Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

There's a Better Answer Than Electric Cars


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 Tatarewicz

Tatarewicz

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 483 posts

Posted 14 June 2018 - 08:44 AM

https://www.bloomber...n-electric-cars

 

Erich Sixt, chairman and chief executive officer of the Pullach, Germany-
based global car rental company that bears his family’s name, recently
described electric cars as a “costly political error” given their still
inferior range, long charging times and the huge investment necessary to
expand the charging infrastructure. It may have been a self-serving
statement (renters don’t like them), but he may also well be right: If a
paper published on Thursday correctly estimates the cost of extracting
carbon dioxide from the air, regulators could do better to concentrate on
that technology rather than on forcing vehicle electrification.

 

 

Carbon Engineering is a company co-founded by Harvard physicist David
Keith and funded, among others, by Microsoft founder Bill Gates. Since
2015, the firm has been running a CO2 extraction plant in Canada, testing
out a technology that was until recently rejected as too costly. Keith and
his collaborators, who wrote the paper, have used an independent cost
assessment to calculate that using the process they developed allows the
capture of a metric ton of carbon dioxide at the cost of $94 to $232,
depending on variable costs such as the price of natural gas. (Since
energy is used in the process, about 0.9 tons of CO2 is actually removed
from the atmosphere with each ton captured).

 

That is far lower than previous estimates for the technology, ranging from
$550 to $1,300 per ton. The paper’s authors explain that the reduction
comes from simply using industrial equipment already available on the
market without much customization, a strategy they put in place at the
Canadian plant.

At Keith’s prices, investing in CO2 capture can be a better idea both for
consumers and for the environment than car electrification. According to
the International Energy Agency, increasing the number of electric cars on
the road from the current 2 million to 280 million by 2040 will only
displace 1 percent of the expected global CO2 emissions, largely because
other demand for carbon-based energy, including from planes and ships,
will push emissions up – and because electricity to power the giant
electric vehicle fleet won’t come entirely from clean sources. To achieve
this unimpressive result, carmakers have already pledged some $90 billion
in EV investment, and that’s not counting the cost of the ubiquitous
infrastructure necessary to give EVs mass appeal, the investment needed to
expand power generation and network capacity and the government subsidies
to electric car buyers.

Since late last year, Carbon Engineering’s plant has been producing fuel
from the CO2 it extracts by combining it with hydrogen. The fuel is
compatible with current internal combustion engines, so there’s no need
for carmakers to invest in completely different technology. Since burning
the synthetic fuel can only release as much CO2 as was used in its
production, the whole cycle is pretty much carbon-neutral.

Keith calculates that at scale, his technology can produce fuel at $1 a
liter ($3.79 per gallon) – significantly higher than the current wholesale
prices. There’s no question that going over from fossil fuel to the
synthetic liquids would need to be subsidized by environmentally-friendly
governments, but such subsidies have a distinct advantage over incentives
for EV owners and investment in parallel infrastructure: Nothing will need
to change for the enormous existing fleet of cars, about 1 billion of
them. Existing gas stations will be able to handle the new liquids just as
they do fossil fuel, too. And the new fuels could be used for those modes
of transportation that aren’t even close to being electrified, such as
ships.

Obviously, producing enough synthetic fuel to reduce emissions
significantly will require lots of extraction capacity. According to the
paper, building a plant capable of capturing 980,000 tons of CO2 a year
requires some $1.1 billion of capital investment, which could be brought
down to $780 million if construction begins at scale. To cut the CO2
emissions predicted by the IEA for 2040 by 1 percent, or by 357 million
tons, would require $284 billion at Keith’s estimated prices. That number,
however, is comparable with the total investment necessary to go over to
electric cars. Besides, there are other carbon capture technologies that
can be deployed directly at industrial facilities that use fossil fuels;
developing them at scale could lower the required investment.

None of this is to say electric cars shouldn’t be developed or sold. There
are plenty of true believers who will buy them, probably enough to support
some production and investment. It’s just that governments, which have
recently latched on to vehicle electrification as compulsory, and even
begun putting out competing dates for their future bans on the sales of
cars with internal combustion engines, may actually be wrong-headed.

There’s no pressing need for regulators to rush into embracing the
imperfect technology behind today’s EVs and pushing it on manufacturers
and consumers. Other technology exists that could use the regulatory
attention and at least some of the government funds going into EV
promotion. Promoting its development won’t necessarily pay off, but it
could well lead to better, less traumatic outcomes for an important
established industry and for a billion (and counting) people who use its
products.
Leroy N. Soetoro

 

Comment: Best option is having every driver an Uber driver connected electronically via a trip booking agency which gives potential passengers a $ quote cost of nearest available vehicles: "Uber," regular taxi, public transit for a particular A-to-B trip along with estimated time of arrival of each. Work best in an AMA-type membership wherein qualified drivers and passengers would have been screened for a criminal-free record and no mental problems.  So instead of four cars on the road, there would be one with three passengers; great reduction in traffic volume so travel time reduced. No need for additional traffic lanes so more money available for grade separations and thus safer, more efficient travel. Driver gas costs nil or maybe a profit.

 

Also, money better spent than on EV's  is cars with co-driver steering and controls (co-pilot) so drivers with blackout/syncope possibility, heart or other conditions could have takeover/correct/over ride mistake; give something for old lady to do rather than just yap.

 


  • 0

#2 Vanka Savolov

Vanka Savolov

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1162 posts

Posted 14 June 2018 - 06:48 PM

Any short-comings of the electric car have been solved... it's getting past limited mindsets and allowing the 'natural' use of electricity to come into being.

 

Charging stations? Problem solved

 

Range? Problem solved.

 

Battery replacement? Problem solved.

 

If one only looks toward the status quo, then it is only that which one will see. Look beyond that severe limitation and you'll discover an infinite realm of possibilities.

 

You want to continue to pollute and effort to clean it up at the same time? Be my guest... but the question is: why?


  • 0

#3 Ivan88

Ivan88

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13602 posts

Posted 14 June 2018 - 08:07 PM

What is the cost of batteries & electricity for an electric car per 100,000 miles?

Last I checked when the battery goes out, your on the hook for thousands of dollar.

However, the gasoline & diesel big trucks people are buying cost thousands to repair too.

 

Cheap fuel production techniques have been repeatedly squashed.

The same squashers don't mind selling us a more expensive product to "solve" some problem.

Getting rid of asbestos, gasoline etc. to "save us from global warming, etc." is totally a racket run by the same folks who 

word hard to prevent inexpensive fuel solutions.


Edited by Ivan88, 14 June 2018 - 08:15 PM.

  • 0

#4 Vanka Savolov

Vanka Savolov

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1162 posts

Posted 14 June 2018 - 08:28 PM

What is the cost of batteries & electricity for an electric car per 100,000 miles?

Last I checked when the battery goes out, your on the hook for thousands of dollar.

However, the gasoline & diesel big trucks people are buying cost thousands to repair too.

 

Cheap fuel production techniques have been repeatedly squashed.

The same squashers don't mind selling us a more expensive product to "solve" some problem.

Getting rid of asbestos, gasoline etc. to "save us from global warming, etc." is totally a racket run by the same folks who 

word hard to prevent inexpensive fuel solutions.

Nikola Tesla designed and built an electric car in the late 1930s that didn't need batteries. That car out performed all the gas operated cars of the day.

 

In addition to the pollution problem of gas/diesel there are indeed maintenance costs... oil filters, air filters, engine coolant, oil changes, electrical and mechanical timing and all those safe guards, like dummy lights and computer feedback that's needed to alert the operator that something is about to blow, burn and or seize.

 

With electric cars much of that is absent. Maintenance costs are held to a minimum. And with the advancements since Tesla's time, there's too much that can make an electric car, by far, much more Superior than anything we have today, that is fuel powered.  


Edited by Vanka Savolov, 14 June 2018 - 08:29 PM.

  • 0

#5 Ivan88

Ivan88

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13602 posts

Posted 14 June 2018 - 08:32 PM

All of what you said about electric cars vs gasoline seems true.

However, the same sort of people pushing for electric cars are those who destroyed Tesla and brought us never ending wars and debt and ever increasing poverty.

But, then these same sorts brought us gasoline cars too.

Guess we are just going from one scam to another.


  • 0

#6 Vanka Savolov

Vanka Savolov

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1162 posts

Posted 14 June 2018 - 09:12 PM



All of what you said about electric cars vs gasoline seems true.

However, the same sort of people pushing for electric cars are those who destroyed Tesla and brought us never ending wars and debt and ever increasing poverty.

But, then these same sorts brought us gasoline cars too.

Guess we are just going from one scam to another.

For every one of them there is at least 10,000 of us... I'm just saying that the numbers simply do not add up. How could it be that so few could possibly control everyone else?

 

I say, with the full force and weight of my words and the power of God within me: STOP IT and STOP IT, NOW!! Stop letting those few run everything into the ground and pollute the rest. STOP IT!! DO NOT ALLOW THAT TO CONTINUE ON!!  (please)


  • 0

#7 Vanka Savolov

Vanka Savolov

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1162 posts

Posted 14 June 2018 - 09:18 PM

A rhyme, pulled from the Members Creative Arts Forum:

 

Energy Everywhere (EE = Ether Energy)

 

With energy everywhere, it makes

me wonder why we use polluting fuels?

In the minerals, in the water, in the air...

there is energy literally everywhere.

Tesla proved his 'air battery' and

Schauberger proved his water light.

Hutchinson proved his mineral battery

and yet we still live with pollution's plight?

 

So many have tried so very hard

to overcome the greed of others.

But their kind of greed controls

everything, and it truly smothers.

With jerks and asshole in charge

of our world, life just isn't worth living.

So I spend my days developing

technologies that are fit for giving.

 

I'll break that strangle hold if at all

possible, because the planet is dying.

So, I'll keep at it until I break that hold...

Or I will simply die trying.


  • 0

#8 RobertD

RobertD

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 21015 posts

Posted 15 June 2018 - 03:05 AM

Electric cars without batteries...
Problem solved.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2018 Pravda.Ru