Does a Tesla need to refuel for 6 hours during endourance races? :D

[iamsupernasty]

Are you really that stupid? That explains nothing at all. Industry uses a lot of energy to produce goods so it can't be compared to the carbon footprint for recharging cars. Think before replying ffs.

See that bit in bold? Look at the carbon footprint for an ic engine travelling over a set distance and then carbon footprint for the electricity required to recharge an electric car.

Are you really that stupid?

I was simply refuting the fact that automobiles produce more emissions than the industrial sector. That's all I was saying, and I backed up my argument with facts. I've been playing devils advocate in multiple spots in this thread, and I think your combining two of my points into one.

 

[10,500RPM]

Are you really that stupid?

I was simply refuting the fact that automobiles produce more emissions than the industrial sector. That's all I was saying, and I backed up my argument with facts. I've been playing devils advocate in multiple spots in this thread, and I think your combining two of my points into one.

Nobody was talking about industy though. I said power stations producing electric is a much cleaner way of fuelling a car than cars producing their own power from oil based fuels. How does that make me stupid? You even brought China into the conversation ffs.

 

[peterjford]

power stations producing electric is a much cleaner way of fuelling a car than cars producing their own power from oil based fuels.

Unless you lived in Chernobyl, or possibly Fukushima.

 

[ucwepn]

We are currently having a similar debate in Australia at the moment its regarding a new carbon tax that government plans to introduce for the 100 highest polluting companies (including power companies). In Australia it is said that we have a 250 year supply of coal so burning of coal is our primary source of power. Its not as dirty as it sounds as we powderise the coal and inject it into the furnace so it gets the cleanest burn possible to generate our electricity. They were saying not long ago that if everyone switched to electric cars there would be no way for people to charge the batteries in peak power times due to the limited infrastructure we have at the moment, therefore overnight would be the only time you would be allowed to recharge your electric vehicle therefore creating a 2nd peak time. (although it should be noted thats only if everyone had plug in electrics). Its a very tricky subject and our government is about to spend $12 million of tax payers money to try and win over the public to this new carbon tax of which most of our population is very against and many don't believe what the science says. The funny thing is that Australia produces less than 1% of the worlds carbon emmisions lol

slightly off topic I know but kind of relative to electric vehicles lol

 

[sleeves345]

Ok, I wrote part of my thesis on whether or not electric cars would be beneficial to the environment.

I suggest everyone start by reading Joseph Arar's paper "New Directions: The electric car and carbon emissions in the US" if you can find a copy.

Granted, this paper (and my project) concentrates on the US alone, but the point stands:

An electric vehicle produces less CO2 per mile traveled than an equivalently-sized gasoline-powered vehicle. In fact, if ALL cars were switched to electric power TODAY, we would see a 23% reduction in CO2 output nationwide. Granted, that's not really feasible, but it goes to illustrate that electrics ARE better for the environment. This figure DOES account for CO2 generated by power plants of all types, as well as efficiency losses in power lines, charging, etc.

The reason for this is that the power generated PER unit CO2 generated is much greater for power plants than for engines. Sure, power plants produce most of the pollution in the country, but they produce SO MUCH MORE POWER than car engines as well.
To illustrate: think of a 667 MW coal plant. Thats an average-sized coal plant, and it will produce a certain amount of CO2. To generate 667 MW of power with gasoline engines, you'd need 4,472.3 engines each generating 200 horsepower. I'd bet that 4.5 thousand engines will put out more CO2 than a coal plant will (especially considering that coal plants have CO2 reclamation systems and CAN be made to run cleanly).

Furthermore, not all power is generated by coal or gas. Like it or not, Nuclear power is the cleanest and (by average deaths per year) a very safe power option available. Sustainability may be another issue altogether, but hey. Wind power and solar and hydro power are small contributors to power generation, but the % generated per year by sustainable sources is rising every year. And every watt generated by wind and solar plants is less pollution overall.

To the people crying about batteries and how bad they are to produce: they are recyclable. Tesla itself runs a battery recycle program that reuses 70% of old battery materials to make new ones. And lets not forget that gasoline must be pumped, shipped, refined, and trucked to gas stations; all processes that pollute as well.

I could go on and on, and indeed, i think i may have gone on too long. To wrap up:
Electric cars may not be cheaper to own today.
Electric cars may not be cleaner to drive as of right now.
If current trends continue, they WILL be cleaner (and probably cheaper) soon enough.
The only major problem I see is the limited range of the cars, and frankly, they're intended for in-city driving, not cross-country, so who cares?

feel free to flame away.
inb4 ****storm.

 

[blitztech]

I only read the first few pages of this post before I got sick of all the arguing. But good news is this post convinced me to register and stop trolling the forum.

I felt it somewhat interesting that our family had this same argument back when my mom bought her Prius. She's now proven us all wrong and has over 160,000 miles on the original batteries and still gets nearly 50mpg even with this ethanol crap they're shoving down our throats