4 ms·

How so? A car's ICE is much less efficient than a power plant.

by swebs 8y ago

olivermarks 8y ago
Planting a lot more trees will have a major impact on pollution reduction. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18215002 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18215002 Half the plastics on the planet were made in the last 13 years https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/07/plastic-age/533955/?fbclid=IwAR1ECQUKm07faBnDLM_9sfcZaR20HGqP_xnK8npknAYiZyeq1okVd-SyjoQ&single_page=true https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/07/plastic-... EV transport is currently limited and unless solar, wind or hydro is used electricity has to be generated somewhere.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
  How is that an argument? You can plant tree, reduce plastics production AND switch to EV. For some reason, every time the case for the electrification of transport is presented, other legitimate, complementary causes are put forward as opposable. As if reducing emissions was a zero-sum game…
  - olivermarks 8y ago
    Wasn't really an argument against EV's, just an observation that plastics production is a major use of oil and a pollutant (EV's are mostly plastic and alloys for example) at all levels, while the tree planting reality will have a massive positive impact on pollution and seems to be getting overlooked as it is not commercially attractive to big industrialists.
village-idiot 8y ago
Depends on the pollutants you're looking at. From a CO2/efficiency standpoint, you're correct. A modern EV powered purely by coal power plants puts out less CO2 than a gasoline car, largely because of the efficiency difference between large power plants and ICE. From a SO2/NO2 standpoint, EVs powered by coal would be far far worse, assuming gasoline. Gas/Diesel these days is ultra low sulfur, which reduces SO2 significantly. The only remaining issue is NO2, which is why the catalytic converter is there. The only caveat is Diesel. Diesel engines, especially older ones, are pretty horrid things. It's only in the last couple of year have we started to get the particulate under control with DPFs, and the NOx issue remains very difficult to fix cheaply (see: VW). Chances are any diesel engines running in a place like China will be old and lack both DPFs and Urea based NOx control systems. I am uncertain as to whether old diesel trucks or coal power plants produce more NOx.
- olivermarks 8y ago
  IMO hybrid is the way to go for transport. I live in an earthquake prone area where a power cut would equal limited range one way or no transport when I most needed it if I only had an EV. Modern ICE are amazingly sophisticated, EV in comparison have limited range, potential polluting issues, battery creation rare earth component scarcity issues and a massive dead battery disposal problem. We'll get there with a grid and more practical EV's but we're not there yet
  - JoshCole 8y ago
    Might want to refresh your information about electric vehicles. Nissan Leaf era range is no longer the status quo. Tesla has vehicles with 300+ miles of range and other auto manufacturer are now planning to release or releasing 200+ mile range vehicles. Charging times are also not a problem. In my experience, I can handle my daily commute without doing anything special whatsoever. Super convenient. Just get home and plug in and never worry about range at all. Total cost of ownership of an EV is getting close to a tipping point where EV is a better deal than electric. One thing pushing that way is the many moving parts of ICE vehicles leading to more maintenance needed. Another is that modern car batteries are turning out to have longevity much higher than what was projected by critics (early Tesla cars still have 90% of initial battery capacity). Another is that the cost per mile in terms of energy is an order of magnitude cheaper. The only thing really stopping electric is that people have been wary to invest heavily in the factories that were necessary to produce the economies of scale that would lower the price. Since Tesla has done that, prices are dropping and everyone else is being forced to follow. ICE vehicles are losing market share, because the more practical EVs you mentioned are already here.
  - FrojoS 8y ago
    At most gas stations, the pump won’t work during a power outage. https://www.google.ch/amp/s/www.simplemost.com/gas-stations-pump-without-electricity/amp/ https://www.google.ch/amp/s/www.simplemost.com/gas-stations-... With an EV, if you are not driving already, your car will likely be almost fully charged at your home or office while the earthquake strikes. You will then have about 300 miles of driving to a place with power.
VBprogrammer 8y ago
I found a series of videos on youtube a while back, a set of training videos for people working in steam turbine plans, which really cemented in my head the reasons why this is the case. For example: the final stages of a steam condensing turbine are actually operating under vacuum relative to atmospheric pressure. To start the turbine a vacuum pump first removes the the air from the turbine. After steams works its way through the turbine it is cooled by feed water (which is then used in the boiler) reducing it's volume by about 1000 times maintaining the vacuum. An ICE on the other hand expels a good portion of the input energy as hot exhaust gasses several PSI above atmospheric pressure.
wonderwonder 8y ago
Volume, coal plants produce massive amounts of pollutants. Cars as a source of pollution only just passed power generation and that's because of the switch to natural gas. Individual coal plants can burn millions of tons of coal per year each. Coal ash is also radioactive. https://www.vox.com/2016/6/13/11911798/emissions-electricity-versus-transportation https://www.vox.com/2016/6/13/11911798/emissions-electricity...
rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
EVs are better than average ICE everywhere: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_tailpipe#Carbon_footprint_in_selected_countries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_tailpipe#Carbon_footp...
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
Symmetry 8y ago
In terms of energy in to energy out it is a lot more efficient. But the amount of particulate matter created by burning a kilojoule of coal is much, much higher than the amount created by burning a kilojoule of gasoline.
- varjag 8y ago
  It is not. Gasoline ICE typical thermal efficiency is ~20%, large power generation turbine is 35-40%. Also, to refine 92 octane gasoline takes about the same amount of energy as it releases when burning.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

How so? A car's ICE is much less efficient than a power plant.

by swebs 8y ago

How so? A car's ICE is much less efficient than a power plant.

Planting a lot more trees will have a major impact on pollution reduction. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18215002 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18215002 Half the plastics on the planet were made in the last 13 years https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/07/plastic-age/533955/?fbclid=IwAR1ECQUKm07faBnDLM_9sfcZaR20HGqP_xnK8npknAYiZyeq1okVd-SyjoQ&single_page=true https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/07/plastic-... EV transport is currently limited and unless solar, wind or hydro is used electricity has to be generated somewhere.

rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
How is that an argument? You can plant tree, reduce plastics production AND switch to EV. For some reason, every time the case for the electrification of transport is presented, other legitimate, complementary causes are put forward as opposable. As if reducing emissions was a zero-sum game…
- olivermarks 8y ago
  Wasn't really an argument against EV's, just an observation that plastics production is a major use of oil and a pollutant (EV's are mostly plastic and alloys for example) at all levels, while the tree planting reality will have a massive positive impact on pollution and seems to be getting overlooked as it is not commercially attractive to big industrialists.

village-idiot 8y ago

Depends on the pollutants you're looking at. From a CO2/efficiency standpoint, you're correct. A modern EV powered purely by coal power plants puts out less CO2 than a gasoline car, largely because of the efficiency difference between large power plants and ICE. From a SO2/NO2 standpoint, EVs powered by coal would be far far worse, assuming gasoline. Gas/Diesel these days is ultra low sulfur, which reduces SO2 significantly. The only remaining issue is NO2, which is why the catalytic converter is there. The only caveat is Diesel. Diesel engines, especially older ones, are pretty horrid things. It's only in the last couple of year have we started to get the particulate under control with DPFs, and the NOx issue remains very difficult to fix cheaply (see: VW). Chances are any diesel engines running in a place like China will be old and lack both DPFs and Urea based NOx control systems. I am uncertain as to whether old diesel trucks or coal power plants produce more NOx.

olivermarks 8y ago
IMO hybrid is the way to go for transport. I live in an earthquake prone area where a power cut would equal limited range one way or no transport when I most needed it if I only had an EV. Modern ICE are amazingly sophisticated, EV in comparison have limited range, potential polluting issues, battery creation rare earth component scarcity issues and a massive dead battery disposal problem. We'll get there with a grid and more practical EV's but we're not there yet
- JoshCole 8y ago
  Might want to refresh your information about electric vehicles. Nissan Leaf era range is no longer the status quo. Tesla has vehicles with 300+ miles of range and other auto manufacturer are now planning to release or releasing 200+ mile range vehicles. Charging times are also not a problem. In my experience, I can handle my daily commute without doing anything special whatsoever. Super convenient. Just get home and plug in and never worry about range at all. Total cost of ownership of an EV is getting close to a tipping point where EV is a better deal than electric. One thing pushing that way is the many moving parts of ICE vehicles leading to more maintenance needed. Another is that modern car batteries are turning out to have longevity much higher than what was projected by critics (early Tesla cars still have 90% of initial battery capacity). Another is that the cost per mile in terms of energy is an order of magnitude cheaper. The only thing really stopping electric is that people have been wary to invest heavily in the factories that were necessary to produce the economies of scale that would lower the price. Since Tesla has done that, prices are dropping and everyone else is being forced to follow. ICE vehicles are losing market share, because the more practical EVs you mentioned are already here.
- FrojoS 8y ago
  At most gas stations, the pump won’t work during a power outage. https://www.google.ch/amp/s/www.simplemost.com/gas-stations-pump-without-electricity/amp/ https://www.google.ch/amp/s/www.simplemost.com/gas-stations-... With an EV, if you are not driving already, your car will likely be almost fully charged at your home or office while the earthquake strikes. You will then have about 300 miles of driving to a place with power.

VBprogrammer 8y ago

I found a series of videos on youtube a while back, a set of training videos for people working in steam turbine plans, which really cemented in my head the reasons why this is the case. For example: the final stages of a steam condensing turbine are actually operating under vacuum relative to atmospheric pressure. To start the turbine a vacuum pump first removes the the air from the turbine. After steams works its way through the turbine it is cooled by feed water (which is then used in the boiler) reducing it's volume by about 1000 times maintaining the vacuum. An ICE on the other hand expels a good portion of the input energy as hot exhaust gasses several PSI above atmospheric pressure.

wonderwonder 8y ago

Volume, coal plants produce massive amounts of pollutants. Cars as a source of pollution only just passed power generation and that's because of the switch to natural gas. Individual coal plants can burn millions of tons of coal per year each. Coal ash is also radioactive. https://www.vox.com/2016/6/13/11911798/emissions-electricity-versus-transportation https://www.vox.com/2016/6/13/11911798/emissions-electricity...

rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago

EVs are better than average ICE everywhere: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_tailpipe#Carbon_footprint_in_selected_countries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_tailpipe#Carbon_footp...

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

Symmetry 8y ago

In terms of energy in to energy out it is a lot more efficient. But the amount of particulate matter created by burning a kilojoule of coal is much, much higher than the amount created by burning a kilojoule of gasoline.

varjag 8y ago
It is not. Gasoline ICE typical thermal efficiency is ~20%, large power generation turbine is 35-40%. Also, to refine 92 octane gasoline takes about the same amount of energy as it releases when burning.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]