3 ms·

"Wouldn’t it be great if we could all drive without dirtying the air we breathe? Alas, not everyone can afford an electric car." These claims always bother me.

by arbuge 8y ago

"Wouldn’t it be great if we could all drive without dirtying the air we breathe? Alas, not everyone can afford an electric car." These claims always bother me. Besides the obvious pollution from the generation of electricity required to run the car (in places where clean energy isn't available), there are also the issues of energy required to manufacture the car, energy required to replace battery packs after several years, energy required to recycle the car at end of life, etc. Driving without dirtying the air is really hard to achieve if you think about the whole chain of events that goes into that. Far better to live and work within easy travelling distance if you want to have less of a negative impact on the environment.

rzwitserloot 8y ago
This issue is very complicated. Your average make-tiny-explosions-in-a-chamber based vehicle can give you about 250,000 to 1 million km (150k-625k miles). Then it's just done. The parts are worn down. It's given its all. Your average move-power-from-batteries-to-engines based vehcile can EASILY keep on going for 10 million km or more. Yes, even the battery pack can get there, though it would indeed be by far the first thing that will fail. It is far cheaper to replace that, than to replace an entire combustion engine. Given that, you could draw the conclusion that the energy required to make the chair, the radio, the dashboard, etc – can be divided by at least 10, probably more. But your average person does not ride more than ~250000 KM in a decade, and for sheer matters of safety engineering, style, conveniences like supporting modern electronics – most people consider a 10 year old car pretty old, and a 20 year old one ancient, and want to replace it simply because it is old. Which, for combustion cars, is not a big deal: It's pretty worn down by then. But for EVs? That's a real problem. A 20 year old EV with 250k on the odometer is a damn shame. Nobody wants it anymore but all the parts still work. Solve this problem and EVs are _INCREDIBLY_ better for the environment. I guess self-driving cars helps; you can share a car and just order it to drive to your front door. But to make that a success, you need to do something about the 9-to-5 culture; people need to go to work, say, anywhere between 7am to 1pm, work 6 to 8 hours, and return home, and any job that needs full staffing the entire time people are at the office needs 2 shifts. That's a huge social upheaval (but it also gets rid of traffic jams, creates jobs, and probably boosts the economy because it is easier to do stuff because things are still open). At which point we're in 'change the world, man!' hippie territory. But one can dream, I guess.
- Symbiote 8y ago
  If they become like taxis, and a taxi company owns a fleet of cars, then we could see similarities to how trains are engineered: an expected life of several decades, with refurbishment of the interior if it starts to look worn and dated. Replacement will only be when key parts like the chassis are worn, or no longer meets modern requirements (step-free access for a train, perhaps crash-worthiness for a car). In some countries, buses probably already follow this pattern, but in richer countries improving emissions standards obsolete the old ones.

by arbuge 8y ago

rzwitserloot 8y ago

This issue is very complicated. Your average make-tiny-explosions-in-a-chamber based vehicle can give you about 250,000 to 1 million km (150k-625k miles). Then it's just done. The parts are worn down. It's given its all. Your average move-power-from-batteries-to-engines based vehcile can EASILY keep on going for 10 million km or more. Yes, even the battery pack can get there, though it would indeed be by far the first thing that will fail. It is far cheaper to replace that, than to replace an entire combustion engine. Given that, you could draw the conclusion that the energy required to make the chair, the radio, the dashboard, etc – can be divided by at least 10, probably more. But your average person does not ride more than ~250000 KM in a decade, and for sheer matters of safety engineering, style, conveniences like supporting modern electronics – most people consider a 10 year old car pretty old, and a 20 year old one ancient, and want to replace it simply because it is old. Which, for combustion cars, is not a big deal: It's pretty worn down by then. But for EVs? That's a real problem. A 20 year old EV with 250k on the odometer is a damn shame. Nobody wants it anymore but all the parts still work. Solve this problem and EVs are _INCREDIBLY_ better for the environment. I guess self-driving cars helps; you can share a car and just order it to drive to your front door. But to make that a success, you need to do something about the 9-to-5 culture; people need to go to work, say, anywhere between 7am to 1pm, work 6 to 8 hours, and return home, and any job that needs full staffing the entire time people are at the office needs 2 shifts. That's a huge social upheaval (but it also gets rid of traffic jams, creates jobs, and probably boosts the economy because it is easier to do stuff because things are still open). At which point we're in 'change the world, man!' hippie territory. But one can dream, I guess.

Symbiote 8y ago
If they become like taxis, and a taxi company owns a fleet of cars, then we could see similarities to how trains are engineered: an expected life of several decades, with refurbishment of the interior if it starts to look worn and dated. Replacement will only be when key parts like the chassis are worn, or no longer meets modern requirements (step-free access for a train, perhaps crash-worthiness for a car). In some countries, buses probably already follow this pattern, but in richer countries improving emissions standards obsolete the old ones.