https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/01/south-america-s-lithium-fields-reveal-the-dark-side-of-our-electric-future

Don't pat yourself on the back just yet.

On 2022-08-19, floaterjr <gpgmga@gmail.com> wrote:
> https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/01/south-america-s-lithium-fields-reveal-the-dark-side-of-our-electric-future
>
> Don't pat yourself on the back just yet.

All those people got educations and can't stop writing the stupid 'save our
future" crap which is clearly BS to anyone who can do math.

--
If you think nobody cares if you're alive, try missing a couple of
car payments. -- Earl Wilson

Con Reeder, unhyphenated American <constance@duxmail.com> wrote:
> On 2022-08-19, floaterjr <gpgmga@gmail.com> wrote:
>> https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/01/south-america-s-lithium-fields-reveal-the-dark-side-of-our-electric-future
>>
>> Don't pat yourself on the back just yet.
>
> All those people got educations and can't stop writing the stupid 'save our
> future" crap which is clearly BS to anyone who can do math.
>

There are multiple studies and tools on the environmental costs and
paybacks for EVs that are not political rhetoric.

In general EVs have a higher environmental cost to build and dispose of
(which is what you guys are emphasizing) and lower environmental cost to
run, and the question is where is the crossover point. There was a good one
I used a year or so ago that I’m too lazy to look for now where you input
your car model and types of fuel used by your electric utility and get how
many miles you have to drive it over the lifetime of the car to break even
environmentally.

The worst case scenario, a huge lithium battery and a purely coal fired
electric utility yielded a payback of around 50k miles. For most of the
mainstream models and a normal utility power mix, the payback was 20k miles
or less.

They pay back because even with the dirtiest electric utility out there the
efficiency of scale of using a utility grid is better than a 30-35%
efficient combustion engine.

There are significant personal benefits as well like charging your car at
home every night and not having to visit gas stations, not needing oil
changes or emissions tests, etc. I watched this year’s gas price gyrations
mainly as an observer.

Btw I agree it isn’t for everyone or for every use case, which is why my
primary driver is a PHEV with 50 miles of battery range. What this means in
real life is I only use gas on road trips. It’s the best of both worlds, I
can go months without buying gas but it’s there for me when I need the
range.

--
“I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian,
liberal personality.” — Altie

On 8/19/2022 10:23 AM, xyzzy wrote:
> Con Reeder, unhyphenated American <constance@duxmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2022-08-19, floaterjr <gpgmga@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/01/south-america-s-lithium-fields-reveal-the-dark-side-of-our-electric-future
>>>
>>> Don't pat yourself on the back just yet.
>>
>> All those people got educations and can't stop writing the stupid 'save our
>> future" crap which is clearly BS to anyone who can do math.
>>
>
> There are multiple studies and tools on the environmental costs and
> paybacks for EVs that are not political rhetoric.
>
> In general EVs have a higher environmental cost to build and dispose of
> (which is what you guys are emphasizing) and lower environmental cost to
> run, and the question is where is the crossover point. There was a good one
> I used a year or so ago that I’m too lazy to look for now where you input
> your car model and types of fuel used by your electric utility and get how
> many miles you have to drive it over the lifetime of the car to break even
> environmentally.
>
> The worst case scenario, a huge lithium battery and a purely coal fired
> electric utility yielded a payback of around 50k miles. For most of the
> mainstream models and a normal utility power mix, the payback was 20k miles
> or less.
>
> They pay back because even with the dirtiest electric utility out there the
> efficiency of scale of using a utility grid is better than a 30-35%
> efficient combustion engine.
>
> There are significant personal benefits as well like charging your car at
> home every night and not having to visit gas stations, not needing oil
> changes or emissions tests, etc. I watched this year’s gas price gyrations
> mainly as an observer.
>
> Btw I agree it isn’t for everyone or for every use case, which is why my
> primary driver is a PHEV with 50 miles of battery range. What this means in
> real life is I only use gas on road trips. It’s the best of both worlds, I
> can go months without buying gas but it’s there for me when I need the
> range.
>

This is a big issue in my area. Lots of obtuse ideas. A neighboring
township to mine is facing recall of 4/5 of their board for not trying
to keep solar out (which is illegal and will bring lawsuits).

--
ÄLSKAR - Fänga Dagen

Слава Україні та НАТО

On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 6:46:48 AM UTC-7, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:
> On 2022-08-19, floaterjr <gpg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/01/south-america-s-lithium-fields-reveal-the-dark-side-of-our-electric-future
> >
> > Don't pat yourself on the back just yet.
> All those people got educations and can't stop writing the stupid 'save our
> future" crap which is clearly BS to anyone who can do math.

That kind of math lies and I'm living proof. I'd be dead in any real economic, etc. mathematical scenario.

Mike

On 2022-08-19, xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com> wrote:
> Con Reeder, unhyphenated American <constance@duxmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2022-08-19, floaterjr <gpgmga@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/01/south-america-s-lithium-fields-reveal-the-dark-side-of-our-electric-future
>>>
>>> Don't pat yourself on the back just yet.
>>
>> All those people got educations and can't stop writing the
>> stupid 'save our future" crap which is clearly BS to anyone who
>> can do math.
>>
>
> There are multiple studies and tools on the environmental costs and
> paybacks for EVs that are not political rhetoric.
>
> In general EVs have a higher environmental cost to build and dispose of
> (which is what you guys are emphasizing) and lower environmental cost to
> run,

If you're assuming wind/solar power and are not addressing the storage
problem, that doesn't fully load the cost to run.

> and the question is where is the crossover point. There was a good one
> I used a year or so ago that I’m too lazy to look for now where you input
> your car model and types of fuel used by your electric utility and get how
> many miles you have to drive it over the lifetime of the car to break even
> environmentally.

I am far from convinced that these studies really account for all the
environmental cost, particularly for land use. And I am really not
convinced that they pay attention to the real cost of scale-up. None
of these things have ever survived unsubsidized. Studies are studies,
the real world is the real world.

> The worst case scenario, a huge lithium battery and a purely coal fired
> electric utility yielded a payback of around 50k miles. For most of the
> mainstream models and a normal utility power mix, the payback was 20k miles
> or less.

That sounds unbelievable. But even if it were so, what about the huge
infrastructure investment necessary to support those vehicles? What
provision for the problems with evacuation in a disaster, long trips,
and blizzards and other long traffic backups? What about battery
fires? How about capital cost for battery replacement?

>
> They pay back because even with the dirtiest electric utility out there the
> efficiency of scale of using a utility grid is better than a 30-35%
> efficient combustion engine.

Electric motors may be 83% efficient, but there are other drains to
the efficiency of the whole system. Batteries lose charge, lose capacity
over time, and take time to charge.

>
> There are significant personal benefits as well like charging your car at
> home every night and not having to visit gas stations, not needing oil
> changes or emissions tests, etc. I watched this year’s gas price gyrations
> mainly as an observer.
>
> Btw I agree it isn’t for everyone or for every use case, which is why my
> primary driver is a PHEV with 50 miles of battery range. What this means in
> real life is I only use gas on road trips. It’s the best of both worlds, I
> can go months without buying gas but it’s there for me when I need the
> range.

For an urban commuter, I can see this. For my use profile, that is
worse than useless. One big issue is storage -- I can disconnect
the battery on my gasoline vehicle and put it in storage for 6 months,
no problem. (I have a car in storage at all times.) There are big
problems with doing that for an electic vehicle, including safety
of keeping it in a garage.

I can see a use for some electric and hybrid vehicles. And I can see
that if we get to plentiful nuclear power, that percentage of use
could be pretty high and we could significantly reduce CO2 emissions.

But the goal of 100% electric by 2035, powered by wind and solar, is
obviously an opium dream. As I said 15 years ago when we talked about
this, the constant claims of "green power is right around the corner",
"the smart grid is right around the corner", "solar power is
increasing in efficiency and producing power at scale is right around
the corner" is BS. It's fifteen years later, and they can't even prove
the corner exists yet.

And the assumption that it will "save the world" doesn't follow from a
simple efficiency equation. That will require far more than electric
car technology, and we don't even know that reducing CO2 will make any
real dent in the climate or whether we're going to get into dangerous
territory.

I have no problem with private companies investing every dollar they
want to invest. I can choose not to invest in them. I do have a huge
problem with government subsidies. That extorts money at gunpoint from
me to support investments I don't think make sense.

--
Fast, reliable, cheap. Pick two and we'll talk.
-- unknown

On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 7:04:48 AM UTC-5, floaterjr wrote:
> https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/01/south-america-s-lithium-fields-reveal-the-dark-side-of-our-electric-future
>
> Don't pat yourself on the back just yet.

Would you feel safer hitchhiking if it were an ev rather than a conventional gas guzzler

Nice girl and hitchhiking Are generally inconsistent

If you accepted a ride from an ev, would they still call you a tramp

I remember this guy my girlfriend really liked and she hitchhiked about two hundred miles

But his mom disapproved of it and would not let them date

Would an ev make the ride more respectable?

Years later he is married to a veterinarian in his department
I also noticed he was a tub of lard, probably heart attack

My used to have him and his cousin stay with us overnight, so they could participate in our annual memorial day weekend camping trip

the old fold out couch in the dining room

hey overnighted there

I think my dad was good friends with their dad and hoped one of us would marry either one

I found neither attractive physically or mentally and i think they thought the same about me

And also I can't drive

mk5000

With deception and lies
An unconventional mind
Was your ticket to die
You may have found--Dot in the Sky
by Drab Majesty

Con Reeder, unhyphenated American <constance@duxmail.com> wrote:
> On 2022-08-19, xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Con Reeder, unhyphenated American <constance@duxmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 2022-08-19, floaterjr <gpgmga@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/01/south-america-s-lithium-fields-reveal-the-dark-side-of-our-electric-future
>>>>
>>>> Don't pat yourself on the back just yet.
>>>
>>> All those people got educations and can't stop writing the
>>> stupid 'save our future" crap which is clearly BS to anyone who
>>> can do math.
>>>
>>
>> There are multiple studies and tools on the environmental costs and
>> paybacks for EVs that are not political rhetoric.
>>
>> In general EVs have a higher environmental cost to build and dispose of
>> (which is what you guys are emphasizing) and lower environmental cost to
>> run,
>
> If you're assuming wind/solar power and are not addressing the storage
> problem, that doesn't fully load the cost to run.
>
>> and the question is where is the crossover point. There was a good one
>> I used a year or so ago that I’m too lazy to look for now where you input
>> your car model and types of fuel used by your electric utility and get how
>> many miles you have to drive it over the lifetime of the car to break even
>> environmentally.
>
> I am far from convinced that these studies really account for all the
> environmental cost, particularly for land use. And I am really not
> convinced that they pay attention to the real cost of scale-up. None
> of these things have ever survived unsubsidized. Studies are studies,
> the real world is the real world.
>

I was going to argue against your specific points but then I realized your
response just boils down to “studies that don’t confirm my priors are
obviously flawed even though I haven’t seen them”. You know all these
flaws of studies you haven’t seen. I mean you’re attacking a straw man of a
grid powered by green energy when I specifically said that they take into
account the actual mix of sources in the grid, or you’re sure they don’t
account for energy and environmental losses in the electric grid even
though they are specifically comparing overall grid efficiency with ICE
efficiency (which also has a grid with losses, like spills, leaks, refinery
leaks and emissions, wellhead gad burn offs, etc)

> For an urban commuter, I can see this. For my use profile, that is
> worse than useless. One big issue is storage -- I can disconnect
> the battery on my gasoline vehicle and put it in storage for 6 months,
> no problem. (I have a car in storage at all times.) There are big
> problems with doing that for an electic vehicle, including safety
> of keeping it in a garage.

No there actually aren’t. The process for storing an EV long term is charge
it to 80%, take it off the charger, and then just like in an ICE vehicle
remove or disconnect the 12v battery and put it on a tender. (EVs have 12v
batteries for starting (basically closing relays) and powering accessories
just like ICE cars). They actually store better because they don’t have gas
to go bad or nearly as many lubricants and rubber hoses to leak or rot.

> But the goal of 100% electric by 2035, powered by wind and solar, is
> obviously an opium dream.

Obviously but like I said no one is assuming that in their payback
calculations. They are using the energy grid as it exists today.

As far as your concern about battery fires you do know that vehicle fires
in normal ICE vehicles are also a thing, right? You just aren’t attuned to
them because they aren’t novel. Just Google “car catches fire in driveway”
and look at all the local news reports, I did and none of them were EVs.
Heck my ex-wife’s Ford Explorer had two recalls where they told her to park
it away from any houses until the recalls were done because of the fire
hazard (and in one of them the “fix” was to disable the cruise control).

--
“I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian,
liberal personality.” — Altie

On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 5:09:01 PM UTC-5, xyzzy wrote:
> Con Reeder, unhyphenated American <cons...@duxmail.com> wrote:
> > On 2022-08-19, xyzzy <xyzzy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Con Reeder, unhyphenated American <cons...@duxmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On 2022-08-19, floaterjr <gpg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/01/south-america-s-lithium-fields-reveal-the-dark-side-of-our-electric-future
> >>>>
> >>>> Don't pat yourself on the back just yet.
> >>>
> >>> All those people got educations and can't stop writing the
> >>> stupid 'save our future" crap which is clearly BS to anyone who
> >>> can do math.
> >>>
> >>
> >> There are multiple studies and tools on the environmental costs and
> >> paybacks for EVs that are not political rhetoric.
> >>
> >> In general EVs have a higher environmental cost to build and dispose of
> >> (which is what you guys are emphasizing) and lower environmental cost to
> >> run,
> >
> > If you're assuming wind/solar power and are not addressing the storage
> > problem, that doesn't fully load the cost to run.
> >
> >> and the question is where is the crossover point. There was a good one
> >> I used a year or so ago that I’m too lazy to look for now where you input
> >> your car model and types of fuel used by your electric utility and get how
> >> many miles you have to drive it over the lifetime of the car to break even
> >> environmentally.
> >
> > I am far from convinced that these studies really account for all the
> > environmental cost, particularly for land use. And I am really not
> > convinced that they pay attention to the real cost of scale-up. None
> > of these things have ever survived unsubsidized. Studies are studies,
> > the real world is the real world.
> >
> I was going to argue against your specific points but then I realized your
> response just boils down to “studies that don’t confirm my priors are
> obviously flawed even though I haven’t seen them”. You know all these
> flaws of studies you haven’t seen. I mean you’re attacking a straw man of a
> grid powered by green energy when I specifically said that they take into
> account the actual mix of sources in the grid, or you’re sure they don’t
> account for energy and environmental losses in the electric grid even
> though they are specifically comparing overall grid efficiency with ICE
> efficiency (which also has a grid with losses, like spills, leaks, refinery
> leaks and emissions, wellhead gad burn offs, etc)
> > For an urban commuter, I can see this. For my use profile, that is
> > worse than useless. One big issue is storage -- I can disconnect
> > the battery on my gasoline vehicle and put it in storage for 6 months,
> > no problem. (I have a car in storage at all times.) There are big
> > problems with doing that for an electic vehicle, including safety
> > of keeping it in a garage.
> No there actually aren’t. The process for storing an EV long term is charge
> it to 80%, take it off the charger, and then just like in an ICE vehicle
> remove or disconnect the 12v battery and put it on a tender. (EVs have 12v
> batteries for starting (basically closing relays) and powering accessories
> just like ICE cars). They actually store better because they don’t have gas
> to go bad or nearly as many lubricants and rubber hoses to leak or rot.
> > But the goal of 100% electric by 2035, powered by wind and solar, is
> > obviously an opium dream.
> Obviously but like I said no one is assuming that in their payback
> calculations. They are using the energy grid as it exists today.
>
> As far as your concern about battery fires you do know that vehicle fires
> in normal ICE vehicles are also a thing, right? You just aren’t attuned to
> them because they aren’t novel. Just Google “car catches fire in driveway”
> and look at all the local news reports, I did and none of them were EVs.
> Heck my ex-wife’s Ford Explorer had two recalls where they told her to park
> it away from any houses until the recalls were done because of the fire
> hazard (and in one of them the “fix” was to disable the cruise control).
> --
> “I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian,
> liberal personality.” — Altie

Maybe the solution is in fixing the pavements rather than the cars

Seawater-derived cement could decarbonise the concrete industry. Magnesium ions are abundant in seawater, and researchers have found a way to convert these into a magnesium-based cement that soaks up carbon dioxide. The cement industry is currently one of the world’s biggest CO2 emitters.

https://www.scimex.org/newsfeed/seawater-derived-cement-could-decarbonise-the-concrete-industry

On 2022-08-19, xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com> wrote:
> Con Reeder, unhyphenated American <constance@duxmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2022-08-19, xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Con Reeder, unhyphenated American <constance@duxmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2022-08-19, floaterjr <gpgmga@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/01/south-america-s-lithium-fields-reveal-the-dark-side-of-our-electric-future
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't pat yourself on the back just yet.
>>>>
>>>> All those people got educations and can't stop writing the
>>>> stupid 'save our future" crap which is clearly BS to anyone who
>>>> can do math.
>>>>
>>>
>>> There are multiple studies and tools on the environmental costs and
>>> paybacks for EVs that are not political rhetoric.
>>>
>>> In general EVs have a higher environmental cost to build and dispose of
>>> (which is what you guys are emphasizing) and lower environmental cost to
>>> run,
>>
>> If you're assuming wind/solar power and are not addressing the storage
>> problem, that doesn't fully load the cost to run.
>>
>>> and the question is where is the crossover point. There was a good one
>>> I used a year or so ago that I’m too lazy to look for now where you input
>>> your car model and types of fuel used by your electric utility and get how
>>> many miles you have to drive it over the lifetime of the car to break even
>>> environmentally.
>>
>> I am far from convinced that these studies really account for all the
>> environmental cost, particularly for land use. And I am really not
>> convinced that they pay attention to the real cost of scale-up. None
>> of these things have ever survived unsubsidized. Studies are studies,
>> the real world is the real world.
>>
>
> I was going to argue against your specific points but then I realized your
> response just boils down to “studies that don’t confirm my priors are
> obviously flawed even though I haven’t seen them”. You know all these
> flaws of studies you haven’t seen. I mean you’re attacking a straw man of a
> grid powered by green energy when I specifically said that they take into
> account the actual mix of sources in the grid, or you’re sure they don’t
> account for energy and environmental losses in the electric grid even
> though they are specifically comparing overall grid efficiency with ICE
> efficiency (which also has a grid with losses, like spills, leaks, refinery
> leaks and emissions, wellhead gad burn offs, etc)

You're assuming that the studies don't merely confirm the researchers priors.
I can't look at a study that isn't in front of me. I just know we've had such
studies for decades, and here we are -- no closer to "saving the world" than
we were decades ago.

>
>> For an urban commuter, I can see this. For my use profile, that is
>> worse than useless. One big issue is storage -- I can disconnect
>> the battery on my gasoline vehicle and put it in storage for 6 months,
>> no problem. (I have a car in storage at all times.) There are big
>> problems with doing that for an electic vehicle, including safety
>> of keeping it in a garage.
>
> No there actually aren’t. The process for storing an EV long term is charge
> it to 80%, take it off the charger, and then just like in an ICE vehicle
> remove or disconnect the 12v battery and put it on a tender. (EVs have 12v
> batteries for starting (basically closing relays) and powering accessories
> just like ICE cars). They actually store better because they don’t have gas
> to go bad or nearly as many lubricants and rubber hoses to leak or rot.
>
>
>> But the goal of 100% electric by 2035, powered by wind and solar, is
>> obviously an opium dream.
>
> Obviously but like I said no one is assuming that in their payback
> calculations. They are using the energy grid as it exists today.
>
> As far as your concern about battery fires you do know that vehicle fires
> in normal ICE vehicles are also a thing, right? You just aren’t attuned to
> them because they aren’t novel. Just Google “car catches fire in driveway”
> and look at all the local news reports, I did and none of them were EVs.
> Heck my ex-wife’s Ford Explorer had two recalls where they told her to park
> it away from any houses until the recalls were done because of the fire
> hazard (and in one of them the “fix” was to disable the cruise control).

The cases I know of, and the ones I see when googling, seem to be the classic
rotting-hose-on-hot-engine type. I was more thinking long-term storage in
the garage.

I am certainly willing to believe that the problems I have heard of regarding
battery life in lithium-ion batteries that aren't used have been solved.

But again, we haven't gamed out all of these things in real life on any
sort of scale. The problems we see at 1% of total vehicle count are going
to be very different than the problems that emerge at 30% vehicle count. We'll
solve those as we encounter them -- if we ever do.

I still see calls for "100% electric vehicles by 2035" and I laugh. That's
right around the corner!

Meanwhile, the Germans are reaping the benefits of their Energiewende,
supported by all the best studies. What was the percentage chance in
those studies of "freeze in the winter and shut off the air
conditioners in the summer", I wonder?

--
An amateur practices until he gets it right. A pro
practices until he can't get it wrong. -- unknown

On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 9:23:11 AM UTC-5, xyzzy wrote:
> Con Reeder, unhyphenated American <cons...@duxmail.com> wrote:
> > On 2022-08-19, floaterjr <gpg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/01/south-america-s-lithium-fields-reveal-the-dark-side-of-our-electric-future
> >>
> >> Don't pat yourself on the back just yet.
> >
> > All those people got educations and can't stop writing the stupid 'save our
> > future" crap which is clearly BS to anyone who can do math.
> >
> There are multiple studies and tools on the environmental costs and
> paybacks for EVs that are not political rhetoric.
>
> In general EVs have a higher environmental cost to build and dispose of
> (which is what you guys are emphasizing) and lower environmental cost to
> run, and the question is where is the crossover point. There was a good one
> I used a year or so ago that I’m too lazy to look for now where you input
> your car model and types of fuel used by your electric utility and get how
> many miles you have to drive it over the lifetime of the car to break even
> environmentally.
>
> The worst case scenario, a huge lithium battery and a purely coal fired
> electric utility yielded a payback of around 50k miles. For most of the
> mainstream models and a normal utility power mix, the payback was 20k miles
> or less.
>
> They pay back because even with the dirtiest electric utility out there the
> efficiency of scale of using a utility grid is better than a 30-35%
> efficient combustion engine.
>
> There are significant personal benefits as well like charging your car at
> home every night and not having to visit gas stations, not needing oil
> changes or emissions tests, etc. I watched this year’s gas price gyrations
> mainly as an observer.
>
> Btw I agree it isn’t for everyone or for every use case, which is why my
> primary driver is a PHEV with 50 miles of battery range. What this means in
> real life is I only use gas on road trips. It’s the best of both worlds, I
> can go months without buying gas but it’s there for me when I need the
> range.
>
> --
> “I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian,
> liberal personality.” — Altie

Do these analyses ever include the costs of upgrading the grid to be able to support EV? I’ve always seen people say that we have plenty of power generation (or we can add more renewables to the system. But that doesn’t address power transmission issues in the US. The majority of homes in the US couldn’t handle adding a single rapid charger (much less pushes to upgrade gas appliances to electric) and that is particularly true of the poor. And that’s just at the end of the line. While you can just have your chargers work at night, that doesn’t mean that much in residential areas where A/C or heating still run at night in many areas of the country. So you’re going to have to upgrade the transmission systems in every older residential area too. That’s a lot of copper that needs to be mined too. Then there is everything that would need to be done to provide millions of power chargers in apartment complex parking lots.

The push for all EV in the near future is a rich man’s dream that’s going to be slammed down on the poor.