gopher.createaforum.com/1/forums/renewablerevolution/p/14/6

DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Renewable Revolution
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Renewables
*****************************************************
#Post#: 2294--------------------------------------------------
Re: Electric Vehicles
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: December 1, 2014, 12:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
An Electric Tuk Tuk!
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp 
HTML http://www.go100percent.org/cms/uploads/pics/bangladesh_borak_02.jpg
Solar powered car hits Dhaka streets
Photo credit: Solar for Bangladesh
100% Renewable Rural Communities in Bangladesh
HTML http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-098.gif
100% Renewable Energy Goal Achieved:
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif
100% Renewable First-Time Electricity For Rural Villagers
Location: Bangladesh
Summary:
As is the case for most rural communities in developing
countries, grid access is extremely limited in rural Bangladesh,
and renewable energy has been a cost effective, pragmatic
solution for providing electricity to these areas. In 2002,
only 30% of the 162 million people of Bangladesh had access to
electricity, greatly impairing quality of life and economic
development. In response, the International Development Agency
(IDA) financed the Rural Electrification and Renewable Energy
Development project, which in just seven years, raised the
percentage of people with electricity to 40%--all with
decentralized renewable energy. The project brought renewable
power to more than 600,000 people who had never before had
electricity.
HTML http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/yayayoy/yayayoy1106/yayayoy110600019/9735563-smiling-sun-showing-thumb-up.jpg 
The technology mix included 320,000 new solar homes (far
surpassing the original target of 50,000) and a 250 kw biomass
plant that uses rice husk as its feedstock and produces
electricity for 300 homes and shops. The project was implemented
by the Rural Electrification Board through its rural electric
cooperatives, in partnership with NGOs and private sector
companies.
HTML http://www.go100percent.org/cms/uploads/pics/bangladesh_pv_demo_02.jpg
A woman engineer demonstrating a Solar Home System. Photo
credit: Grameen Shakti
HTML http://www.smile-day.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Smiley-Thumbs-Up2.jpg 
The benefits were many for those with this new electricity.
Children's study time is reported to have increased by
approximately 6%, children's sick days from school dropped 20%,
home businesses rose 8%, household chore times decreased by 6%,
and distribution network losses went down about 6%.
The total cost of the program was US$290 million. Financing was
provided by IDA, the Global Environment Fund (GEF), the
Government of Bangladesh, and local communities. The financing
structure consisted of micro-credit loans and up to 80%
refinancing for participating organizations through the central
Infrastructure Development Company.
HTML http://www.go100percent.org/cms/uploads/pics/bangladesh_delta_01.jpg
The end of the Ganges river: the Indian delta, Bangladesh (NASA)
The project's success attracted other financial support partners
to come on board, including the Asian Development Bank, KfW and
GTZ (German development bank and German international
cooperation enterprise). The Inter-American Development Bank,
the Japan Bank for International Cooperation and the Global
Partnership on Output-Based Aid have also shown interest in
participating.
Bangladesh has set a target of providing 1 million rural
consumers with solar home systems by 2012, and the country is
aiming for 100% rural electricity access by 2020. To help
accomplish these ambitious goals, IDA is committed to
strengthening the managerial capacity of the Rural
Electrification Board. And in August 2009, IDA approved
additional financing of about US$ 130 million to expand
Bangladesh's rural renewable electricity project.
Links:
World Bank
Grameen Shakti
The Un Refugee Agency
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YTNWRgHYqw&feature=player_embedded
HTML http://www.go100percent.org/cms/index.php?id=80&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=126&cHash=a3fd2bdc6e88e6cf10419f99fc23a006
#Post#: 2325--------------------------------------------------
Can EVs Ever Be Completely Powered by PVs?
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: December 4, 2014, 6:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Can EVs Ever Be Completely Powered by PVs?
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif
The Engineer posted on November 07, 2014 | 3 Comments
solar, PV, nanotech, cars, batteries, EVA
A car powered by its own body panels could soon be driving on
our roads after a breakthrough in nanotechnology research by a
QUT team.
HTML http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/yayayoy/yayayoy1106/yayayoy110600019/9735563-smiling-sun-showing-thumb-up.jpg 
Researchers have developed lightweight "supercapacitors" that
can be combined with regular batteries to dramatically boost the
power of an electric car.
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/za4.gif
The discovery was made by Postdoctoral Research Fellow Dr
Jinzhang Liu, Professor Nunzio Motta and PhD researcher Marco
Notarianni, from QUT's Science and Engineering Faculty -
Institute for Future Environments, and PhD researcher Francesca
Mirri and Professor Matteo Pasquali, from Rice University in
Houston, in the United States.
The supercapacitors - a "sandwich" of electrolyte between two
all-carbon electrodes - were made into a thin and extremely
strong film with a high power density.
The film could be embedded in a car's body panels, roof, doors,
bonnet and floor - storing enough energy to turbocharge an
electric car's battery in just a few minutes.
The findings, published in the Journal of Power Sources and the
Nanotechnology journal, mean a car partly powered by its own
body panels could be a reality within five years, Mr Notarianni
said.
"Vehicles need an extra energy spurt for acceleration, and this
is where supercapacitors come in. They hold a limited amount of
charge, but they are able to deliver it very quickly, making
them the perfect complement to mass-storage batteries," he said.
"Supercapacitors offer a high power output in a short time,
meaning a faster acceleration rate of the car and a charging
time of just a few minutes, compared to several hours for a
standard electric car battery."
Dr Liu said currently the "energy density" of a supercapacitor
is lower than a standard lithium ion (Li-Ion) battery, but its
"high power density", or ability to release power in a short
time, is "far beyond" a conventional battery.
"Supercapacitors are presently combined with standard Li-Ion
batteries to power electric cars, with a substantial weight
reduction and increase in performance," he said.
"In the future, it is hoped the supercapacitor will be developed
to store more energy than a Li-Ion battery while retaining the
ability to release its energy up to 10 times faster - meaning
the car could be entirely powered by the supercapacitors in its
body panels.
"After one full charge this car should be able to run up to
500km - similar to a petrol-powered car and more than double the
current limit of an electric car."
Dr Liu said the technology would also potentially be used for
rapid charges of other battery-powered devices.
"For example, by putting the film on the back of a smart phone
to charge it extremely quickly," he said.
The discovery may be a game-changer for the automotive industry,
with significant impacts on financial, as well as environmental,
factors.
"We are using cheap carbon materials to make supercapacitors and
the price of industry scale production will be low," Professor
Motta said.
"The price of Li-Ion batteries cannot decrease a lot because the
price of Lithium remains high. This technique does not rely on
metals and other toxic materials either, so it is
environmentally friendly if it needs to be disposed of."
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/treeswing.gif
Source: QUT
HTML http://www.engineering.com/DesignerEdge/DesignerEdgeArticles/ArticleID/8895/Can-EVs-Ever-Be-Completly-Powered-by-PVs.aspx
Renewable energy=
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-301014181553.gif 
HTML http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-scared002.gif=Fossil Fuelers
[center]
HTML http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-forum/popcorn.gif[/center]
#Post#: 2394--------------------------------------------------
PEV or a PHEV Compared With a non-electric powered vehicle:
PART 1 of 5 parts
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: December 16, 2014, 10:41 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
PEV or a PHEV Compared With a non-electric powered vehicle:
PART 1 of 5 parts
For everyone in general and JoeP in particular, the following
presentation is an overview with some pertinent information. It
does get into some details but PART 1 excludes a detailed cost
benefit analysis and cost comparison (including the
environmental costs). I'll get to that later.
1. This Consumer Reports video is one year old but has pertinent
info about The Prius, Volt and Leaf at 13:00 - 16:00. The Tesla
Model S is discussed at 23:14 - 27:44.
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBb3YUmInIY&feature=player_embedded
2. Are American cars getting better?
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191404.bmp Consumer Reports says YES! First 5 minutes covers why GM is
improving.
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m87HaGNXwdY&feature=player_embedded
3. Consumer Reports on hybrid cars August 2013. Volt discussion
at 9:30-11:30. Discussion of how batteries are NOT having
negative environmental impact at 14:24-16:00.
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nm9_GAsihpA&feature=player_embedded
4. Great video on the nuts and bolts cost comparison of hybrids
and non-hybrid internal combustion engine powered vehicles.
Watch all of it. This guy did his homework. He stumbles his
words sometimes but his data is solid. Brake maintenance
basically does not happen for 150,000 miles due to regenerative
braking. Excellent!
Battery pack life seems to be non-issue on a PHEV. More on that
later.
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh_V1zwmCOA&feature=player_embedded
5. Chevy Volt Engineering is advanced, prudent and saves on BOTH
weight and cost.
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMokamy19kg&feature=player_embedded
6. Chevy Volt 2013 PLUG IN Hybrid review (pretty thorough). It
has four driving modes. I like the flexibility the plug in
feature gives to recharge the battery with solar power rather
than burning gasoline to do it. That means a smaller carbon
footprint. You CAN always drive 35 to 40 miles pure EV every day
as long as you can plug in charge it in your garage at night.
Charging at work will extend that. Also, you NEVER have range
anxiety.
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFGyM40F774&feature=player_embedded
7. Consumer Reports 2014 Volt review.
One Volt owner was not happy with the review. He thinks Consumer
Reports low balled some numbers.
--- Quote ---
> David Wilson
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/2mo5pow.gif
> I find Consumer Reports' review of the Chevy Volt lacking
credibility. My worst electric range was 37 miles on a charge
and best has been 47. For this guy to say he gets 20 mpg on a
charge seems like he is purposely attacking the Volt with false
accusations. Look at the video at 3:36 and you will see what
appears to be a full charge and range of 36 EV miles. If CR was
really getting less, the computer would average it, and show
less. I get 400 range, not 300 like he said. Pathetic review.
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLy3e3uIcds&feature=player_embedded
[i]End of[/I] PEV or a PHEV Compared With a non-electric powered
vehicle: PART 1 of 5 parts
PEV or a PHEV Compared With a non-electric powered vehicle:
PART 2 of 5 parts
HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/renewables/electric-vehicles/msg2406/#msg2406
#Post#: 2399--------------------------------------------------
Re: Electric Vehicles
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: December 17, 2014, 8:53 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The ICE powered car is the car mechanic's license to lie, cheat
and steal, PERIOD! :P
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rb4YanZYH8E&feature=player_embedded
Of course they are "hard at work" thinking up scams for the PEV
and the PHEV too. >:(
But it's a bit harder for the mechanic to charge more for
maintenance when you DON'T have an ICE garage queen that
requires many visits to said mechanic ( i.e. less moving parts
means less maintenance). ;)
#Post#: 2400--------------------------------------------------
Re: Electric Vehicles
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: December 17, 2014, 8:56 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I just learned that the people that designed the battery pack
for the Volt worked in Hughes satellite battery systems! These
scientist engineers plan for endurance in harsh environments. GM
brought in a good team for that car. :emthup:
HTML http://images.thecarconnection.com/med/2012-chevrolet-volt_100375658_m.jpg
Structural enhancements to fit to Chevy Volt electric car to
avoid post-crash battery-pack fires (2012) .
HTML http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1071491_nhtsa-chevy-volt-battery-pack-fix-ok-ends-investigation
HTML http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1071491_nhtsa-chevy-volt-battery-pack-fix-ok-ends-investigation
HTML http://www.thedetroitbureau.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Chevy-Volt-Battery-Warranty.jpg
HTML http://discovermagazine.com/~/media/import/images/f/a/4/cardiagram.jpg
#Post#: 2406--------------------------------------------------
PEV or a PHEV Compared With a non-electric powered vehicle:
PART 2 of 5 parts
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: December 18, 2014, 6:55 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
PEV or a PHEV Compared With a non-electric powered vehicle:
PART 2 of 5 parts
Alternate humility
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp expressing title:

HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gifCFS
(common forking sense)
transportation in a world of logic challenged Homo SAPS.
Anybody in the lower forty eight considering purchasing an EV or
a PHEV needs, first of all, to know where their electric "gas"
stations are.
HTML http://www.blogcdn.com/green.autoblog.com/media/2012/07/myford-ev-stations.jpg
The above image is from a MyFordMobile app. It has nothing to do
with Ford cars. It appears that eight states have the lion's
share of "not at home in the garage" charge spots.
[b]The battery pack is a BIG deal.[/b] So let's discuss their
use or abuse. If you a have a pure electric and drive between 9k
and 12k (average 10.5k) a year and you plan to own the vehicle
for 10 years, you will need a new battery pack in, 9.5 years.
To increase consumer confidence, manufacturers have warranted
the batteries for time periods deemed pretty long even by
internal combustion car standards.
Typically it�s eight years, and mileage is usually at least
100,000 miles.
HTML http://www.hybridcars.com/how-long-will-an-evs-battery-last/
HTML http://www.hybridcars.com/how-long-will-an-evs-battery-last/
If you have a a PHEV and drive between 9k and 12k (average
10.5k) a year and you plan to own the vehicle for 10 years, you
will need a new battery pack in, you will need a new battery
pack, uh, NEVER. This fellow says they can go 300,000 miles in
New York City Taxis.
[embed=640,380]
HTML http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh_V1zwmCOA#[/embed]
The article below talks about a Volt owner that has gone past
the 120,000 mile mark without changing the battery pack.
HOWEVER, 46,000-plus miles were done on electricity. The guy
commutes 220 miles round trip A DAY! :o
--- Quote ---
> [quote]
> "As Belmer tells InsideEVs, the Volt was purchased on March
28, 2012. Since then, it�s seen a daily commute of 220 miles
there and back, with a single longest trip of 430 miles in a
day.
> At 120,000-plus miles, Belmer seems to love his Volt now more
than ever.
>
> What�s not to love when oil changes come every 38,000 miles
and tire rotations every 10,000 miles. That�s basically all the
maintenance that�s been required on Belmer�s Volt."
--- End Quote ---
[/quote]
Chevy Volt Owner Zips Past 120,000 Miles
12 months ago by Eric Loveday
HTML http://insideevs.com/chevy-volt-owner-zips-past-120000-miles/
HTML http://insideevs.com/chevy-volt-owner-zips-past-120000-miles/
So, the person that buys a used PHEV must be prepared to deal
with the battery pack replacement. I expect the depreciation
math of PEVs and PHEVs will be even more mileage based than with
gasoline only cars. Unlike the old used salesman pitch about the
car that was just used on Sundays by grandma making it more
valuable (if you like a sitting rust bucket :P), a seldom used
PHEV or EV really IS more valuable, just from the battery pack
standpoint. We shall see.
And provided your regenerative brake technology does not fail in
100,000 miles, you won't ever have to change the brakes, either.
HTML http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/2thumbs.gif
HTML http://www.ev-charging-infrastructure-2012.com/media/images/uploaded/evbuk13.151.featured.jpg
[img width=640
height=380]
HTML http://www.greenbiz.com/sites/default/files/styles/gbz_article_primary_breakpoints_kalapicture_screen-md_1x/public/images/articles/featured/800px-evchargestationsign.jpg?itok=VowfYuvI[/img]
A sign to get familiar with.
[img width=640
height=680]
HTML http://www.tirebusiness.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/storyimage/TB/20140714/NEWS/140719963/AR/0/verdek,-ev,-electric-vehicle,-charging-station-.jpg&maxW=618&cci_ts=20140714125038[/img]
[img width=640
height=580]
HTML http://www.aprs.org/Energy/Charging/Pay-monthly-carX.JPG[/img]http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/SUS/PublishingImages/leaf_charging_station.jpg
Is your new home away from home free or not?
HTML http://www.transportation.anl.gov/publications/transforum/v11/v11n1/images/ev_charging.jpg
Is the juice Renewable Energy powered like the above?
HTML http://cleantechnica.com/files/2014/03/ChargePoint_Infographic_EV_Growth.jpg
The above is important. Someday you will sell the car. The main
market for them is where the more people are buying them.
HTML http://images.blog.autoshopper.com/770_2011-Chevrolet-Volt-charging-image.jpghttp://www.wired.com/images_blogs/autopia/2011/03/chevrolet-volt-charging.jpg
Google Maps now tell you where the Charging Stations are.
The charging stations are now standardized (as of 2012). The
speed with which your batteries are charged varies with the
level of the charger. Not said for those who want the fastest
charging rate (the most expensive chargers) is that routine slow
charging extends battery pack life. Routine fast charging will
shorten it. Be real. Most of us park our cars and leave them
parked for several hours at a time either at work or at home.
Assume you will, as a matter of prudence, economy, cost savings
and common sense, use slow charging routinely.
HTML http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/2thumbs.gif

HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191456.bmp
The standard for chargers comes from the SAE (Society of
Automotive Engineers):
SAE International Releases New Fast-Charging Combo Coupler
Standard (SAE J1772) for Plug-In Electric and Electric Vehicles
--- Quote ---
> WARRENDALE, Pa., Oct. 15, 2012
> �This new technical standard is a real game-changer,� Andrew
Smart, Director of Industry Relations and Business Development
for SAE International, said. �It reflects the advancements in
technology within PHEV and EV engineering and we are pleased to
represent the collaborative efforts within industry that made it
possible.�
>
> The standard represents the future of charging technology and
smart grid interaction, while addressing the needs of today.
Such needs include reduced times at public charging stations,
enabling consumers to travel greater distances in their PHEV�s
and EV�s.
>
> �This new standard reflects the many hours that top industry
experts from around the world worked to achieve the best
charging solution � a solution that helps vehicle
electrification technology move forward.� Gery Kissel,
Engineering Specialist, Global Battery Systems, GM, and SAE
J1772� Task Force Chairman, said. �We now can offer users of
this technology various charging options in one combined
design.�
>
> The original version of J1772� defined AC Level 1 and AC Level
2 charge levels and specified a conductive charge coupler and
electrical interfaces for AC Level 1 and AC Level 2 charging.
The new revision incorporates DC charging where DC Level 1 and
DC Level 2 charge levels, charge coupler and electrical
interfaces are defined. The standard was developed in
cooperation with the European automotive experts who also
adopted and endorsed a combo strategy in their approach.
--- End Quote ---
HTML http://www.sae.org/servlets/pressRoom?OBJECT_TYPE=PressReleases&PAGE=showRelease&RELEASE_ID=1897
HTML http://www.sae.org/servlets/pressRoom?OBJECT_TYPE=PressReleases&PAGE=showRelease&RELEASE_ID=1897
These charging systems are not just about charging the car. They
are designed to incorporate using your car's battery pack as an
emergency power plant for your house! :o
HTML http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/2thumbs.gif
I realize some wise guy might try to charge at some free place
during the day and juice his house with it at night but that
would be dumb. Why? Because he would increase the number of
charge and discharge cycles of his battery pack and thereby
shorten the life of the rather costly battery pack even with
short driving distances.
--- Quote ---
> GM official said,
>
> �The combined charging approach will reduce development and
infrastructure complexity, improve charging reliability, reduce
the total cost-of-ownership for end customers and provide low
maintenance costs.�
>
> The new standard will also speed the transition to a two-way,
interactive power grid that incorporates vehicle batteries as a
significant energy source. For example, car owners could use
their vehicle battery for auxiliary power at home or to run
other equipment, or they could sell excess power back to the
grid.
>
> In an SAE article in 2012 by Patrick Ponticel, Gross
explained:
>
> �We [GM] learned a lot of lessons on the EV1, and we have
vowed to make sure some of the hard lessons learned don�t happen
again. One lesson is that we can�t go it alone on
infrastructure, and on the standard for infrastructure� So we
vowed on the [Chevrolet] Volt program to not proceed until the
industry had condensed around charging infrastructure.�
> [size=14pt]
> GM apparently took no chances when developing the Volt.
HTML http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/2thumbs.gif
> According to Ponticel, GM�s Engineering Specialist for Global
Codes and Standards Development, Gery Kissel, also chairs the
SAE International J1772 Task Force[/size]
--- End Quote ---
Full 2012 article of technology that is now, as of 2014, in
place.
HTML http://cleantechnica.com/2012/05/08/gm-ford-and-chrysler-adopt-new-sae-standard-for-ev-charging-ports/
HTML http://cleantechnica.com/2012/05/08/gm-ford-and-chrysler-adopt-new-sae-standard-for-ev-charging-ports/
End of PEV or a PHEV Compared With a non-electric powered
vehicle: PART 2 of 5 parts
Continued in
PEV or a PHEV Compared With a non-electric powered vehicle:
PART 3 of 5 parts
HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/renewables/electric-vehicles/msg2430/#msg2430
#Post#: 2424--------------------------------------------------
Re: Electric Vehicles
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: December 20, 2014, 6:24 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-201214191425.png
#Post#: 2430--------------------------------------------------
Re: Electric Vehicles
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: December 21, 2014, 3:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
PEV or a PHEV Compared With a non-electric powered vehicle:
PART 3 of 5 parts
Tesla claims
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191404.bmp that you CAN use fast charging routinely WITHOUT shortening
your
battery pack life.
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300714025456.bmp 
Will slow charge extend battery life?
--- Quote ---
> [quote]justineet | 20 Juin 2013
>
> This is an interesting -- good -- question....in other words,
does fast charging -- especially supercharging -- affect the
life span of the battery pack negatively in any significant
way??? Reports indicate, NO! That is primarily due to Tesla's
innovation to run the battery cells through cool and hot cycles
during the charging and operation stages so the battery cells
are always at optimum temp range required to extend the life
span. Tesla reportedly has proven this in the labs.
> But one thing for sure will shorten the life span of your
battery pack is leaving your battery in complete or near
complete(deep) discharge state for long periods of time. So you
should always try to never leave your car in deep discharge
state for an extended period of time. Frequent deep discharging
is not also recommended. Tesla probably has incorporated a
safety circuit to avoid deep discharge state. Still frequent
deep discharging is not recommended. Even with deep discharge
safety circuit on board, the battery pack might still go below
the "safe" discharge level since batteries continue to self
discharge on their own at some rate.
>
HTML http://www.teslamotors.com/fr_CA/forum/forums/will-slow-charge-extend-battery-life
HTML http://www.teslamotors.com/fr_CA/forum/forums/will-slow-charge-extend-battery-life
--- End Quote ---
[/quote]
My take is that unnecessary fast charging is a bad idea. A slow
charge would slightly improve charge efficiency (ratio of Wh
stored to Wh from the wall) since the HEAT dissipated by the
power feeders is proportional to the SQUARE of current.
So, very roughly speaking, charging at 30A will result in
approximately half the heat when compared to 40A. And 20A will
result in a quarter of the heat when compared to 40A.
At 40A, the batteries (and the charging equipment) get hotter
and the actual energy transfer is less efficient (i.e. less
environmentally friendly) so don't do it unless you have to.
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif
ICE powered cars. PEVs and PHEVs: The Truth about their Impact
(Damage) to the Biosphere:
As far as the environmental impact of vehicle carbon footprint,
the giant, huge, polluting, biosphere poisoning ELEPHANT in the
room is the internal combustion engine AND the LEAD ACID battery
toxicity that THOSE ICE powered cars cause to the environment. I
wrote about the lead acid pollution her over a year ago. It's
somewhere in the DD Dustbin if you want to learn another way
first world ****S trash the third world.
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183312.bmp
Lead acid batteries are a HORROR to the environment, [b]whereas
the PEV and PHEV battery pack infrastructure is almost fully
recyclable [/b](as well as valuable and in demand in a secondary
market).
In other words, the HUGE, but long lasting and fully recyclable
battery pack has LESS environmental impact than the lead acid
battery, relatively tiny battery on an ICE powered car!
Yes Monsta and Charles Hall (the creative number cruncher ;)
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp for EROEI on behalf OF BIG OIL), a Lot of Lithium is being
mined
and it takes a lot more energy to do that than the industrial
process that brings us lead acid batteries.
So? Once that battery pack is built, the emissions and
environmental impact STOP. The ICE powered car with the lead
acid battery has FUTURE negative impact(s) in lead acid battery
pollution and fuel use pollution translating to tremendous
damage to the environment.
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183337.bmp 
Because of the fuel and the lead acid battery, the ICE powered
car has a much higher, and a toxic one at that, carbon
footprint.
The PHEV does have an environmental impact with its ICE but it's
is tiny in comparison because MUCH less energy is used to mine
for the materials and build it. And the PHEV, if used properly,
has negligible engine pollution and maintenance (an ICE small
engine rarely used NEVER needs an overhaul and rarely needs an
oil change, period).
What about the car body along with the engine metal? ???
At present, about 75 to 80 percent of the steel that goes into a
car of any type is recycled. So the issue is, HOW MUCH STEEL BY
WEIGHT is used. A PEV or a PHEV requires LESS of everything in
weight and quantity. That's the bonus of engineering a car to
have less weight in order to maximize pure EV range. Again, the
PEV or PHEV is the better choice, environmentally speaking.
Keeping the ICE in a PHEV from polluting is within the control
of the PHEV owner.
HTML http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/yayayoy/yayayoy1106/yayayoy110600019/9735563-smiling-sun-showing-thumb-up.jpg 
That choice is not open to the owner of a car that just runs on
gasoline or diesel. The PEV and the PHEV are both easier on the
environment, in regard to initial manufacturing AND recycling,
than the ICE powered car. Remember the energy required to make a
large ICE is multiples of that required to make the relatively
small ICE for a PHEV.
From a National Geographic article:
--- Quote ---
> Production, recycling, and disposal costs to the environment
are difficult to quantify and largely beyond the control of most
consumers. They are also relatively minor.
>
> Most of an automobiles� environmental impact, perhaps 80 to 90
percent, will be due to fuel consumption and emissions of air
pollution and greenhouse gases that climate scientists say are
driving global warming. Fortunately, the level of that impact is
very much under the control of the driver.
>
> Fuel Costs
>
> Petroleum products raise environmental red flags even before
they are burned. Extracting them from the earth is an
energy-intensive process that can damage local ecosystems.
Shipping fuels can also consume a lot of energy, and creates an
occasional environmental disaster such as an oil spill. As world
demand rises, and unconventional fuel sources, such as oil
sands, become more economically viable, the ecological impacts
of petroleum extraction might also increase dramatically. That�s
one more reason why fuel efficiency is so important.
>
> Air Quality
>
> Vehicles are America�s biggest air quality compromisers,
producing about one-third of all U.S. air pollution. The smog,
carbon monoxide, and other toxins emitted by vehicles are
especially troubling because they leave tailpipes at street
level, where humans breathe the polluted air directly into their
lungs. That can make auto emissions an even more immediate
health concern than toxins emitted high in the sky by industrial
smokestacks.
>
HTML http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/green-guide/buying-guides/car/environmental-impact/
HTML http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/green-guide/buying-guides/car/environmental-impact/
--- End Quote ---
The bottom line is that the ICE powered car is far more
environmentally UNFRIENDLY than the PEV or PHEV. However, I
agree that a bicycle (with solar charged electric boost) is
better if you can handle that. Monsta might suggest a bare
bicycle is the only truly environmentally friendly option,
howevah.
HTML http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_6869.gif
He is
such a purist!
HTML http://www.smileysnetwork.com/sport/velo32.gif
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53rsISWpsMU&feature=player_embedded
Happy peddling! The above green transportation is recommended if
you have bike paths to keep cars from running you down and NOT
recommended if your daily destination work place is more than 10
miles away without shower facilities.
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp 
ANECDOTE ALERT:
HTML http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_6961.gif
Back in
1979-81 in Syracuse, New York, I had a "hybrid" powered bike. I
bought a tiny two cycle ICE that fitted with a roller on to the
front wheel when I applied it with a lever. I would bike 8 miles
to the Control Tower (during the summer only) using renewable
energy (me) as the main power source. I got lazy after a while
and just applied the roller most of the time. That didn't work
too well when it rained; wet rubber on wet rubber is the
embodiment of slippin' and slidin'. At any rate, I saved a ton
of gasoline.
Below please find a reasonable fascimile of what I called my
"Arab Buster".
[embed=640,380]
HTML http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7vaqTeP6X4#[/embed]
Here's another excellent article from the MIT Technology Review
that directly answers Surly's carbon footprint question:
July 12, 2013
Are Electric Vehicles Better for the Environment than
Gas-Powered Ones?
Comparing electric and gas-powered versions of the same car show
the environmental benefits of electric vehicles.
This week I met an owner of an Tesla Model S electric sedan who
raised the question of whether electric vehicles are really
better for the environment when you include the resources that
go into making the battery and the impact of disposing of it. He
was feeling uneasy about his environmental bona fides.
Renault recently made public a report that provides a fair
assessment by comparing an electric version of its Fluence sedan
with gas and diesel-powered versions of the same car. And it
makes clear that electric cars are, indeed, better for the
environment. The report is a life-cycle assessment, a �cradle to
grave� analysis, including not only the emissions involved in
using the car, but also the emissions from making it, the
resources consumed in manufacturing, and a range of
environmental impacts. It looked at not only greenhouse-gas
emissions, but impacts on acid rain, ozone pollution, algae
blooms, consumption of water and materials such as steel and
copper, and total energy
demand.
HTML http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_6869.gif

HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/34y5mvr.gif

The study found that while the environmental impact of making
electric vehicles is greater* than for making gas and diesel
vehicles, this is more than made up for by the greater impact of
gas and diesel vehicles while they�re being used. This is true
in terms of total energy consumption, use of resources,
greenhouse gases, and ozone pollution. *The electric vehicles
were assumed
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-311013201314.png to be charged from a grid that includes significant amounts of
fossil fuels.
Other studies show that electric vehicles beat gas-powered ones
in terms of greenhouse gas emissions [b]even if they�re charged
in regions that depend heavily on coal.
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/47b20s0.gif
Here�s one such
study. (see link below) In some areas, hybrids are a better
choice than electric cars.
Electric vehicles come out behind in two areas. ::) They
contribute slightly more to acid rain. And they�re slightly
worse in terms of causing algae blooms than gasoline cars (but
better than diesel).
HTML http://www.technologyreview.com/view/517146/are-electric-vehicles-better-for-the-environment-than-gas-powered-ones/
HTML http://www.technologyreview.com/view/517146/are-electric-vehicles-better-for-the-environment-than-gas-powered-ones/ 
So, IF you are getting your electricity to power your battery
pack from RENEWABLE ENERGY, you can tell the fossil fuelers that
disingenuously claim you are just shifting the pollution for
your "fuel" to a fossil fuel or nuclear power plant that, uh,
well, see the detector reading below every time they make this
claim.
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-111214174727.png
Meanwhile, in one of those 1% la la land Profit over Planet
Havens (Dubai), they are buying bug out vehicles that are,
well... Never mind.
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6RdmEinhhI&feature=player_embedded
--- Quote ---
> The world's most expensive motorhome has gone on sale in Dubai
- covered in gold and worth a cool �2 million.
> The space-age eleMMent Palazzo comes complete with a colossal
master bedroom, 40-inch TV, on-board bar, fireplace and even its
own rooftop terrace.
> But the most impressive piece of luxury is the 'Sky Lounge' -
at the press of a button the 40ft home transforms into a
personal retreat with pop up ****tail bar, underfloor heating
and extravagant marble lighting.
--- End Quote ---

HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/gaah.gif

End of PEV or a PHEV Compared With a non-electric powered
vehicle: PART 3 of 5 parts
[url=
HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/renewables/electric-vehicles/msg2472/#msg2472]PEV or a PHEV Compared With a non-electric powered vehicle: PART
4
of 5 parts
#Post#: 2472--------------------------------------------------
Re: Electric Vehicles
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: December 29, 2014, 8:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
PEV or a PHEV Compared With a non-electric powered vehicle:
PART 4 of 5 parts
A couple of VERY relevant thoughts before diving into the
numbers:
VERY RELEVANT THOUGHT NUMBER ONE: 24/7 Bernays consent
manufactured, Convenient Cognitive Dissonance AFFLICTS our
consumer society victims when they CONSTANTLY FORGET to ask how
long it will take, for example, a Buick Encore Premium to "pay
for itself", in order to justify the hefty premium it demands
over the Toyota Corolla.
HTML http://2015bestsuvreviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/2015-Buick-Encore-Premium.jpghttp://www.amoralmotor.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Toyota-Corolla-2014-420x215.jpg
Two ICE powered cars. One costs thousands more than the other
because, well, just BECAUSE!
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif
Well, one good reason is that there's no objective sense in
which it possibly could, so the question's just not worth
asking, is it?
HTML http://media.treehugger.com/assets/images/2012/06/6967925966_ab0361191c_h.jpeg.662x0_q100_crop-scale.jpg
Volt and Leaf getting REALLY cheap FUEL!
Ironically, it's because a PHEV like a Volt and also an EV like
the LEAF in fact CAN reasonably be claimed to pay much of its
own way that the argument turns quickly to whether it pays ALL
its own way.
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-291014182422.png 
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png 
That's a double standard, based on the reality that we've been
trained to pay for brands and luxury features and levels of
performance that are meaningless in everyday driving, and don't
have any equivalent experience in valuing the unique appeal of
EV/PHEV driving, something that the overwhelming majority of
drivers have so far never bothered to experience for themselves.
VERY RELEVANT THOUGHT NUMBER TWO: The negative impact cost to
the biosphere of an ICE only car continues after the purchase
of the vehicle to the point (and well beyond) of a GREATER
amount of pollution than that generated to manufacture it! You
are COMMITTING to damage the biosphere MORE by buying an ICE
only car. The only way to minimze or eliminate ICE only car
pollution is to not drive it.
So, if you are a responsible, caring human, you either avoid
purchasing a car altogether (like Monsta) and stick to public
transportation (or human powered devices like bicycles) OR you
buy a PEV or a PHEV, PERIOD.
Some numbers on the Volt:
The Volt appears to cost a lot more than a Prius. The fact is
that the Prius is more expensive when 5 years of driving 15k a
year in both cars is figured.
From a one year old article:
"... one factor is the fuel savings you get from an electric
car, but what really has GM-Volt.com all excited is that the
numbers come out a lot better for the Chevy Volt than for
Toyota�s Prius.
As Jeff Cobb of GM-Volt (the site is not affiliated with GM,
btw) enthused last week:
As we enter the holiday season, you who chose a Volt may know it
is like a gift that keeps on giving, whereas a Toyota Prius is
an expense that ultimately costs more to own even though it
sells for much less.
The numbers vary somewhat according to zip code so you can check
them out for yourself at Edmunds, keeping in mind that there may
be other algorithms out there.
The takeaway really is that when you go to buy a new car, you
need to look at your costs over time rather than just the retail
price."
HTML http://cleantechnica.com/2013/12/21/true-cost-owning-chevy-volt-might-surprise/
HTML http://cleantechnica.com/files/2014/11/6a00d8341c4fbe53ef01b7c70ba5ba970b-800wi.jpg
GM in China is making this tiny electric city car (Chevy EN-V
2.0). I like it. Monsta probably likes it. But I don't think
Fazio (JoeP's boss) would go for it.
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/4fvfcja.gif
HTML http://cleantechnica.com/2014/11/28/chevy-en-v-2-0-used-ev-sharing-program/
So, let us concentrate on the Volt and an EV that costs about
the same as the Volt. I am doing this in view of JoeP's purchase
price budget. I'll throw in a typical ICE only powered car in
the same initial cost price range for comparison of "competing"
fossil fueler polluting piggery (2015 Chevrolet Impala LT MSRP
$36,000).
HTML http://1-photos.ebizautos.com/new-2015-chevrolet-impala-lt-6468-12316302-1-640.jpg
2015 Chevrolet Impala LT, V6 Cylinder Engine, Transmission: 6
Spd Automatic, Drivetrain: Front Wheel Drive, City MPG: 19, Hwy
MPG: 29, Tons/yr of CO2 Emissions @ 15K mi/year: 8.2, Battery,
70AH, heavy-duty 512 cold-cranking amps.
The goodies that ALL have environmental costs:
KEY FEATURES INCLUDE
Rear Air, Satellite Radio, iPod/MP3 Input, Onboard
Communications System, Dual Zone A/C MP3 Player, Keyless Entry,
Remote Trunk Release, Child Safety Locks, Steering Wheel
Controls.
More:
PREMIUM AUDIO AND SPORT WHEELS PACKAGE includes (UQS) Bose
Centerpoint Surround Sound premium 11-speaker system, (C9B)
ambient door lighting, (C9J) ambient instrument panel lighting,
(KI6) 120-volt power outlet, (RT9) 19" aluminum wheels and (T43)
rear spoiler, SUNROOF, POWER, TILT-SLIDING WITH ADDITIONAL
SKYLIGHT FIXED GLASS AFT OF THE SLIDING GLASS with power
sunshade, CONVENIENCE PACKAGE includes (UD7) Rear Park Assist,
(UVC) Rear Vision Camera, (DD8) auto-dimming inside rearview
mirror, (BTV) remote vehicle starter system, (UG1) Universal
Home Remote, (B58) premium carpeted front and rear floor mats
and (B36) carpeted trunk mat, PREMIUM SEATING PACKAGE includes
(KA1) heated driver and front passenger seats, (AG2) 8-way power
front passenger seat adjuster and (AP9) cargo convenience net,
ADVANCED SAFETY PACKAGE includes (UEU) Forward Collision Alert,
(UFG) Rear Cross-Traffic Alert, (UFL) Lane Departure Warning and
(UFT) Side Blind Zone Alert, REAR VISION CAMERA, REMOTE VEHICLE
STARTER SYSTEM, ENGINE, 3.6L DOHC V6 DI WITH VARIABLE VALVE
TIMING (VVT) (305 hp {227.4 kW} @ 6800 rpm, 264 lb-ft of torque
{356.4 N-m} @ 5200 rpm) (Includes E85 FlexFuel capability with
(FE9) Federal emissions or (YF5/NE1 and NC7) California
emissions with the Federal override only.) (STD)
Edmunds computed true cost to own for a non LT Impala (slightly
cheaper): $46,544 Edmunds True Cost to Own� Based on a 5-year
estimate with 15,000 miles driven per year. Edmunds.com True
Cost to Own� (TCO�) is proprietary data that helps you estimate
the total five-year cost of buying and owning a vehicle -
including some items you may not have taken into consideration.
A benefit of using our TCO� tool is that you can easily compare
the five-year totals for different vehicles and make a more
informed choice.
HTML http://www.edmunds.com/chevrolet/impala/2015/
Agelbert NOTE: The Edmunds estimate excludes all the biosphere
impact costs from energy and pollution in mining for the
materials, refining the metal and other materials and
manufacturing the vehicle. The cost of 41 tons of CO2 (8.2 tons
of CO2 per year for five years) is another fossil fuel SUBSIDY
that your lungs and that of your dog, outside cat, your
neighbors and your family and friends DO pay; so says the EPA:
"The Social Cost of Carbon
EPA and other federal agencies use the social cost of carbon
(SCC) to estimate the climate benefits of rulemakings. The SCC
is an estimate of the economic damages associated with a small
increase in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, conventionally one
metric ton, in a given year. This dollar figure also represents
the value of damages avoided for a small emission reduction
(i.e. the benefit of a CO2 reduction).
The SCC is meant to be a comprehensive estimate of climate
change damages and includes, but is not limited to, changes in
net agricultural productivity, human health, and property
damages from increased flood risk. However, given current
modeling and data limitations, it does not include all important
damages. As noted by the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, it is
�very likely that [SCC] underestimates� the
damages.
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-310714182509.png
The table below presents the most recent SCC estimates (PDF, 22
pp, 780 KB) (updated in 2013) for certain years.

Social Cost of CO2, 2015-2050 a (in 2011 Dollars)
Discount Rate and Statistic
[table]
[tr]
[td]Year[/td][td] 5% Avg[/td][td] 3% Avg[/td][td] 2.5%
Ave[/td][td] 3% 95th percentile[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2015[/td][td] $12[/td][td] $39[/td][td] $61[/td][td]
$116[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2020[/td][td] $13[/td][td] $46[/td][td] $68[/td][td]
$137[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2025[/td][td] $15[/td][td] $50[/td][td] $74[/td][td]
$153[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2030[/td][td] $17[/td][td] $55[/td][td] $80[/td][td]
$170[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2035[/td][td] $20[/td][td] $60[/td][td] $85[/td][td]
$187[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2040[/td][td] $22[/td][td] $65[/td][td] $92[/td][td]
$204[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2045[/td][td] $26[/td][td] $70[/td][td] $98[/td][td]
$220[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2055[/td][td] $28[/td][td] $76[/td][td] $104[/td][td]
$235[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]
SCC values are dollar-year and emissions-year specific
For more information see the SCC Fact Sheet (PDF, 4 pp, 80 KB).
See also the following documents for information about ongoing
research to improve the SCC.
HTML http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/EPAactivities/economics/scc.html
Clear as mud, right? Stick around. I'll clear it up. ;D For the
non-accountants here, discount rate and present value are terms
used when computing the "value" NOW of something that will be
worth X dollars at a future point. The SCC Fact sheet has
examples (discount rates for dummies
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191456.bmp). It helped refresh my memory.
I knew those business administration courses I took would be
good for something someday! ;D
Here's how it works. You will pump out 41 metric tons (assuming
"Tons/yr of CO2 Emissions @ 15K mi/year: 8.2" is in METRIC tons
- one metric ton = 2,204.6 pounds) from your 2015 Chevrolet
Impala LT in 2015. If you use the 2.5% average discount rate
(which may be a huge underestimate of the cost but we'll let
that go so we aren't accused of estimating a "low probability"
cost like the 95th percentile), the SCC is $61 times 41 =
$2,501. That SAME 41 tons of CO2 will cost society $68 times 41=
$2788 in 2020 if it is still around. The scientists (I have
provided several videos about his in the last couple of years)
have stated unequivocally that the CO2 will PERSIST in our
atmosphere for about 1,000 YEARS.
So, your 2015 Chevrolet Impala LT is guaranteed to have an
SCC, if every bit of CO2 it pumps out in five years at 15k miles
driven a year is sequestered into the planet and stops polluting
it by 2020, of 41 times 5 times $68 = $13,940.
Scientists tell us that is NOT realistic. They tell us that the
CO2 will be EASILY out there, warming our biosphere, in 2050.
If you junk the 2015 Chevrolet Impala LT in 2020 through some
miraculous recycling process that uses zero energy and does not
further pollute the planet so it is converted into an EV or 15
bicycles, the SCC of that 2015 Chevrolet Impala LT is going to
be 41 times 5 times $104 = $21,320 by 2050.
And if, as a rather vocal segment of the scientist bean counters
at the EPA claims, the actual SCC cost of of the the outlier 3%
95th Percentile is SPOT ON, the SCC for that car will be 41
times 5 times $235 = $48,175.
Green Escape clause: If you run dat pig on 100% ethanol (Brazil
does that - we don't cause big oil gamed the fuel laws to keep
15% polluting pigerry in the 85% ethanol blend), the above
numbers don't apply.
If I made a boo boo with my math, let me know and I'll correct
it.
In summary, the 3,700 pounds of car called a 2015 Chevrolet
Impala LT carries a Social Carbon Cost (SCC) by 2050 of
anywhere between $21,320 and $48,175 IF it is recycled without
the use of any energy into a non polluting substance in 2020.
What are the odds of THAT happening? Right. Somebody will keep
driving it. When it is junked there will be an energy cost to
recycle the raw materials and, of course, the toxins from the
battery to deal with.
And that, fellow Doomers, is why I give Mking 'what fer'
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/swear1.gif
every time he accuses
me of driving a polluting pig. BECAUSE I drive less than 2k a
YEAR, I am actually preventing someone from drivng that ICE pig
12k to 24k a year!
I suppose, if I were brutally green about this whole thing, I
woulf make sure it was crushed by a solar powered electric
machine! I admit I am making a compromise. But my carbon
footprint is microscopic compared to a Volt owner that flies all
over hell and damnation for fracking piggery.
Actually, the cost of a NEW car, for me, is an addition to the
pollution picture (as Monsta has correctly pointed out OFTEN)
because a LOT of energy is used to build a new car; far more
than I will use in another 10 years at 2k or less a year.
That said, I wish I could get a Volt!
End of PEV or a PHEV Compared With a non-electric powered
vehicle: Part 4 of 5 Parts
PEV or a PHEV Compared With a non-electric powered vehicle: Part
5 of 5 Parts
HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/renewables/electric-vehicles/msg2473/#msg2473

#Post#: 2473--------------------------------------------------
Re: Electric Vehicles
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: December 29, 2014, 8:36 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
PEV or a PHEV Compared With a non-electric powered vehicle:
Part 5 of 5 Parts
Details:
Fact Sheet: Social Cost of Carbon
HTML http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/Downloads/EPAactivities/scc-fact-sheet.pdf
Edmunds 2015 Chevrolet Impala cost to YOU directly of driving
15k/yr for five years = $46,544
Social Carbon Cost (SCC) by 2050 of anywhere between $21,320 and
$48,175. We'll split the difference and come up with an SCC of
$34,748.
Cost of 2015 Chevrolet Impala $81,292. Cheer up, your grandkids
will pay the LION's share!
The following info is accurate but somewhat dated. Nevertheless,
remember the SCC discount rate on CO2 pollution costs up to 2050
for the stuff below that will still be there and CONTINUES to be
ADDED TO:
CO2 emissions from U.S. cars & trucks totaled 314 million metric
tons in 2002. That's as much as would be released from burning
all the coal in a train 50,000 miles long -- enough to circle
around the world, twice. (Environmental Defense, Nov-.Dec. 2006,
p. 8, PDF)
Car emissions kill 30,000 people each year in the U.S. (2, 1998)
More than half of the people in the U.S. live in areas that
failed to meet federal air quality standards at least several
days a year (7, 1990), and around 80 million Americans live in
areas that continually fail to meet these standards (6, 1998).
Most ozone pollution is caused by motor vehicles, which account
for 72% of nitrogen oxides and 52% of reactive hydrocarbons
(principal components of smog). (7, 1990)
Emissions from cars dwarfs that from power plants. In May 2000,
Austin Energy planned to reduce nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions
by 40% at its Decker and Holly power plants, from 1700 tons per
year to less than 1000tpy by 2003. By comparison, NOx emissions
in Travis county from motor vehicles totaled approximately
30,000 tons per year in 1996 -- the last year for which complete
data was available. (1, 2000)
Now for some less depressing (depending on your point of view)
'believe it or not it IS true and documented' accurate data:
Improving the average fuel efficiency of vehicles in the United
States by 2.7 miles per gallon would equal all U.S. oil imports
from the Persian Gulf, according to conservation advocate Amory
Lovins. (12)
Big pickups even worse than SUV's. Fuel efficiency of the
average pickup has also declined from as high as 19.2 miles a
gallon in the 1987 model year to 16.8 miles a gallon today. The
average S.U.V. gets 17.8 miles a gallon now and the average car
24.8. And even those averages do not count the very biggest
vehicles those weighing more than 8,500 pounds fully loaded
which are exempt under federal law. Like the Hummer and other
giant sport utilities, the biggest pickups average little more
than 10 miles a gallon. (NYT, July 31, 2003)
95% of a car's energy goes towards moving the car itself, and
only 5% to moving the passenger. The average passenger car
weighs 3000 lbs. (source), so if a person weighs 150 lbs., then
3000 / (3000 + 150) = 95.2%. Put two people in the car and it
drops to 91% (3000 / (3000 + 150 + 150). With four people, it's
83% (3000 / (3000+150+150+150+150).
Contrast with a 30-lb. bicycle: 83% of the energy goes towards
transporting the rider, not the vehicle (150 / (30+150).
Cigarette lighter penalty. Using the cigarette lighter to power
200 watts of devices decreases fuel economy by about 1 mpg. (200
watts is hefty�an iPhone might use around 10). (WP, 2008)
External costs of driving. The estimated annual external cost of
driving (including air pollution, climate change, imported oil
security, congestion, accidents, noise, etc.) is $126.3
billion.(E Magazine, 2005)
Bikes vs. Cars. David Lawyer wrote the ultimate paper comparing
bicycle vs. automobile energy use, and found that bikes are 2/3
more efficient than cars even after factoring in the energy to
produce the extra food the cyclist requires. (David Lawyer)
Bicycle MPG. If we spent our gas money (at $3.72/gallon) on food
to fuel our biking, that $3.72 would take us 26 miles on beef,
48 miles on potatoes, 106 miles on beans, and 109 miles on rice.
(source)
Bicycling is 117% more efficient than walking. (source)
Using a bicycle to commute four days a week for four miles
(one-way) saves 54 gallons of gas annually. (2)
The energy and resources needed to build one medium-sized car
could produce 100 bicycles. (2)
HTML http://bicycleuniverse.info/transpo/almanac.html
Well then, if you want to buy an ICE only powered car, truck,
SUV or whatever,
HTML https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8401/8630779080_8792a60557_b.jpg
HTML http://cleantechnica.com/files/2014/12/2014-Mercedes-B-Class-Electric-Drive-2.jpg
Mercedes B-Class Electric Drive
HTML http://cleantechnica.com/files/2014/12/mercedes-electric.png
From the above graphic I computed a 15k/yr 5 year cost to own of
$45,975 (Edmunds has no cost data on it yet). Besides the
energy and pollution cost to build it, there are is no
additional Social Carbon Cost (SCC). You don't have all the ICE
stuff like a muffler and oil changes, etc. That should save you
some money down the road. With an 87 mile range, for a 40 mile a
day commute, it's definitely a walk in the park. What I don't
like about is that it is heavy. It is an ICE car conversion. It
was not designed from the ground up to be an EV.
Read all about it here:
2014 Mercedes B-Class Electric Drive Review � 1st Month
(Exclusive)
December 14th, 2014
SNIPPET 1:
By Kyle Field
A month ago, my wife and I traded in our aging gasmobile for the
newly introduced 2014 Mercedes B-Class Electric Drive EV. I
considered myself to be an educated EV consumer but still had
quite a few learnings � some good, some bad � in the first month
with our EV. Though the majority of our learnings were not
related to the car itself, but more generically to the
transition from a gasmobile to an EV, that�s where I�ll start.
SNIPPET 2:
... this particular configuration results in the least efficient
EV when compared to others available today, with an MPGe rating
of 85/83 and most others coming in at 100+. This is largely due
to the fact that the B-Class was not built from the ground up as
an EV or even a fuel-efficient car but rather a converted gas
mobile. This is most evident in the weight � at 3935 lbs, the
B-Class is no featherweight. For comparison, the BMW i3 which
was purpose-built as an EV comes in at 2853 lbs (without the
Range Extender). The B-Class pays a further penalty for being a
former gasmobile, as extra battery capacity was required to haul
around the extra mass. The B-Class� battery is rated at 36 kWh.
SNIPPET 3:
Under the Hood
While the B-Class looks and feels like a normal car, when you
pop the hood, things change. The B-Class� electric motor,
batteries, charger, and supporting EV systems are all made by
Tesla, shipped from the US to Germany for assembly. While I�m
not a car fanatic (at least not the gas-powered ones), I feel a
sense of pride that Mercedes came to a US company for their
first EV. This was a feature on the plus side for me, as Tesla
is making waves in the EV world and I�m happy to be a part of
that revolution.
Driving the B-Class
With the normal looking exterior, the accelerator of the B-Class
houses a fun secret � instant torque! This is difficult to put
into words for non-EV drivers but suffice it to say that the
accelerator on this EV (and most other EVs) is responsive. When
you step on the pedal, it jumps. Continued pressure results in a
very smooth acceleration up to whatever speed you desire. I
occasionally treat my kids to a ride on the roller coaster and
pound the pedal down to the ground on the way to pre-school
resulting in what feels like a quick boost on a roller coaster.
Granted, they�re too young for coasters at this point, but the
sentiment is spot on.
SNIPPET 4:
One unique challenge EV owners have is the large variety of
charging networks out there. After test driving a few charging
network apps, we have found that the crowdsourced PlugShare app
(Web, iOS, Android) has the best overview of the entire public
charging network and includes chargers from many of the big
networks, like ChargePoint, Blink, EV Connect, and NRG�s eVgo,
as well as personal charging locations! Wanting to build
capability and make the most of our EV, we have signed up for
several different charging networks, each of which has it�s own
unique way to charge � some with set monthly fees, others with a
price per kWh or per hour, etc. It�s been an interesting process
but the net takeaway is that, here in Southern California, there
are lots of chargers in lots of areas we frequent.
Full article with lots of cool pictures:
HTML http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/yayayoy/yayayoy1106/yayayoy110600019/9735563-smiling-sun-showing-thumb-up.jpg 
HTML http://cleantechnica.com/2014/12/14/2014-mercedes-b-class-electric-drive-review-1st-month/
The Mercedes B-Class Electric Drive, because it's, well, a
MERCEDES, has some Bernays status (mine is better than yours -
yada yada ya - gives the finger to neighbor) puffery attached to
it but that company generally does make pretty good cars.
Besides, it's got the "Tesla inside" branding to help it along.
Consequently, the Mercedes B-Class EV has a rep to uphold as
well as a built in loyal costumer base. If this Mercedes B-Class
Electric Drive does what they say it does, it's resale value
will also be quite high.
The Volt, with excellent sales figures and a good track record
of reliability is guaranteed to have outstanding resale value.
A smart fellow that calls himself "The Energy Czar" has had a
Volt for two years.
He is SERIOUS about getting TOTALLY off of fossil fuels. He has
a lot of solar power in his house juicing the Volt. AND he has a
set up to use the Volt as an auxiliary power plant to send power
to his house! His voice of experience is all you need to hear.
The Volt is a FANTASTIC investment for, not just transportation,
but SECURE driving above and beyond what a pure ICE car can
provide.
The lower center of gravity provides better cornering. The
acceleration, if you need it, is Corvette quality without paying
the Corvette price!
The fact that people will NOT be lead footed with their cars
most of the time means PHEV and EV owners in general and Volt
drivers in particular will have less drivng accidents. This mean
lower insurane premiums down the road.
It's design is functional, not just for looks. That means your
car will hold its resale value because the appearance will not
change much, if at all, over the years.
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqKCuilRMGg &feature=player_embedded
The Energy Czar dude also made an initial review when he bought
the car with lots of talk about the goodies in sound systems and
some kind of cell phone setup. He also has a one year review on
the internet.
Internal combustion engines CANNOT handle deep water. They stall
when the water travels up the muffler and chokes the exhaust.
Electrics DON'T STALL in high water! There's a video out there
of a Volt going through deep water happy as a pond duck (knee
deep) but I haven't been able to track it down. GM has an
official video of Volt stream fording tests that you can ask the
dealer to show you (it's not available on the internet anymore).
And the Volt coming out in January of 2015 is even BETTER for
the environment. "Automotive News reports that the next version
will trade its 1.4-liter four-cylinder engine for a 1-liter
three-cylinder engine. It will also get a fifth seat." The Volt
ICE is becoming even more of an auxiliary power plant. The
1-liter three cylinder ICE requires less energy to manufacture
and is cheaper to maintain. GOOD!
"Chevy says it has sold 65,000 since Volt went on sale in 2010."
HTML http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2014/08/07/chevrolet-volt-2016-debut/13723803/
Edmunds 15k/yr cost to own a 2013 Volt = $42,078 ((data for
newer ones not available but remember they are about $5,000
cheaper up front AND they have a smaller ICE. That means this
price is on the high side. The SCC of his vehicle depends
entirely on how many of the 15k a year miles are driven on the
ICE. If you use 100% ethanol (not legal in the USA yet but it
should be) or even 85% Ethanol, your SCC will be negligible,
period.
HTML http://www.edmunds.com/chevrolet/volt/2013/?sub=hatchback

Now let's look at the three cars side by side: The Energy cost
and associated pollution to recycle the cars steel back to raw
material is not included. However, due to the fact that PEVs and
PHEVs are lighter and use less steel, the aftermarket for EV and
PHEV battery packs and the toxicity of lead acid batteries from
ICE only cars, it is clear that the PEV and PHEV vehicles are
less damaging to the environment and use less energy when they
are put through the recycling process.
Ownership cost to you and your grandkids of 15k/yr for five
years:
2015 Chevrolet Impala =
$81,292
2015 Mercedes B-Blass Electric Drive (EV)
= $45,975
2013 Chevrolet Volt (PHEV)
= $42,078
In summary, the Agelbert Institute of Penny Pinchers for a
Viable Biosphere and CFS gives the Volt a TOP rating for REALLY
green transportation that will FUEL (pun intended!) DEMAND
DESTRUCTION of fossil fuels. The small ICE can EASILY run on
ethanol instead of gasoline so that is that! You might not save
the world, but just think of all the fossil fuelers you will
drive crazy!
And if you are influenced by people saying gasoline is "cheap",
please consider that the gamed LOW gasoline price coming down
the pike now is strictly temporary.
At any rate, since a Volt DOES have an ICE in it, nobody can
call you a sucker for electrics with a PHEV. The real sucker is
the idiot that runs out and buys a gas hog because gasoline is
"cheap".
Don't let the rockefeller T-rex eat Patrick Henry's rat. If you
can't do the bicycle commute, buy an EV or a PHEV. They are the
most prudent and fun investment in transportation you can make.
End of PEV or a PHEV Compared With a non-electric powered
vehicle: Article and Part 5 of 5 Parts
P.S. If I helped to convince even one person to never buy an ICE
only powered car again, all this research, sweat and toil to put
this together has been worth it!
HTML http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-052.gifhttp://www.pic4ever.com/images/earthhug.gifhttp://www.pic4ever.com/images/treeswing.gif
HTML http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-032.gif
PEV or a PHEV Compared With a non-electric powered vehicle: Part
1 of 5 Parts
HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/renewables/electric-vehicles/msg2394/#msg2394
*****************************************************
Page 7 of 70
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page