Speak EV - Electric Car Forums banner
221 - 240 of 257 Posts

·
Registered
VW ID.3 Life Pro Performance, MY22 (software v2.3)
Joined
·
170 Posts
Well fleet CO2 emissions from vehicles were increasing in the EU 2015 up to 2019, except in Norway, Sweden, Iceland and the Netherlands, where higher rates of EV adoption made them the exception and fleet emissions fell.
Apparently if we want fleet emissions to fall we need more EVs and more legislation to restrict fleet emissions. It seems clear given a choice the automakers are not interested in reducing emissions, hence they no longer have a choice.
Rising fleet emissions are a lot to do with people buying bigger and yet bigger cars. Car makers (in the EU at least) have fleet emissions targets to meet, and one way to offset the trend to SUVs etc is to sell some EVs (and/or buy credits from others who do, notably Tesla).

On the subject of “hard deadlines”, I don’t think this looks exactly like a cliff edge (from insideEVs):

COUNTRIES AND U.S. STATES WITH GAS CAR BANS
  1. Norway - 2025
  2. South Korea - 2025
  3. Belgium - 2026
  4. Austria - 2027
  5. Slovenia - 2030
  6. Iceland - 2030
  7. Netherlands - 2030
  8. Denmark - 2030
  9. Ireland - 2030
  10. Israel - 2030
  11. Sweden - 2030
  12. India - 2030
  13. Washington - 2030
  14. Scotland - 2032
  15. Japan - 2035
  16. United Kingdom - 2035
  17. California - 2035
  18. New York - 2035 (just announced)
  19. Canada - 2035/2040
  20. Cape Verde - 2035
  21. China - 2040
  22. Singapore - 2040
  23. Sri Lanka - 2040
  24. Taiwan - 2040
  25. France - 2040
  26. Spain - 2040
  27. Egypt - 2040
  28. Costa Rica - 2050
Look how many are missing, and then remember that these are just “end of sale” dates, not “end of use”.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,672 Posts
.... where they don't actually make any cars.

(#save the world and export your CO2 to another country)
Well I think they make cars in Sweden and the Netherlands... but yes, these are countries where regulations are it seems less influenced by lobbying from legacy ICE manufacturers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,672 Posts
Rising fleet emissions are a lot to do with people buying bigger and yet bigger cars. Car makers (in the EU at least) have fleet emissions targets to meet, and one way to offset the trend SUVs etc is to sell some EVs (and/or buy credits from others who do, notably Tesla).

On the subject of “hard deadlines”, I don’t think this looks exactly like a cliff edge (from insideEVs):

COUNTRIES AND U.S. STATES WITH GAS CAR BANS
  1. Norway - 2025
  2. South Korea - 2025
  3. Belgium - 2026
  4. Austria - 2027
  5. Slovenia - 2030
  6. Iceland - 2030
  7. Netherlands - 2030
  8. Denmark - 2030
  9. Ireland - 2030
  10. Israel - 2030
  11. Sweden - 2030
  12. India - 2030
  13. Washington - 2030
  14. Scotland - 2032
  15. Japan - 2035
  16. United Kingdom - 2035
  17. California - 2035
  18. New York - 2035 (just announced)
  19. Canada - 2035/2040
  20. Cape Verde - 2035
  21. China - 2040
  22. Singapore - 2040
  23. Sri Lanka - 2040
  24. Taiwan - 2040
  25. France - 2040
  26. Spain - 2040
  27. Egypt - 2040
  28. Costa Rica - 2050
Look how many are missing, and then remember that these are just “end of sale” dates, not “end of use”.
Yes, Indeed. Larger vehicles and SUVs seem to have been the main driver of increasing emissions. Again in some countries higher vehicle weights attract higher taxes and have done for many years...

One way or another fleet emissions now have to come down... this is driven by regulations. I don't imagine that would happen anytime soon without regulation.
 

·
I'm not crazy, the attack has begun.
Joined
·
30,973 Posts
Fleet emissions are only a very small part of the conversation I was putting forward about CO2.

Fleet emissions reveal nothing at all about the short term CO2 burden of manufacturing all these new BEVs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,489 Posts
Aren't there like a gazillion credible reports that show the overall CO2 emissions involved in making, distributing and running EVs over the lifetime of the car is less than that of making, distributing and running ICE cars? I'm sure @donald will say they're all flawed in some way, and only he speaks the truth... and I can't be bothered to do the research to refute him. But somebody else who is better informed than I am help me out here... most reports say that even including manufacturing, EVs are still responsible for less CO2 than ICE vehicles are if you also include their manufacture etc. in the total figure too?
 

·
Registered
Renault Zoe 50
Joined
·
23,039 Posts
Add to that the fact that EVs piggy back off existing infrastructure.

Whereas oil and gas has a huge network and carbon footprint for exploration, extraction and refining.

Of course I expect @donald knew that. ;)
 

·
I'm not crazy, the attack has begun.
Joined
·
30,973 Posts
Aren't there like a gazillion credible reports that show the overall CO2 emissions involved in making, distributing and running EVs over the lifetime of the car is less than that of making, distributing and running ICE cars?
The key point being 'lifetime of the car', but if you bunch up the manufacturing of them into a short space of time over then next few years then it is a CO2 burden whilst the fleet is repopulated from ICE to BEV.

Do I really have to explain such mundane points?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
586 Posts
Aren't there like a gazillion credible reports that show the overall CO2 emissions involved in making, distributing and running EVs over the lifetime of the car is less than that of making, distributing and running ICE cars?
Yes, they all generally find that EVs create more CO2 emissions during manufacture than ICE, typically due to the batteries, but that over the full life of the vehicle the total emissions are lower because of the efficiency. How quickly they break-even with ICE vehicles on emissions and how much lower those total emissions are is very sensitive to assumptions about the electricity used to charge them. As a rule, if you are buying a new vehicle and you do average annual mileages or more then an EV is the lower carbon option.

That said though EVs aren't a no carbon option and many of the reports find significant CO2 emissions during manufacture, EVs aren't good for the planet, they're just less bad than ICE.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,489 Posts
The key point being 'lifetime of the car', but if you bunch up the manufacturing of them into a short space of time over then next few years then it is a CO2 burden whilst the fleet is repopulated from ICE to BEV.

Do I really have to explain such mundane points?
But if they didn’t need to build all those EVs over the next few years, wouldn’t they have had to build a load more ICE vehicles instead? People are still going to be buying new cars either way. If the percentage of EVs amongst the new cars that would be made/sold anyway increases, then that’s less CO2.

If 100 new cars would be sold either way. Fewer CO2 would be produced overall if 40 of them were EVs and 60 of them were ICE than if 20 of them were EVs and 80 of them ICE. Right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
586 Posts
The key point being 'lifetime of the car', but if you bunch up the manufacturing of them into a short space of time over then next few years then it is a CO2 burden whilst the fleet is repopulated from ICE to BEV.
That's a non-issue because most reports find the EV breaks even on CO2 emissions with a comparable ICE within a few years at typical mileages so in the first few years emissions are higher but by the 5 year mark on an individual EV they are even or typically better, and then lower for the remaining life. But it's all sensitive to annual mileages and electricity mix.

Plus there is no bunching effect, EV production is taking market share from ICE, but total vehicle manufacturing is no higher. There is no mass scrapping and premature retirement of existing ICE vehicles, with a huge bunching of EV manufacturing. It's a gradual transition as the UK fleet gets steadily replaced.
 

·
I'm not crazy, the attack has begun.
Joined
·
30,973 Posts
But if they didn’t need to build all those EVs over the next few years, wouldn’t they have had to build a load more ICE vehicles instead?
That was my (missed [as usual]) point; the materials for the next lot of ICE cars are still rolling around the roads, they are taken off, scrapped, and renewable energy used to recycle them.

Unfortunately you can't make copper coils, nickel and cobalt batteries, power electronics, neodymium magnets, etc. from recycled steel. What you can make is new steel!
 

·
I'm not crazy, the attack has begun.
Joined
·
30,973 Posts
That's a non-issue because most reports find the EV breaks even on CO2 emissions with a comparable ICE within a few years at typical mileages so in the first few years emissions are higher but by the 5 year mark on an individual EV they are even or typically better, and then lower for the remaining life. But it's all sensitive to annual mileages and electricity mix.

Plus there is no bunching effect, EV production is taking market share from ICE, but total vehicle manufacturing is no higher. There is no mass scrapping and premature retirement of existing ICE vehicles, with a huge bunching of EV manufacturing. It's a gradual transition as the UK fleet gets steadily replaced.
Maybe, but these are assertions and I was asking someone for some numbers. None offered, just some hand-wavy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,489 Posts
That was my (missed [as usual]) point; the materials for the next lot of ICE cars are still rolling around the roads, they are taken off, scrapped, and renewable energy used to recycle them.

Unfortunately you can't make copper coils, nickel and cobalt batteries, power electronics, neodymium magnets, etc. from recycled steel. What you can make is new steel!
Well maybe you’re right. Though, I feel as with most things that it is unlikely that bloke-on-internet is right while scientific, social, and governmental consensus is wrong.

If bloke-on-internet is right, how’d he spot the ‘truth’ faster than the extremely wealthy oil companies? If the whole environmental rationale for banning the sale of new ICE cars can be debunked so easily, then I’m surprised to hear it here first from bloke-on-internet.
 

·
I'm not crazy, the attack has begun.
Joined
·
30,973 Posts
Well maybe you’re right. Though, I feel as with most things that it is unlikely that bloke-on-internet is right while scientific, social, and governmental consensus is wrong.
I don't think there is scientific consensus on EVs. Social consensus is even less meaningful than one person's view.

... and governmental consensus .... :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

If bloke-on-internet is right, how’d he spot the ‘truth’ faster than the extremely wealthy oil companies?
Because this bloke-on-internet has been a Chartered Engineer working on BEVs since early 2000's, before folk-on-internet even knew commercial BEVs would be soon on the market.

I mean, FFS, there are literally people buying their own BEVs right now who were shitting in their nappies when I was figuring out test protocols for BEV wiring systems of the future.

If the whole environmental rationale for banning the sale of new ICE cars can be debunked so easily, then I’m surprised to hear it here first from bloke-on-internet.
Well, it is a complicated legal-politico thing. Gov has already been fined and held up as failing to do anything about emissions in the past, so 'doing something' looks better than 'doing nothing', so best not to go looking for more problems in the 'doing something' line of action else they might be back into court.

Look, there is nothing hugely bad in my view to press ahead with it and I have never said there was, that is something you've read into what I wrote. My point is to ask where all the 'stuff' to make all these BEVs is going to come from.

Unless you are an alchemist, you can't recycle steel into copper.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
586 Posts
Maybe, but these are assertions and I was asking someone for some numbers. None offered, just some hand-wavy.
The have been lots of discussions and threads on this site where I and other posters have included links to reports from Polestar on the Polestar 2 and Mercedes EQC showing manufacturing emissions and carbon footprint, break-even with ICE etc. Plenty of statistics on vehicle registrations over at the SMMT showing trends and proportion which are EV, the data is there if you want it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,489 Posts
I don't think there is scientific consensus on EVs. Social consensus is even less meaningful than one person's view.

... and governmental consensus .... :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:


Because this bloke-on-internet has been a Chartered engineer working on BEVs since early 2000's, before folk-on-internet even knew commercial BEVs would be soon on the market.


Well, it is a complicated legal-politico thing. Gov has already been fined and held up as failing to do anything about emissions in the past, so 'doing something' looks better than 'doing nothing', so best not to go looking for more problems in the 'doing something' line of action else they might be back into court.

Look, there is nothing hugely bad in my view to press ahead with it and I have never said there was, that is something you've read into what I wrote. My point is to ask where all the 'stuff' to make all these BEVs is going to come from.

Unless you are an alchemist, you can't recycle steel into copper.
If it were true that banning the sale of new ICE cars in 2035 would lead to more CO2 emissions due to missed recycling opportunities of existing ICE cars (wait a minute, can’t recycled steel be used in the non-battery bits of EVs? Oh, never mind…) than not banning the sale of new ICE cars, someone would have proven it scientifically by now. There’d be a study, with facts, and numbers and things in it. That would then breed other studies, the finance to continue making such studies coming from oil companies would be endless. Scientific consensus would shift - due to these reports proving the ‘truth’ - governments would change policies.

Unless you think there’s a massive global conspiracy to cover up the scientifically provable fallacy of banning new ICE car sales. That the reports proving you right are out there, but they’ve been suppressed somehow. All global governments know it’s a lie, but they are in cahoots to fool their citizens. In which case, I recommend you take it up with your local illuminati lizard person… uh, I mean, member of parliament forthwith!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,949 Posts
There's plenty of Lithium in sea water apparently, and there's even measurable qty of Gold in a cubic metre of the stuff! Surely Nickel, Manganese, Cobalt,and just about every mineral known must be in there as well, so can't we find a way to extract it economically? A challenge for the chemists (and I'm not one! :)).
 

·
I'm not crazy, the attack has begun.
Joined
·
30,973 Posts
The have been lots of discussions and threads on this site where I and other posters have included links to reports from Polestar on the Polestar 2 and Mercedes EQC showing manufacturing emissions and carbon footprint, break-even with ICE etc. Plenty of statistics on vehicle registrations over at the SMMT showing trends and proportion which are EV, the data is there if you want it.
Number on where you get all the raw materials from ....
 

·
I'm not crazy, the attack has begun.
Joined
·
30,973 Posts
If it were true that banning the sale of new ICE cars in 2035 would lead to more CO2 emissions due to missed recycling opportunities of existing ICE cars (wait a minute, can’t recycled steel be used in the non-battery bits of EVs? Oh, never mind…) than not banning the sale of new ICE cars, someone would have proven it scientifically by now.
The 'consensus' is happy to boost CO2 for a while so long as it drops overall.

If one were to waste one's time proving that, it'd get greenwashed with 'yes, but we have to start somewhere and do it' sort of thing, which is a perfectly arguable proposition I'm not disagreeing, but that CO2 will go up before it goes down isn't really anything anyone seems bothered about.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
586 Posts
The 'consensus' is happy to boost CO2 for a while so long as it drops overall.

If one were to waste one's time proving that, it'd get greenwashed with 'yes, but we have to start somewhere and do it' sort of thing, which is a perfectly arguable proposition I'm not disagreeing, but that CO2 will go up before it goes down isn't really anything anyone seems bothered about.
These are assertions, no evidence provided, just some hand-wavy.
 
221 - 240 of 257 Posts
Top