ELM327 wrote: » There's no argument. LFP is inferior to LI-Ion in every way
unkel wrote: » That's not a fact. That's your opinion. One I do not agree with. LiFePo4 is cheaper, more reliable and stable, far safer and does not use cobalt. All these are facts. And all are major benefits in my book.
ELM327 wrote: » I couldnt care less about cobalt as I'm not an ecomentalist.
timsey tiger wrote: » You are in effect saying that you couldn't care less about what is going on in the DRC. Classy.
ELM327 wrote: » I don't care. Do you have a phone? A laptop? A battery powered cordless tool? Then you can't care either.
MJohnston wrote: » There's a difference between preferring that the situation change vs preferring it continue because you want a wee bit more money in your own pocket or fewer minutes spent at a charging station. You're at least honest, I suppose.
ELM327 wrote: » I would wager there is many exponents more of cobalt used for fossil fuel and for consumer electronics than the relatively microscopic (not literal) amount used in an EV battery. PS: I don't actively want the DRC thing to continue but I am agnostic towards it. I want the better product as a consumer. Do you shop in penneys/primark? Order items on Wish or similar? Drink coffee? Eat chocolate? Lots of child/slave/underpaid labor out there. It's interesting to choose EV batteries to get woke over, where there are long standing unethical items that you consume daily.
MJohnston wrote: » Yeah, I avoid Penneys because it's unethical (same for most fast fashion) although you have to balance that with supporting local jobs. I would never go near Wish and try to avoid Amazon where possible. Coffee only from direct trade roasters (3FE is an easy one) and I get chocolate from a direct trade sourcer (called Neary Nógs). I avoid non-sustainable palm oil. My company pays 200% carbon credits for any business travel we do. I sponsor trees ffs. All that boring 'ecomentalist' stuff, I love it! At the same time, I know full well there are plenty of items and consumables in my life that are non-ethical, and plenty of things where it's utterly impossible to avoid unethical products. And I know that our society has made ethical purchasing a much more expensive endeavour. Which imo means there's little excuse for those of us who can afford it to do better. If I had to charge my car a bit slower for a more ethically, sustainably manufactured battery, I absolutely would do that. It'll be a big factor when I switch cars next time in a few years just as it was last time — a serious consideration for me when getting my BMW i3 was that they use a lot of sustainable materials in construction. You can do what you like, of course, certain people always have, and they always will.
ELM327 wrote: » Taking the above at face value which I have no reason not to, you must accept that you are the 1 in the 1:100000 ratio. The vast majority of people don't care*, which is why these practices continue. * or at least don't care enough that it affects their purchasing habits.
MJohnston wrote: » Yeah but as I said, I think there's little excuse for those of us who can afford it to do better and purchase ethically where possible. In this particular EV battery case, it's even easier than that! You just have to accept a small time trade-off.
liamog wrote: » It's a difficult question, based on info in Tesla's published Impact assessments, they go to great lengths to ethically source the Cobalt used in their batteries. There is an argument that it's ethically questionable to deny employment from Responsible Mineral extractors, especially in high risk areas. Reduction in Cobalt in Lithium Ion batteries is a cost measure, not an ethical one.
MJohnston wrote: » But EV adoption on the cusp of exploding, now is also the time to ensure the technology as a whole is as ethical and sustainable as possible.
liamog wrote: » That's why boiling it down to cobalt bad/good doesn't work. It's akin to saying people should stop using any cotton products because some cotton is sourced from Xinjiang and may be harvested using forced Uighur labour.
MJohnston wrote: » I think at this point it's undeniably a lot more ethical to drive an EV than ICE.
garo wrote: » These days people retire at 65 or 66 or 67. So you still have 20 years of driving left. That 7 series won't see you out.
Kramer wrote: » 20 years................that's probably just 3 or 4 battery replacements in an 85kWh Model S :pac:. I bet 30+ year old 7 series will hold up better than 30+ year old Teslas (there won't be any ).
Water John wrote: » Excellent programme last night 'Ten Things To Know About Hydrogen' RTE 1. One use was using the hydrogen fuel cell to produce electricity for the EV.
[Deleted User] wrote: » True, no one is going to want to replace the batteries in a 15 year car that is worth less than the cost of battery replacement. Unless there are incentives to keep older vehicles serviceable (on environmental grounds) as opposed to disincentives as there are now, like more expensive insurance and cheap finance on newer models.
cruisey1987 wrote: » That's basically how a hydrogen car works, the fuel cell produces a steady flow of electricity, some of which is used to charge a small battery which is used for bursts of acceleration. I think it's something to do with the fuel cell having a fairly limited power output and needing some help to get the car up to speed
ELM327 wrote: » Yup, it magically takes 3kWh of energy and gives you 1kWh! It's a fossil fueled car (albeit with no local emissions) and it is as efficient as a middle of the road fossil car. I think I saw the mirai got mid 50's mpge. Compared to the likes of even an Ioniq non plugin HEV that's pretty poor.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/d96cd5eb793ec44f833dd8d0bb2a52ac.svg)
