5 ms·

What is the main attraction behind buying a Tesla or other electric vehicles? The main sources of energy in the United States are still oil, coal, and natural g

by perryh2 13y ago

What is the main attraction behind buying a Tesla or other electric vehicles? The main sources of energy in the United States are still oil, coal, and natural gases. This means that most energy use in the US will still contribute to pollution and consumption of a non-renewable resource. It makes a lot of sense to drive an electric vehicle in a country like France, where 75% of energy comes from nuclear and around 15% comes from hydro sources.I think a Model S would still be an interesting car to drive given the torque provided by an electric motor, but the car still is pretty heavy (5,000 lbs due to batteries) and uses a lot of electricity to charge.

abrowne 13y ago
Isn't it more efficient to have fewer large power plants rather than lots of little power plants (i.e. car engines)? Maybe not with the transmission loss and factoring in the batteries...
- ams6110 13y ago
  Long distance utility transmission losses are around 6% according to Wikipedia. I don't know what losses there are in recharging the batteries, but it's surely not 100% efficient. I also don't know how that compares to costs (pipelines, trucking etc.) used to distribute petroleum fuels. Modern internal combustion engines with mandated emission controls are really very clean. Very likely cleaner than coal plant smokestack exhaust.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
beering 13y ago
I had the understanding that it could be more efficient to be able to use fewer power plants that can be operated efficiently or replaced individually rather than millions of independent ICEs. But I'm far from an expert on this.
rrhyne 13y ago
Supporting Tesla supports lowering the cost structure for batteries. Widespread use of solar will follow.
benjvi 13y ago
The combined efficiency of an electric motor + fossil fuel power plant is still much greater than in a conventional internal combustion engine and therefore the environmental impact from the car is much reduced regardless of the fuel source. A secondary factor - driving a car like a Tesla communicates an image of environmental responsibility. Even if the government and energy companies aren't supporting renewable fuels, you are. When there is a wind turbine on every corner, and a solar panel on every roof, you will be ready with your Tesla. You're a good citizen, and a forward-thinker...
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
simonsquiff 13y ago
The environmental stuff is actually just the icing on the cake - EVs have a number of advantages over internal combustion and the disadvantages keep getting smaller. -awesome acceleration due to instant torque and no gearbox -amazing handling due to low centre of gravity (heavy batteries at the bottom) -quieter -minimal servicing / repair costs due to much simpler drive train with fewer moving parts and no fluid -more internal space (no crank shaft etc - especially in the back row this makes the middle seat so much more comfortable without a big bulge between your feet) -more external space (e.g the Tesla S has a front trunk (frunk) where the engine normally is) -safety factor - extra crumple space with the frunk and no engine to go into your legs in front on collision -cheaper to run especially in high gas cost areas like Europe -some areas have perks like using the HOV or bus lane -convenience factor of 'filling up' at home The environmental stuff is all goodness (and other responses have illustrated how this still holds even in coal dominated areas) but for many is not the driving factor. Obviously EVs are not for everyone. My analogy is that they are like SSDs - better in every way except size (range) and cost, and therefore not viable for some...but that will rapidly change as the technology moves on.
- amalag 13y ago
  One issue that still has to be solved is for people like me to charge them without a garage. Swapping batteries is interesting, I wonder if it will become a cheap reality.
  - tgcordell 13y ago
    This is a huge issue that doesn't get a lot of airtime. Many urban city dwellers rely on street parking. What solution is around for them to charge their vehicles? I love the concept Tesla is pushing, but this problem has me vexed.
jgable 13y ago
You are correct that today, in the US, on average, electric vehicles do not provide a significant improvement in emissions over hybrids like the Prius. [1] However, something to consider is that an electric vehicle effectively decouples transportation from the emissions source, forever. Power generation is projected to continue to get cleaner over time [2], and as power generation improves, the emissions of electric vehicles improve with it, even without any additional improvement of electric vehicles themselves. While US power generation may never be as free as fossil fuels as that of France, it is only getting better, and electric vehicles can ride that wave. If instead, we continue to drive gasoline vehicles (even hybrids), we will never stop pumping out CO2 with our cars. The only renewable resource that can power a car directly, without transitioning through electricity, is solar, and there just isn't enough power in the solar radiation that strikes the roof area of a car to be practical. Natural gas vehicles are actually a good stepping stone to reducing CO2 emissions, since methane (CH4) has roughly half the carbon per unit of energy. There is renewed interest these days in developing natural gas vehicles, but I personally think electric vehicles will win the race. [1] http://www.afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.php http://www.afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.php [2] http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/MT_electric.cfm http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/MT_electric.cfm
schiffern 13y ago
>The main sources of energy in the United States are still oil, coal, and natural gases. This is a problem that cries out for math. On average, the CO2 intensity of US electricity is 690 g/kWh. This makes the Model S the CO2 equivalent of a car getting 37 mpg. This is a lot higher than comparable cars. Of course CO2 isn't the only pollutant. It would also emit 0.43 g/mi of NOx (blowing the limit by nine times), 0.011 g/mi of NMOG (1/7th the limit), 0.015 g/mi of PM10 (the limit is 0.01 g/mi), and 0.13 g/mi of CO (a miniscule 1/27th of the limit). So it's a mixed bag. Caveat: I used the average US energy mix, but electricity production is highly regional. Here's a map Tesla made regarding pollution from electricity: http://www.teslamotors.com/goelectric#electricity http://www.teslamotors.com/goelectric#electricity Some states also let you choose where your power comes from, and of course rooftop solar is currently available (unlike rooftop oil wells). Sources: http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-resources/refs.html http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-resources/refs.html https://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/ld_ca.php https://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/ld_ca.php http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy07osti/38617.pdf http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy07osti/38617.pdf
samstave 13y ago
Personally, I never want to give another dime, directly, to any Gas company, ever. Their business practices are cancerous. Sadly, we don't have a choice in requiring energy - and while Enron is a perfect example of absolute corruption in the energy industry, if I can cut out at least vehicle gas requirements from my wallet, I'd be a happy man.
ssmoot 13y ago
I live in Texas and pay a half-cent premium to get 100% wind-power at around 9.6c per kWh to charge my Nissan Leaf. Since I use a 7kw charger at home almost exclusively then actually running the car (not including it's production) is actually extremely "green". The owner friendly side of the deal is that I never visit gas stations, never change oil or other fluids, don't have to do anything much to it outside of tire rotation. Maintenance is both very cheap and very convenient (since there isn't much of it).

by perryh2 13y ago

abrowne 13y ago

Isn't it more efficient to have fewer large power plants rather than lots of little power plants (i.e. car engines)? Maybe not with the transmission loss and factoring in the batteries...

ams6110 13y ago
Long distance utility transmission losses are around 6% according to Wikipedia. I don't know what losses there are in recharging the batteries, but it's surely not 100% efficient. I also don't know how that compares to costs (pipelines, trucking etc.) used to distribute petroleum fuels. Modern internal combustion engines with mandated emission controls are really very clean. Very likely cleaner than coal plant smokestack exhaust.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

beering 13y ago

I had the understanding that it could be more efficient to be able to use fewer power plants that can be operated efficiently or replaced individually rather than millions of independent ICEs. But I'm far from an expert on this.

rrhyne 13y ago

Supporting Tesla supports lowering the cost structure for batteries. Widespread use of solar will follow.

benjvi 13y ago

The combined efficiency of an electric motor + fossil fuel power plant is still much greater than in a conventional internal combustion engine and therefore the environmental impact from the car is much reduced regardless of the fuel source. A secondary factor - driving a car like a Tesla communicates an image of environmental responsibility. Even if the government and energy companies aren't supporting renewable fuels, you are. When there is a wind turbine on every corner, and a solar panel on every roof, you will be ready with your Tesla. You're a good citizen, and a forward-thinker...

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

simonsquiff 13y ago

The environmental stuff is actually just the icing on the cake - EVs have a number of advantages over internal combustion and the disadvantages keep getting smaller. -awesome acceleration due to instant torque and no gearbox -amazing handling due to low centre of gravity (heavy batteries at the bottom) -quieter -minimal servicing / repair costs due to much simpler drive train with fewer moving parts and no fluid -more internal space (no crank shaft etc - especially in the back row this makes the middle seat so much more comfortable without a big bulge between your feet) -more external space (e.g the Tesla S has a front trunk (frunk) where the engine normally is) -safety factor - extra crumple space with the frunk and no engine to go into your legs in front on collision -cheaper to run especially in high gas cost areas like Europe -some areas have perks like using the HOV or bus lane -convenience factor of 'filling up' at home The environmental stuff is all goodness (and other responses have illustrated how this still holds even in coal dominated areas) but for many is not the driving factor. Obviously EVs are not for everyone. My analogy is that they are like SSDs - better in every way except size (range) and cost, and therefore not viable for some...but that will rapidly change as the technology moves on.

amalag 13y ago
One issue that still has to be solved is for people like me to charge them without a garage. Swapping batteries is interesting, I wonder if it will become a cheap reality.
- tgcordell 13y ago
  This is a huge issue that doesn't get a lot of airtime. Many urban city dwellers rely on street parking. What solution is around for them to charge their vehicles? I love the concept Tesla is pushing, but this problem has me vexed.

jgable 13y ago

You are correct that today, in the US, on average, electric vehicles do not provide a significant improvement in emissions over hybrids like the Prius. [1] However, something to consider is that an electric vehicle effectively decouples transportation from the emissions source, forever. Power generation is projected to continue to get cleaner over time [2], and as power generation improves, the emissions of electric vehicles improve with it, even without any additional improvement of electric vehicles themselves. While US power generation may never be as free as fossil fuels as that of France, it is only getting better, and electric vehicles can ride that wave. If instead, we continue to drive gasoline vehicles (even hybrids), we will never stop pumping out CO2 with our cars. The only renewable resource that can power a car directly, without transitioning through electricity, is solar, and there just isn't enough power in the solar radiation that strikes the roof area of a car to be practical. Natural gas vehicles are actually a good stepping stone to reducing CO2 emissions, since methane (CH4) has roughly half the carbon per unit of energy. There is renewed interest these days in developing natural gas vehicles, but I personally think electric vehicles will win the race. [1] http://www.afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.php http://www.afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.php [2] http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/MT_electric.cfm http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/MT_electric.cfm

schiffern 13y ago

>The main sources of energy in the United States are still oil, coal, and natural gases. This is a problem that cries out for math. On average, the CO2 intensity of US electricity is 690 g/kWh. This makes the Model S the CO2 equivalent of a car getting 37 mpg. This is a lot higher than comparable cars. Of course CO2 isn't the only pollutant. It would also emit 0.43 g/mi of NOx (blowing the limit by nine times), 0.011 g/mi of NMOG (1/7th the limit), 0.015 g/mi of PM10 (the limit is 0.01 g/mi), and 0.13 g/mi of CO (a miniscule 1/27th of the limit). So it's a mixed bag. Caveat: I used the average US energy mix, but electricity production is highly regional. Here's a map Tesla made regarding pollution from electricity: http://www.teslamotors.com/goelectric#electricity http://www.teslamotors.com/goelectric#electricity Some states also let you choose where your power comes from, and of course rooftop solar is currently available (unlike rooftop oil wells). Sources: http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-resources/refs.html http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-resources/refs.html https://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/ld_ca.php https://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/ld_ca.php http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy07osti/38617.pdf http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy07osti/38617.pdf

samstave 13y ago

Personally, I never want to give another dime, directly, to any Gas company, ever. Their business practices are cancerous. Sadly, we don't have a choice in requiring energy - and while Enron is a perfect example of absolute corruption in the energy industry, if I can cut out at least vehicle gas requirements from my wallet, I'd be a happy man.

ssmoot 13y ago

I live in Texas and pay a half-cent premium to get 100% wind-power at around 9.6c per kWh to charge my Nissan Leaf. Since I use a 7kw charger at home almost exclusively then actually running the car (not including it's production) is actually extremely "green". The owner friendly side of the deal is that I never visit gas stations, never change oil or other fluids, don't have to do anything much to it outside of tire rotation. Maintenance is both very cheap and very convenient (since there isn't much of it).