4 ms·

> environment as well It's not going to do anything great for the environment and we've been over this on previous Tesla threads (years ago). Driving electric

> environment as well It's not going to do anything great for the environment and we've been over this on previous Tesla threads (years ago). Driving electric cars instead of hybrids in areas where the electricity is primarily derived from unclean sources is not better than hybrids for the environment.

knappe 10y ago
And everyone said that of the Prius too. And now we have fully electric cars. You have to start somewhere or you get nowhere.
colordrops 10y ago
What would you propose instead?
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- karussell 10y ago
  Instead of the battery the less toxic way would be hydrogen based engines.
  - colordrops 10y ago
    How would you make the hydrogen though? Does it suffer the same criticism as your original comment?
smilekzs 10y ago
Unclean power plants are still vastly more efficient than the most efficient internal combustion engines. That's why trains are electric wherever possible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_locomotive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_locomotive
- wott 10y ago
  > Unclean power plants are still vastly more efficient than the most efficient internal combustion engines. I don't think so. > That's why trains are electric wherever possible. 1. Thing is, you don't have to refuel electric locomotives, so that saves time and logistics. Unless you plan to install a pantograph on the roof of your Tesla, you still have to refuel it. 2. Unlike cars, diesel locomotives do not use any kind of direct transmission anyway, they generate electricity from Diesel engines to power electric motors. Because unlike cars, they have to transmit huge power and torque to make the first wheels turns, and mechanical transmissions are not good for that, but electric engines are. So since they use electric engines anyway, why not power them from electrical energy instead of diesel? That's why locomotives are electrical wherever possible.
  - Coincoin 10y ago
    You don't think so? Is that your opinion or a fact? Most calculations I've seen seem to conclude electric are more CO2 efficient per mile; from 2 to 9 times depending on which state is producing the power.
  - bkanber 10y ago
    > Unclean power plants are still vastly more efficient than the most efficient internal combustion engines. I'm an automotive engineer specializing in hybrid vehicle powertrains. Published and everything. As of two years ago the only country in the world where the power source makes an EV not worthwhile, well-to-wheel emissions-wise, was India. Every other country in the world has clean enough power production to make EV cars an environmental net positive. And I believe India's power is getting much cleaner over the next few years, so it may not be the case much longer.
- toephu2 10y ago
  Side topic: just curious what powers Caltrains's trains?
j6m8 10y ago
The important distinction is that this abstracts the "cleanliness" away from the individual. Replacing one coal plant with a wind plant, for instance, is far more easily done than waiting for all affected consumers to replace their cars.
m_mueller 10y ago
as you indicated - this depends on where you live - and if you're ready to just fix the problem yourself with solar power. Stating that it won't help is IMO misleading - Tesla is basically offering you all the missing tools to carry a high energy American lifestyle towards being carbon neutral. The footprint you missed in terms of consumed goods or at home, could be compensated by buying CO2 certificates. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16K4gNhy_AN8Eg4Ov3z7pF_dgON1oObkHQ8Px5I73Hvc https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16K4gNhy_AN8Eg4Ov3z7p...
MattRix 10y ago
Not better in the short term, but still better in the long term, as it leads to greater adoption of electric cars, etc.
heygrady 10y ago
> Driving electric cars where the electricity is from unclean sources is not better than hybrids for the environment Some of the widely reported research about the power generation and electric cars is flawed [1]. Electric vehicles and hybrids come out about even in the worst markets, like Missouri [2]. But nearly everywhere else, an electric vehicle is better for the environment. People don't always consider that the electric grid is moving away from coal [3], which means your electric car will get greener during the time you own it without you having to upgrade it. [1] http://midwestenergynews.com/2016/04/20/minnesota-study-challenges-coal-car-claims-about-electric-vehicles/ http://midwestenergynews.com/2016/04/20/minnesota-study-chal... [2] http://blog.ucsusa.org/rachael-nealer/gasoline-vs-electric-global-warming-emissions-953 http://blog.ucsusa.org/rachael-nealer/gasoline-vs-electric-g... [3] http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2016/08/renewable-energy-was-16-9-percent-of-u-s-electric-generation-in-the-first-half-of-2016.html http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2016/08/renewab...
bkanber 10y ago
> Driving electric cars instead of hybrids in areas where the electricity is primarily derived from unclean sources is not better than hybrids for the environment. As of two years ago the only country where that was the case was India. Right before that, South Africa and China both became clean enough for EVs to be an environmental net positive. Power produced in the US is some of the cleanest in the world, and getting cleaner every day as coal plants are decommissioned. We are well above the environmental net benefit line. > Driving electric cars instead of hybrids in areas where the electricity is primarily derived from unclean sources is not better than hybrids for the environment. There are no longer significant areas where this is the case. Even most coal markets in the US are clean enough (not sure what will happen with new de-regulations). The US, on average, is by far clean enough. Source: I'm a hybrid vehicle powertrain engineer
- kriro 10y ago
  The entire clean energy argument depends on your classification of nuclear energy. Long term storage issues put it squarely in the unclean category for me so I'd argue that US energy is by and large pretty unclean. I'm also pricing in the expected value of meltdowns in my unclean rating. It's hard to quantify exactly but the black swan events have pretty catastrophic consequences for the environment. Since I've witnessed two very severe ones in my lifetime, one in what many people would call a technically very advanced country I don't think it's unreasonable. If you think that's tinfoilhat-crazy, fell free to talk to an insurance or reinsurance company about insuring nuclear plants fur a fon conversation.
  - bkanber 10y ago
    Nuclear power is only 20% of US energy production. Nuclear waste is a political problem, not a scientific or engineering one. We're not allowed to recycle it the way we want. Blame President Carter. Coal power puts more radiation into the atmosphere than nuclear does. You have no idea how to "price" the cost of meltdowns into your "unclean" rating. TMI's incident did not have any effect on public safety. I don't think it's tinfoil-hat-crazy, I just think it's uninformed.
Qwertious 10y ago
>Driving electric cars instead of hybrids in areas where the electricity is primarily derived from unclean sources is not better than hybrids for the environment. ICE cars are far less efficient than fossil-fuel power plants, due to the weight/size restraints of a car-engine form-factor. Given this, electric cars actually do emit less energy than cars that burn fossil fuels. But frankly, you're looking at this the wrong way - most electric cars are at the start of their life, and have at least 10 years' worth of use, if not 20 or more. Given that renewables will inevitably become a major portion of the electricity grid within 10 years (and realistically, almost certainly within 5), they'll become more efficient in the future, and make renewables reduce even more CO2 emissions, since they're punting petrol away, too.

knappe 10y ago

And everyone said that of the Prius too. And now we have fully electric cars. You have to start somewhere or you get nowhere.

colordrops 10y ago

What would you propose instead?

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
karussell 10y ago
Instead of the battery the less toxic way would be hydrogen based engines.
- colordrops 10y ago
  How would you make the hydrogen though? Does it suffer the same criticism as your original comment?

smilekzs 10y ago

Unclean power plants are still vastly more efficient than the most efficient internal combustion engines. That's why trains are electric wherever possible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_locomotive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_locomotive

wott 10y ago
> Unclean power plants are still vastly more efficient than the most efficient internal combustion engines. I don't think so. > That's why trains are electric wherever possible. 1. Thing is, you don't have to refuel electric locomotives, so that saves time and logistics. Unless you plan to install a pantograph on the roof of your Tesla, you still have to refuel it. 2. Unlike cars, diesel locomotives do not use any kind of direct transmission anyway, they generate electricity from Diesel engines to power electric motors. Because unlike cars, they have to transmit huge power and torque to make the first wheels turns, and mechanical transmissions are not good for that, but electric engines are. So since they use electric engines anyway, why not power them from electrical energy instead of diesel? That's why locomotives are electrical wherever possible.
- Coincoin 10y ago
  You don't think so? Is that your opinion or a fact? Most calculations I've seen seem to conclude electric are more CO2 efficient per mile; from 2 to 9 times depending on which state is producing the power.
- bkanber 10y ago
  > Unclean power plants are still vastly more efficient than the most efficient internal combustion engines. I'm an automotive engineer specializing in hybrid vehicle powertrains. Published and everything. As of two years ago the only country in the world where the power source makes an EV not worthwhile, well-to-wheel emissions-wise, was India. Every other country in the world has clean enough power production to make EV cars an environmental net positive. And I believe India's power is getting much cleaner over the next few years, so it may not be the case much longer.
toephu2 10y ago
Side topic: just curious what powers Caltrains's trains?

j6m8 10y ago

The important distinction is that this abstracts the "cleanliness" away from the individual. Replacing one coal plant with a wind plant, for instance, is far more easily done than waiting for all affected consumers to replace their cars.

m_mueller 10y ago

as you indicated - this depends on where you live - and if you're ready to just fix the problem yourself with solar power. Stating that it won't help is IMO misleading - Tesla is basically offering you all the missing tools to carry a high energy American lifestyle towards being carbon neutral. The footprint you missed in terms of consumed goods or at home, could be compensated by buying CO2 certificates. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16K4gNhy_AN8Eg4Ov3z7pF_dgON1oObkHQ8Px5I73Hvc https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16K4gNhy_AN8Eg4Ov3z7p...

MattRix 10y ago

Not better in the short term, but still better in the long term, as it leads to greater adoption of electric cars, etc.

heygrady 10y ago

> Driving electric cars where the electricity is from unclean sources is not better than hybrids for the environment Some of the widely reported research about the power generation and electric cars is flawed [1]. Electric vehicles and hybrids come out about even in the worst markets, like Missouri [2]. But nearly everywhere else, an electric vehicle is better for the environment. People don't always consider that the electric grid is moving away from coal [3], which means your electric car will get greener during the time you own it without you having to upgrade it. [1] http://midwestenergynews.com/2016/04/20/minnesota-study-challenges-coal-car-claims-about-electric-vehicles/ http://midwestenergynews.com/2016/04/20/minnesota-study-chal... [2] http://blog.ucsusa.org/rachael-nealer/gasoline-vs-electric-global-warming-emissions-953 http://blog.ucsusa.org/rachael-nealer/gasoline-vs-electric-g... [3] http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2016/08/renewable-energy-was-16-9-percent-of-u-s-electric-generation-in-the-first-half-of-2016.html http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2016/08/renewab...

bkanber 10y ago

> Driving electric cars instead of hybrids in areas where the electricity is primarily derived from unclean sources is not better than hybrids for the environment. As of two years ago the only country where that was the case was India. Right before that, South Africa and China both became clean enough for EVs to be an environmental net positive. Power produced in the US is some of the cleanest in the world, and getting cleaner every day as coal plants are decommissioned. We are well above the environmental net benefit line. > Driving electric cars instead of hybrids in areas where the electricity is primarily derived from unclean sources is not better than hybrids for the environment. There are no longer significant areas where this is the case. Even most coal markets in the US are clean enough (not sure what will happen with new de-regulations). The US, on average, is by far clean enough. Source: I'm a hybrid vehicle powertrain engineer

kriro 10y ago
The entire clean energy argument depends on your classification of nuclear energy. Long term storage issues put it squarely in the unclean category for me so I'd argue that US energy is by and large pretty unclean. I'm also pricing in the expected value of meltdowns in my unclean rating. It's hard to quantify exactly but the black swan events have pretty catastrophic consequences for the environment. Since I've witnessed two very severe ones in my lifetime, one in what many people would call a technically very advanced country I don't think it's unreasonable. If you think that's tinfoilhat-crazy, fell free to talk to an insurance or reinsurance company about insuring nuclear plants fur a fon conversation.
- bkanber 10y ago
  Nuclear power is only 20% of US energy production. Nuclear waste is a political problem, not a scientific or engineering one. We're not allowed to recycle it the way we want. Blame President Carter. Coal power puts more radiation into the atmosphere than nuclear does. You have no idea how to "price" the cost of meltdowns into your "unclean" rating. TMI's incident did not have any effect on public safety. I don't think it's tinfoil-hat-crazy, I just think it's uninformed.

Qwertious 10y ago

>Driving electric cars instead of hybrids in areas where the electricity is primarily derived from unclean sources is not better than hybrids for the environment. ICE cars are far less efficient than fossil-fuel power plants, due to the weight/size restraints of a car-engine form-factor. Given this, electric cars actually do emit less energy than cars that burn fossil fuels. But frankly, you're looking at this the wrong way - most electric cars are at the start of their life, and have at least 10 years' worth of use, if not 20 or more. Given that renewables will inevitably become a major portion of the electricity grid within 10 years (and realistically, almost certainly within 5), they'll become more efficient in the future, and make renewables reduce even more CO2 emissions, since they're punting petrol away, too.