to pretty much the entire world, as Sodium is one of the most common and easily accessible elements we have. And they would be safer than Li-ion ones in terms of fire risk. But they currently don't have the energy density needed for vehicles, and cost too much to produce. But the same was true of Li-ion batteries not so long ago.

One of the things about EVs and the surrounding technology is that we're only at the very beginning of their development and potential.

kirving

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432348#Comment_118432348

There was an interactive tool on this site previously, but looks to be missing now.

Plenty of activity when it comes to EV Battery development in Europe too.

https://www.transportenvironment.org/discover/how-clean-are-electric-cars/

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/29/-northvolt-europes-tesla-battery-rival-produces-lithium-ion-cell-.html

https://unitedlithium.com/projects/sweden/#:~:text=The%20Bergby%20Project%20is%20a,transportation%20infrastructure%2C%20workforce%20and%20equipment

El Tarangu

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432376#Comment_118432376

Where did the energy come from this autumn?

An a very cold winter day, when no wind is blowing, little-to-no solar power is being produced, and everyone is indoors with their normal level of appliance use plus, increasingly, charging their EVs, where will the energy come from?

crisco10

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432514#Comment_118432514

I think the subtlety is just because there is backup generation available, does not mean it's producing emissions all the time as well.

So when wind blows, your peakers are burning ZERO fossil fuels, and when it's not they do burn fuel to fill the gaps. At our current electricity mix, that means we are avoiding burning gas/oil for approx 40% of Ireland's Electricity needs. That's a huge amount of fuel saving/reduction.

techman1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118431137#Comment_118431137

Electric motors might be 90% efficient but electric generators are at the very best only about 60% efficient. Therefore converting coal , oil , water, wind energy etc to electricity is at most only 60% efficient. Therefore you need to knock another 40% of the efficiency of electric cars that you quoted. All this stuff is not limited by technology but by the laws of thermodynamics and entropy. You can never get to 100% efficiency in converting energy to electricity

notAMember

There are efficiencies in producing power in large powerplants, rather than carrying your own individual powerplant around in your car... which is what fuel engines are. Plus of course the flexibility... fuel for the grid can come from anywhere, and you can work on making that less polluting. You can't really change the engine in your car. It is de-coupling energy production from energy use.

That being said, the most green car is the one you already own. We only considered and bought an EV when our other car was driven into the ground and effectively was not worth repairing.

And, transport is affected by other decisions. Ideally we wouldn't need any car at all, but public transport in this country isn't great. We work around it though. For example, when moving home 10+ years ago, we had the budget for a 4 bedroom rural house on an acre of land, or a 2 bed home in an urban area with a smaller garden. We chose the small one that meant we could walk to schools, shops, use public transport, rather than needing to drive around the place. We put an extension on to get an extra bedroom for the kids. We can use bikes, buses, walking and as a family, only need one car for longer trips.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432514#Comment_118432514

Can't find the stats but I'm going to make an informed assumption that it didn't come from the made up new Fuel burning plants that we apparently needed to add over the last 15 years.

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432159#Comment_118432159

Nuclear isn't carbon free (or reliable or economic)

One claim is that in 2020 there was 98% up time for Finland's four reactors. However they have been burning coal and oil since 2009 to cover for the fifth reactor which should have been providing a third of Finland's nuclear power. So the reality is that it was only 67% up time and the plant cost three times it's advertised price.

Scotland have shut down a nuclear power plant today leaving just one active. Renewables in Scotland are providing nearly 100% of the amount of power used when you take into account the nett exports over the interconnectors. So we have a long way to go on renewables but it's possible.

kirving

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432615#Comment_118432615

That's true for combustion based electricity generation true - and has been addressed in this thread.

It is not true for wind or hydro generators. Even if it was - so what? The energy is free anyway.

It's not applicable to the likes of solar PV.

Even still, 60% @ power plant * 90% battery charge is 54%. Likely double that of of an ICE car.

techman1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432830#Comment_118432830

Yes you are correct, but 54 % efficiency is alot more truthful than saying electric cars are 100% efficient which is the common stat thrown out there.

Also if petrol cars are 33% efficient and that is improving consistently, surely we should keep as much effort into this as going all in on electric cars.

Would it not be easier and more beneficial to reduce the size of cars generally. Surely driving around in a big heavy electric SUV alot more damaging than a all efficient petrol car. But there needs to be honest

Mr. teddywinkles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432131#Comment_118432131

Well if we were to get into the nitty gritty we could talk bout calories and food consumption and cost of production to the environment to give us the energy to cycle or walk.

It all has to come from somewhere.

What worries me bout evs is 5things

Initial cost of vehicle.

Battery recycling (environmental impact) .

How long they last.

Cost to replace.

Range (especially if the battery is coming near its end)

Did I not also hear a stat saying that wind energy output can range from 75% of total grid capacity to 5% when theres no wind.

If it don't blow it don't go

El Tarangu

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432575#Comment_118432575

I understand that, and I don't want to come across as being completely against renewables (far from it), but if we are avoiding burning oil and gas for 40% of our electricity needs, currently, it means we are still burning oil and gas for 60% of our energy needs. The availability of renewables fluctuates wildly, day-to-day, and the price/availability of fossil fuels fluctuates wildly due to geopolitical pressures that Ireland has little-to-no influence over.

Which is all to say that the proposal to simply perform a 1:1 replacement of ICEs with EVs, and then to suggest that the the electricity required to power these vehicles will come from *waves hand* "renewables, probably" doesn't really seem like a viable solution to avoid the worst effects of climate change, minimising the impact of energy shocks, etc

kirving

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432981#Comment_118432981

But that 54% is assuming that all EV's run on fossil fuel generated power. But that isn't the case, and many people even in Ireland run their EV's partially on solar PV.

If you burn petrol in your living room for heat, say you'll get 99% efficiency and lots of toxic fumes. Doing the same in a boiler will give you say 90-95% efficiency.

But it's impossible to convert all of that heat energy to do work (ie: moving stuff) in a practicable manner. So the best powerplant in the world is still only 63% efficient. https://www.power-eng.com/gas/ge-powered-plant-awarded-world-record-efficiency-by-guinness/#gref

A car can never get to the level, as it runs in non-ideal conditions almost always, and there is no room for efficiency-improving technology. Hybrids help to some extent by taking pressure off the engine when it's at its most inefficient points (like pulling away at the lights).

Even if the car could get to 63% like the powerplant, we are still burning fuel to move the car. Electricity can be produced by renewable sources for much less environmental impact.

magicbastarder

that raises the question as to how much driving an irish person could reasonably hope to offset with PV?

e.g. if they got 5kW for ten hours a day - 50kWh - how far would that get an e-car? about 200km?

Furze99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432191#Comment_118432191

Oh the blessed ignorance of the uninformed. Take yourself down to say the Galway Wind Park - one of the biggest construction sites in the state a few years ago. Vast amounts of blanket bog stripped to allow for foundations for hundreds of huge industrial turbines.

unkel

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118433522#Comment_118433522

Good question. An EV does about 16kWh / 100 km. The average Irish car does about 18k km per year. That is a bit under 3MWh per year. The average Irish house uses about 3.5MW/h per year, so that's 6.5MWh per household including 1 EV

I live in a small semi-detached house. I have nearly 8kwp of solar PV on my roof. This produces a bit under 8MWh per year. Enough to power my house and my 2 EVs for the year. The second one is a local runabout doing very low mileage

monkeybutter

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118433647#Comment_118433647

what are you on about, its built in the middle of a coilte forest, with little impact on the forest itself

for the uninformed

monkeybutter

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432348#Comment_118432348

how much of this is offset by the carbon neutral power and besides the blades, how long will they last

The bike is 100 times lighter but is not capable of carrying 5 peoples and except in rare cases will trave 100 times less distance over its life than the car

monkeybutter

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118433726#Comment_118433726

how much did that setup cost you and do you know what % you lose on charging