Electric cars?

[JohnDe]

Noted, though my request for objective argument, objective argument is completely absent.

As I explained in detail above "Sorry, but I can't watch this guy........Show me someone with less of a chip on their shoulder, please."

 

[wayneL]

As I explained in detail above "Sorry, but I can't watch this guy........Show me someone with less of a chip on their shoulder, please."

So your argument is subjective rather than objective. Or, you are not addressing the objective points raised in the video.

"I don't like John cadogan, therefore he must be wrong”?

 

[JohnDe]

I agree, he is super hard to watch, and the times I have pushed through his BS intros to try and find out what he is actually saying I found all his arguments either have rather simple rebuttals or are just nonsense straw man arguments that we have talked about on this thread a million times.

Of course he appeals to the kind of folks that like the status quo, and fear change though.

I can already tell from the intro that he is going to go with the argument that because something isn't perfect, its not worth making a change, eg unless something is completely zero fossil fuels and zero impact to make, then its not worth changing from the 100% fossil fuel models.

They normally want to focus on the steadily reducing coal used to charge EV's, rather than the rapidly growing amounts of Renewables used, they want to focus on the impacts of mining the materials used to make EV's, but choose to ignore the impacts of making regular cars and their fuel, and the fact that the battery materials are recycled and may end up being used for generations.

-------------------------------
If I had to make a guess, I believe this guys biggest problem with Tesla is that it is messing with his core business that he advertises at the start of every video, he "helps you get new cars cheap" but he can't help you buy a Tesla, because they are direct to consumer, So he can't earn a fee from a Tesla sale.

Yes, I began watching his info videos since he first started on YouTube, but each one gets harder and harder. I can see why he could not continue with his past employers. I have breaks from him and try again but he is pretty consistent with his grating profile. I think that if he didn't try so hard to be controversial he cold be a great source of information. Instead he posts videos that are 15 to 20 minutes long but only give 5 minutes of useful information. Life is too short too short for his type of click bait.

 

[JohnDe]

So your argument is subjective rather than objective. Or, you are not addressing the objective points raised in the video.

"I don't like John cadogan, therefore he must be wrong”?

If you enjoy having nails scraped against a blackboard, you are a stronger person than me. I have watched him from day one and I watched him not long ago, I now watch him on an irregular basis.

I refuse to give him an income by watching his grating ‘try too hard’ videos that make fun of a particular societal type of Aussie person.

 

[Value Collector]

if we are genuine about reducing overall emissions then we must look at the situation here, and not in Iceland or wherever. Therefore,EVs may increase emissions in our country even if they would reduce emissions in another country.

Ev's won't increase our emissions here though, we actually produce large amounts of renewable energy in Australia, we would be better than the Colorado example in the video, where Ev's reduced the emissions to the equivalent of a car going 20km per litre.

Check on the link below, it shows live data of the fuel source used for Australian electricity, it up dates every 5 mins.

As I type this Tasmania and SA are 100% renewable, Victoria and NSW are over 50% renewable, Western Australia is 30% renewable and the sun is setting on Queensland so its dropped to about 20% renewable, but its also importing from NSW who as I said are 50% renewable at the moment

Also, Often Vic, SA and NSW produce large amounts of wind throughout the night during off peak hours when a large amount od EVS would be charging, having a solid amount of EV demand through out the night to absorb the excess wind produced encourages more renewable investments.

https://www.energymatters.com.au/energy-efficiency/australian-electricity-statistics/

 

[wayneL]

If you enjoy having nails scraped against a blackboard, you are a stronger person than me. I have watched him from day one and I watched him not long ago, I now watch him on an irregular basis.

I refuse to give him an income by watching his grating ‘try too hard’ videos that make fun of a particular societal type of Aussie person.

I give @Value Collector kudos for at least addressing the points made.

But you are just indulging in ad homonym fallacy, in spite of my repeated requests for some objective argument.

Step up to the plate, mate.

 

[JohnDe]

I give @Value Collector kudos for at least addressing the points made.

But you are just indulging in ad homonym fallacy, in spite of my repeated requests for some objective argument.

Step up to the plate, mate.

As I said previously, I refuse to give an income to a person that makes fun of others.

If you have any credit you would stop trying to bait me and would instead offer up another source. However, we all know that you can find no other source for your argument, so instead try to bait me to hide the lack of an argument.

Give me a credible source, I'll read and watch anything but I will not give that guy an income to reward his attacks on a particular Aussie that he, and it looks like you also, see ripe for attack.

 

[rederob]

if we are genuine about reducing overall emissions then we must look at the situation here, and not in Iceland or wherever. Therefore,EVs may increase emissions in our country even if they would reduce emissions in another country.

Completely false.
No EVs are made in Australia, so the only CO2 attributable to an EV will be from the energy source.

As ever, the situation is always far more complicated than the narrative suggests, notwithstanding arguments about the actual narrative.

It's actually very simple.

• EV manufacture is less energy intensive for a vehicle's body than an equivalent ICEv, but more effort goes into battery manufacture.
• The life cycle of an EV delivers a better CO2 outcome than for an ICEv in every circumstance

As has also been raised many times in this thread, health and safety benefits are in the billions for Australia alone.

 

[wayneL]

As I said previously, I refuse to give an income to a person that makes fun of others.

If you have any credit you would stop trying to bait me and would instead offer up another source. However, we all know that you can find no other source for your argument, so instead try to bait me to hide the lack of an argument.

Give me a credible source, I'll read and watch anything but I will not give that guy an income to reward his attacks on a particular Aussie that he, and it looks like you also, see ripe for attack.

I'm baiting you?

LMAO!

I posted a video from YouTube for information and consideration. You have a challenge with the author for whatever reason. That's quite okay, it's allowed, but your whole argument is that you don't like the author... Your argument coming subsequent to me posting a video.

Yet you think that I am baiing you?

Dude. I'm quite happy to have my ass handed to me in debates here. I have had my ass handed to me on several occasions before. And that's ok, that's how I choose to learn, by putting up arguments and being prepared to lose the debate... And if I lose I will quite happily change my mind.

However the argument that is least likely to make me change my mind, is that xyz is a cnut and shouldn't be listened to by virtue that someone doesn't like him.

That is just juvenile.

So when you have an actual objective argument, I will be quite prepared to listen, bruh... Even if it means that you suffer the indignity of having to listen to Johnny Cadogan.

 

[rederob]

Dude. I'm quite happy to have my ass handed to me in debates here. I have had my ass handed to me on several occasions before. And that's ok, that's how I choose to learn, by putting up arguments and being prepared to lose the debate... And if I lose I will quite happily change my mind.

Your habit has been to put the credible posters on ignore as your logic skills are consistently shown to be poor.

However the argument that is least likely to make me change my mind, is that xyz is a cnut and shouldn't be listened to by virtue that someone doesn't like him.
That is just juvenile.

Yet that's your practice!

So when you have an actual objective argument, I will be quite prepared to listen, bruh... Even if it means that you suffer the indignity of having to listen to Johnny Cadogan.

Isn't the point that the argument should be yours, and you merely use a medium - Cadogan in this instance - to present it in more detail?
If that is the case, then you have been provided information that renders his points as meritless. So will you change your mind?

 

[JohnDe]

I'm baiting you?

LMAO!

I posted a video from YouTube for information and consideration. You have a challenge with the author for whatever reason. That's quite okay, it's allowed, but your whole argument is that you don't like the author... Your argument coming subsequent to me posting a video.

Yet you think that I am baiing you?

Dude. I'm quite happy to have my ass handed to me in debates here. I have had my ass handed to me on several occasions before. And that's ok, that's how I choose to learn, by putting up arguments and being prepared to lose the debate... And if I lose I will quite happily change my mind.

However the argument that is least likely to make me change my mind, is that xyz is a cnut and shouldn't be listened to by virtue that someone doesn't like him.

That is just juvenile.

So when you have an actual objective argument, I will be quite prepared to listen, bruh... Even if it means that you suffer the indignity of having to listen to Johnny Cadogan.

'Dude' it's simple, if the argument that you have continued to push for the past few posts holds water then you will be able to show more than just one single example.

Show me another example, it's a simple request. Many intellectual debates can offer more than one example, otherwise it's just a personal opinion with no substance

 

[Smurf1976]

EVs may increase emissions in our country even if they would reduce emissions in another country.

You'd need an ICE with petrol / diesel consumption under 2.5 litres / 100km to match an EV charged from the grid using 1 kWh per 6km given that average emissions intensity is around 0.6 kg of CO2 per kWh and marginal emissions aren't hugely different to the average (sometimes lower, sometimes higher but as a whole they're similar).

Basically no ICE can actually achieve that meanwhile the bar keeps getting lower as the emissions intensity of electricity generation falls.

*Grid = either the National Electricity Market (NEM) which covers Tasmania, Victoria, ACT and the vast majority of the population in Queensland, NSW and SA or the South-West Interconnected System (SWIS) which covers most of the population in south-western WA including Perth. Both have almost identical overall emissions intensity and similar marginal emissions. For what it' worth the North-West Interconnected System (WA), the Darwin-Katherine system and the Mt Isa system aren't hugely different either.

Any argument against EV's relies on them using huge amounts of energy to manufacture.

 

[qldfrog]

You'd need an ICE with petrol / diesel consumption under 2.5 litres / 100km to match an EV charged from the grid using 1 kWh per 6km given that average emissions intensity is around 0.6 kg of CO2 per kWh and marginal emissions aren't hugely different to the average (sometimes lower, sometimes higher but as a whole they're similar).

Basically no ICE can actually achieve that meanwhile the bar keeps getting lower as the emissions intensity of electricity generation falls.

*Grid = either the National Electricity Market (NEM) which covers Tasmania, Victoria, ACT and the vast majority of the population in Queensland, NSW and SA or the South-West Interconnected System (SWIS) which covers most of the population in south-western WA including Perth. Both have almost identical overall emissions intensity and similar marginal emissions. For what it' worth the North-West Interconnected System (WA), the Darwin-Katherine system and the Mt Isa system aren't hugely different either.

Any argument against EV's relies on them using huge amounts of energy to manufacture.

relatively older diesel small car are not that far and EV is indeed 1kw per 5 to 6km. 5km in real conditions it seems;
I remember my dad's small car below 3.5l per 100km years ago

The fuel consumption of this version of Renault Twingo 1.5 dCi in combined mode (combining urban and highway driving) is 3.4 litres per 100km - this is the most economical Renault Twingo 2012 - 2014 version, fuel consumption in city - 4.1 l/100km, fuel consumption on highway - 3.1 l/100km. for a car which was within the 10kAUD new

Then how much energy lost to get that kw delivered and stored vs energy to get that diesel at the pump?
To consume this 15KW per 100km, how many KW did you actually feed to charge the battery after the charge/discharge losses..
I did here a basic computation now months ago on the Tesla figures and it was not that negligible, add transmission losses and it is not a nice figure;
all good when you charge with your panels at home, but a different story otherwise;
Obviously we need to compare apples with apples and not a Leaf and a Landcruiser.

In Australia at the time I did the computation, charging a tesla in Qld was creating more co2 on average than using a diesel efficient European car.
Obviously, as we will not get these ICE on the market anymore, this is quite irrelevant, the actual CO2 release ? obviously no one really care in the same way the plastic usage seems to have vanished since we spent billions with useless face masks, test kits and gloves.

 

[sptrawler]

I found this article interesting, some real life figures for the Hyundai ioniq5, with AC off and AC on.

You Asked, We Answered: Here's What You Wanted To Know About The Hyundai Ioniq 5 | Carscoops

The Hyundai Ioniq 5 is one of the most compelling EVs currently on sale

www.carscoops.com

 

[Smurf1976]

In Australia at the time I did the computation, charging a tesla in Qld was creating more co2 on average than using a diesel efficient European car.

The precise answer's an "it depends" thing since the marginal source of electricity and thus the emissions of charging an EV varies depending on when it's charged.

That said, as a generic answer the NEM emits 0.6 kg of CO2 per kWh and the SWIS is almost exactly the same on average.

Where it gets complex is when I point out that there are no large scale coal-fired power stations in either SA or Tasmania but yes coal will be the marginal source of generation in those states at times.

To throw an even bigger spanner in the works on that one, Victoria mines and burns brown coal but in practice black coal, which is not mined or used in Victoria for power generation, is in fact the marginal source of generation for that state more often than brown coal is.

All comes down to the capacity constraints of everything, transmission flows and so on but bottom line is charging your EV in Melbourne may well alter power generation somewhere north of Sydney, or in SA or Tasmania, or on occasion it might alter the output of a facility in Melbourne itself. It depends....

That said a "do the right thing" approach would be to not charge during the late afternoon - early evening period. If there's going to be inefficient "old clunker" plant running then that's when it'll most commonly be.

For petrol and diesel it also depends. Eg how much fuel was used to transport the fuel to the service station for a start isn't constant. Etc.

What can be said though is that the emissions intensity of electricity generation is slowly reducing but for petrol and diesel that isn't the case indeed if anything it's going up as the need to use lesser quality and harder to access sources of oil becomes greater.

 

[qldfrog]

The precise answer's an "it depends" thing since the marginal source of electricity and thus the emissions of charging an EV varies depending on when it's charged.

That said, as a generic answer the NEM emits 0.6 kg of CO2 per kWh and the SWIS is almost exactly the same on average.

Where it gets complex is when I point out that there are no large scale coal-fired power stations in either SA or Tasmania but yes coal will be the marginal source of generation in those states at times.

To throw an even bigger spanner in the works on that one, Victoria mines and burns brown coal but in practice black coal, which is not mined or used in Victoria for power generation, is in fact the marginal source of generation for that state more often than brown coal is.

All comes down to the capacity constraints of everything, transmission flows and so on but bottom line is charging your EV in Melbourne may well alter power generation somewhere north of Sydney, or in SA or Tasmania, or on occasion it might alter the output of a facility in Melbourne itself. It depends....

That said a "do the right thing" approach would be to not charge during the late afternoon - early evening period. If there's going to be inefficient "old clunker" plant running then that's when it'll most commonly be.

For petrol and diesel it also depends. Eg how much fuel was used to transport the fuel to the service station for a start isn't constant. Etc.

What can be said though is that the emissions intensity of electricity generation is slowly reducing but for petrol and diesel that isn't the case indeed if anything it's going up as the need to use lesser quality and harder to access sources of oil becomes greater.

What can be said and agreed for sure:
The concept and future for EV is bright, we need to sever ourselves from fossil fuel irrespective of greenwashing argument, and they remove pollution from cities.
Sadly, i think the target market for the first one is wrong:
You should ideally have EV in independent homes, not units , using PV and charging at midday.
Retiree mostly? Now reset is adding the WFH crowds so that's good
Not exactly the type of green ego boosting user who are current users.
It also means that having EVs in fleet (aka company cars) is BAD.
Because these users will put convenience first as they will not pay the costs and will not..well should not, be parked during the 7am to 6pm window.
If they are,they should not have company cars..but we will be talking PS and local gov. So.....
My point is like the plastic bag ban, there is a good deed presented as pretext, an overall positive target,
But an in the fact worst immediate outcome
yet in a world where narrative is above facts,who cares????
Just spare me the green washing.
We will get EVs, planete resources will be wasted and perfectly good ice vehicle crushed unnecessarily but a lot of money and taxes done along the way with more control and pain for the commoners.
Yet these lithium batteries EV will be around in the next decades,no denying

 

[rederob]

Sadly, i think the target market for the first one is wrong:
You should ideally have EV in independent homes, not units , using PV and charging at midday.

It makes no difference who owns the EV. However, charging days and times can significantly alter their CO2 footprint, as @Smurf1976 has pointed out.

It also means that having EVs in fleet (aka company cars) is BAD.
Because these users will put convenience first as they will not pay the costs and will not..well should not, be parked during the 7am to 6pm window.

As taxing regimes may well be based on distance travelled in future it is probable that company/fleet vehicles will actually make the larger contribution to government coffers.

But an in the fact worst immediate outcome
yet in a world where narrative is above facts,who cares????

Can someone translate this into a sense please.
What is "the narrative"?
The facts are obvious, as presented in this thread.
Displaced ICEVs will be shipped off to nations which are less able to afford either new ICEVs or NEVs as has always been the case.

 

[mullokintyre]

I agree, he is super hard to watch, and the times I have pushed through his BS intros to try and find out what he is actually saying I found all his arguments either have rather simple rebuttals or are just nonsense straw man arguments that we have talked about on this thread a million times.

Of course he appeals to the kind of folks that like the status quo, and fear change though.

I can already tell from the intro that he is going to go with the argument that because something isn't perfect, its not worth making a change, eg unless something is completely zero fossil fuels and zero impact to make, then its not worth changing from the 100% fossil fuel models.

They normally want to focus on the steadily reducing coal used to charge EV's, rather than the rapidly growing amounts of Renewables used, they want to focus on the impacts of mining the materials used to make EV's, but choose to ignore the impacts of making regular cars and their fuel, and the fact that the battery materials are recycled and may end up being used for generations.

-------------------------------
If I had to make a guess, I believe this guys biggest problem with Tesla is that it is messing with his core business that he advertises at the start of every video, he "helps you get new cars cheap" but he can't help you buy a Tesla, because they are direct to consumer, So he can't earn a fee from a Tesla sale.

Rule no 1.
Follow the money.
Rule no 2.
Follow rule no 1.
Mick

 

[sptrawler]

H2 fuel cell trucks in Europe.

The First Hydrogen Trucks Are Rolling in Europe - Fuelcellsworks

The first fuel cell trucks made their first kilometers in Switzerland and the Netherlands. Only Hyundai and Hyzon now produce hydrogen trucks in series. eMAG TR...

fuelcellsworks.com

 

[rederob]

H2 fuel cell trucks in Europe.

The First Hydrogen Trucks Are Rolling in Europe - Fuelcellsworks

The first fuel cell trucks made their first kilometers in Switzerland and the Netherlands. Only Hyundai and Hyzon now produce hydrogen trucks in series. eMAG TR...

fuelcellsworks.com

Do we need a thread for electric trucks now?
Nikola in USA are well behind where they hoped to be with FCETs - (T = trucks) - but the business model they are working looks like being successful as they are using a "hub" where the "spokes" are predetermined destinations.
Looks like the USA is behind Europe in FCETs and behind China in NEVs.

On the topic of cars and the pivot to NEVs, Hyundai's intention is clear and ICEVs are dead in their factories. I was going to post more on the various companies that are discontinuing ICE models in favour of NEVs but the list is literally as long as the number of companies making cars, full stop.