Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » General Discussion » Study: Electric cars no greener than gasoline vehicles...a study from BERKELEY no less. How far to the left can we go?

Study: Electric cars no greener than gasoline vehicles...a study from BERKELEY no less. How far to the left can we go?

+4
2seaoat
ZVUGKTUBM
Hospital Bob
Markle
8 posters

Go to page : 1, 2, 3  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 3]

Markle

Markle

This research is from BERKLEY...can it get any further to the far, far LEFT?
From UPI

Technology

Study: Electric cars no greener than gasoline vehicles

Electric cars, despite their supposed green credentials, are among the environmentally dirtiest transportation options, a U.S. researcher suggests.

Published: July 1, 2013 at 4:51 PM

BERKELEY, Calif., July 1 (UPI) -- Electric cars, despite their supposed green credentials, are among the environmentally dirtiest transportation options, a U.S. researcher suggests.

Writing in the journal IEEE Spectrum, researcher Ozzie Zehner says electric cars lead to hidden environmental and health damages and are likely more harmful than gasoline cars and other transportation options.

Electric cars merely shift negative impacts from one place to another, he wrote, and "most electric-car assessments analyze only the charging of the car. This is an important factor indeed. But a more rigorous analysis would consider the environmental impacts over the vehicle's entire life cycle, from its construction through its operation and on to its eventual retirement at the junkyard."

[...]

Read more: http://www.upi.com/Science_News/Technology/2013/07/01/Study-Electric-cars-no-greener-than-gasoline-vehicles/UPI-40741372711871/#ixzz2Xy2DurU4

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

So you post this to the other thread. And after I debunk it you don't respond to that. Instead you just post up another thread with it.
That's the kind of thing hussein barack obama would do, markle. When he
gets up there and tells a lie and they call bullshit on it, he just ignores that it was a lie and keeps on telling it.
I never realized you and he had that in common. lol

Markle

Markle

Bob wrote:So you post this to the other thread.  And after I debunk it you don't respond to that.  Instead you just post up another thread with it.
That's the kind of thing hussein barack obama would do,  markle.  When he
gets up there and tells a lie and they call bullshit on it,  he just ignores that it was a lie and keeps on telling it.  
I never realized you and he had that in common.  lol

Your ridicule and disrespect of President Barack Hussein Obama. Wouldn't you call that racist?

In your mind you debunked it because you don't want to believe it is true.  

You state that something is not a problem being disposed of and then you say they are working on the problem.

Nice try.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Markle wrote:

Your ridicule and disrespect of President Barack Hussein Obama.  Wouldn't you call that racist?

In your mind you debunked it because you don't want to believe it is true.  

You state that something is not a problem being disposed of and then you say they are working on the problem.

Nice try.

That motorhead you're listening to forgot this part, markel...

For many components of hybrid cars, recycling is the same as with their non-hybrid counterparts. The metal body is reprocessed into steel, tires are shredded into crumb rubber or burned for fuel, even the windshield can be recycled into insulation and concrete.

Toyota announced the launch of the world's first recycling business for NiMH car batteries. The new business will reuse the recycled batteries to make new hybrid-vehicle batteries. (Toyota Press Photo)

But the hybrid car battery is a whole different story. While traditional vehicles use lead-acid batteries, hybrid cars typically also incorporate a separate nickel metal hydride (NiMH) or Lithium-ion (Li-ion) battery to generate electric power.

No. 1 hybrid vehicle manufacturer ,Toyota, announced the launch of the world’s first recycling business for NiMH car batteries. The program will recover the nickel in order to make new batteries, while also lowering the production cost of future hybrid batteries.

The Toyota HV Call Center will be a resource for consumers to find out where to take their non-working batteries. It will also be constructing several recycling facilities with the help of Toyota Chemical Engineering.

The timing of the consumer-facing recycling program is timely in that Prius offers a 8-10 year warranty on its batteries, and the first model wasn’t released until 2000. The company estimates that the batteries last up to 180,000 miles and has offered a recycling program in Japan since 1998.

In the U.S., the lead-acid car battery is a highly recycled material, with a 99.2 percent recycling rate in 2008, according to the EPA. This can be partly attributed to state legislation, as 41 states have banned these batteries from landfills and nine have deposit systems that help pay for recycling at point-of-purchase. Many retailers will also accept old batteries when a new one is purchased.

As a result, many car batteries sold in the U.S. have a large portion of recycled content, including both lead and the plastic casing.

http://earth911.com/news/2010/11/02/toyota-launches-hybrid-battery-recycling-program/

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Also, your title is really misleading. When the word "Berkeley" is used, the use of that word has become synonymous with The University of California at Berkeley. Your link has nothing to do with the University of California.
It's just the musings of some motorhead who happens to live in the town of Berkeley.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Fox and Friends does the same thing all the time,  markle.  They find somebody who they tell their audience is an "expert" but it's really nothing more than some person who will say what Fox and Friends wants him/her to say.
For example,  there was that "expert" they put on to tell us solar energy won't work in the U.S. like it does in Germany because Germany "gets more sun than the U.S."

https://www.google.com/search?q=fox+and+friends+germany+has+more+sunlight&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

That was about as close to the truth as Al Gore on The Tonight Show saying the temperature at the center of the earth is "hotter than the sun". But Steve Doocy and those other two clowns eat it up.  And of course so do the nitwits in that audience.  lol

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

Bob wrote:Also,  your title is really misleading.  When the word "Berkeley" is used,  the use of that word has become synonymous with The University of California at Berkeley.   Your link has nothing to do with the University of California.
It's just the musings of some motorhead who happens to live in the town of Berkeley.  


Nice deconstruct of Markle's argument Razz Razz Razz

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Guest


Guest

People don't really understand that household electricity doesn't just transfer into their batteries in their car. It creates a chemical reaction in the batteries and depending on the condition and level of discharge in the batteries won't be near a 1 to 1 transfer. A great deal of energy from the power company is lost in the recharge process so technically battery powered cars are not all that wonderful. Gas/Diesel still is far more efficient and practical.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

ForgetHell wrote: Gas/Diesel still is far more efficient and practical.

Internal combustion engines are relatively inefficient at converting on-board fuel energy to propulsion as most of the energy is wasted as heat. On the other hand, electric motors are more efficient in converting stored energy into driving a vehicle, and electric drive vehicles do not consume energy while at rest or coasting, and some of the energy lost when braking is captured and reused through regenerative braking, which captures as much as one fifth of the energy normally lost during braking. Typically, conventional gasoline engines effectively use only 15% of the fuel energy content to move the vehicle or to power accessories, and diesel engines can reach on-board efficiencies of 20%, while electric drive vehicles have on-board efficiency of around 80%

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car#Energy_efficiency

Guest


Guest

Mr. Bob you ain't paying attention. I am talking fuel and you are talking engines. Combustion engines operate by making explosions which give off wasted heat energy. Yes an electric motor gives off less wasted heat and is more efficient at the car but travel back up the wires and you will find lots of wasted heat energy creating steam to drive the turbines of the power plant. Electric cars as a whole still suck. Batteries suck. too inefficient.

Markle

Markle

Bob wrote:Fox and Friends does the same thing all the time,  markle.  They find somebody who they tell their audience is an "expert" but it's really nothing more than some person who will say what Fox and Friends wants him/her to say.
For example,  there was that "expert" they put on to tell us solar energy won't work in the U.S. like it does in Germany because Germany "gets more sun than the U.S."

https://www.google.com/search?q=fox+and+friends+germany+has+more+sunlight&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

That was about as close to the truth as Al Gore on The Tonight Show saying the temperature at the center of the earth is "hotter than the sun". But Steve Doocy and those other two clowns eat it up.  And of course so do the nitwits in that audience.  lol

This has relevance to...?

Markle

Markle

Bob wrote:So you post this to the other thread.  And after I debunk it you don't respond to that.  Instead you just post up another thread with it.
That's the kind of thing hussein barack obama would do,  markle.  When he
gets up there and tells a lie and they call bullshit on it,  he just ignores that it was a lie and keeps on telling it.  
I never realized you and he had that in common.  lol

“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.”
― Socrates

2seaoat



“When the debate is lost

You got part of it right.....Bob won the debate hands down..........Electric generated from renewable resources is utopia.....each step with technological and policy which gets us closer to that goal.......The Toyota Prius and the electric component has changed the paradigm, and we are rapidly heading toward that utopia.....not in my lifetime, but the windmills I have seen all over this country is mind boggling........good things are coming......and if you and the special interests who want to argue the pony express is good for America.....good luck......this debate has been won by the new sheriff......Mr. Bob.......look out Z......Robert is getting knowledgeable......he might start challenging you.....but one thing will remain the same......somebody has to argue for the Pony Express.

Markle

Markle

Bob wrote:Also,  your title is really misleading.  When the word "Berkeley" is used,  the use of that word has become synonymous with The University of California at Berkeley.   Your link has nothing to do with the University of California.
It's just the musings of some motorhead who happens to live in the town of Berkeley.  


Please show us where I used the phrase University of California at Berkeley. I did not, nor did I infer any such thing.

So in your opinion, anyone opposed to enlarged golf carts are "motorheads". Do you ridicule the title of everyone who has done research which disagrees with your beliefs? Sorry...foolish question.

I bet you'd like to take my '66 Goat modified to over 500 hp with three carburetors too. You want to put an golf cart motor in there don't you?

Are you also saying that BERKELEY is NOT one of the most Progressive cities in the most Progressive state?

Awwww...you just can't make these things up!

2seaoat



I am calling BS on GTO.....how did you get 50% increase in horsepower somewhere around 330 to 500 it cannot just be the carbs....the standard engine had a four barrel already........not calling you a liar, but I do not see the carbs giving you that increase.....what other modifications.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

ForgetHell wrote:Mr. Bob you ain't paying attention. I am talking fuel and you are talking engines. Combustion engines operate by making explosions which give off wasted heat energy. Yes an electric motor gives off less wasted heat and is more efficient at the car but travel back up the wires and you will find lots of wasted heat energy creating steam to drive the turbines of the power plant. Electric cars as a whole still suck.  Batteries suck. too inefficient.

There are three measures of efficiency.  

WTT  (well-to-tank) which measures the efficiency from the original fuel source to the vehicle fuel tank.  i.e. from an oil well to the tank.  Or from a coal mine to the battery.

TTW  (tank-to-wheel)  which measures the efficiency of converting the fuel onboard the vehicle to the wheels.

WTW (well-to-wheel)  which measures the overall efficiency from the well to the wheels.  

The well-to-wheel efficiency is the one which matters.  Because that's taking into account everything from the drilling or mining of the fuel,  transporting the fuel,  refining the fuel,  converting it to electricity and transmitting it on the grid,  etc.

The following chart provides a comparison of overall well-to-wheel efficiency of various vehicles.

Three vehicles on the chart which matter to us here are...
1. The Honda Civic VX (it was chosen because it is one of the most efficient gasoline only powered cars getting 51 mpg).
2.  The Toyota Prius to compare hybrid.
3.  And the Tesla Roadster to compare an all-electric vehicle.  

"km/MJ" is a measure of efficiency.  It means how much distance (in kilometers) a vehicle can travel on a unit of energy (megajoule).
So the higher the figure on the chart means a vehicle can travel farther on a unit of energy making the vehicle more efficient.
And again remember,  this comparison takes into account everything from the oil well or coal mine (electricity) all the way through the whole process to the wheels of the vehicle.

Study: Electric cars no greener than gasoline vehicles...a study from BERKELEY no less. How far to the left can we go? Chart_10

Guest


Guest

Nice chart but if your testla roadster had to carry batteries to travel the same distance as a gas car it would be too heavy and the battery recharge time makes your fuel still suck. But looks like there is some hope in the future.

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:I am calling BS on GTO.....how did you get 50% increase in horsepower somewhere around 330 to 500 it cannot just be the carbs....the standard engine had a four barrel already........not calling you a liar, but I do not see the carbs giving you that increase.....what other modifications.  

The original came with three duce's OR a four barrel. I had the entire engine rebuilt, I've had it since it was three years old. Edlebrock performance parts added, carburetors, manifold, exhaust headers, pistons, frame stiffened, beefed up transmission beefed up rear end. Plus a few other things.

Plus, I don't care what you believe or don't believe.

2seaoat



Plus, I don't care what you believe or don't believe.


A fifty percent increase in horsepower in a 1966 GTO is a significant increase.......I just did not see that coming from simple carbs when the stock was a four barrel......if you say you had the engine rebuilt and there are plenty of after market enhancements.....but that still is a huge horsepower increase.......but nice car.....maybe a little jealousy.
Those interiors were pretty spartan, and I was a Chrysler/Dodge guy in 66, but that would still be a great car........My brother has a 67 Chevy Chevelle which he has in perfect condition......I do not know if he has varied from the factory settings.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

ForgetHell wrote:Nice chart but if your testla roadster had to carry batteries to travel the same distance as a gas car it would be too heavy and the battery recharge time makes your fuel still suck. But looks like there is some hope in the future.

Which is exactly why I'm now driving a conventional hybrid and not a fully electric vehicle or even a plug-in electric hybrid.  And exactly the same reason why I didn't buy a 55" LED tv until last year.

As I said in another post,  when 55" digital panel tv's were first becoming available they were priced at $10,000.  (I looked at them at that time at All Pro Sound).
We are now at the beginning of plug-in electric vehicle availability same as when that tv was $10,000.
So I'm not buying a plug-in electric vehicle now because those are not yet cost-effective.  Just as I didn't buy that $10,000 HDTV back then for the same reason.

But as battery technology advances that cost-effectiveness will change.  Just as it changed with television.

For a hundred years automobiles ran on only gas engines.
For 70 years television sets were made only with cathode ray tubes.

Today no television set in production still uses cathode ray tubes.  That transition is now 100% complete.
Over time we will see the transition from internal combustion gas engines to electric motors in cars.

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:Plus, I don't care what you believe or don't believe.


A fifty percent increase in horsepower in a 1966 GTO is a significant increase.......I just did not see that coming from simple carbs when the stock was a four barrel......if you say you had the engine rebuilt and there are plenty of after market enhancements.....but that still is a huge horsepower increase.......but nice car.....maybe a little jealousy.
Those interiors were pretty spartan, and I was a Chrysler/Dodge guy in 66, but that would still be a great car........My brother has a 67 Chevy Chevelle which he has in perfect condition......I do not know if he has varied from the factory settings.

Entire performance package was added. The biggest single, least expensive increase in power was the exhaust manifolds. Getting to be time to sell it though. I can't work on it like I used to and that was a big part of the fun.

Markle

Markle

Bob wrote:
ForgetHell wrote:Nice chart but if your testla roadster had to carry batteries to travel the same distance as a gas car it would be too heavy and the battery recharge time makes your fuel still suck. But looks like there is some hope in the future.

Which is exactly why I'm now driving a conventional hybrid and not a fully electric vehicle or even a plug-in electric hybrid.  And exactly the same reason why I didn't buy a 55" LED tv until last year.

As I said in another post,  when 55" digital panel tv's were first becoming available they were priced at $10,000.  (I looked at them at that time at All Pro Sound).
We are now at the beginning of plug-in electric vehicle availability same as when that tv was $10,000.
So I'm not buying a plug-in electric vehicle now because those are not yet cost-effective.  Just as I didn't buy that $10,000 HDTV back then for the same reason.

But as battery technology advances that cost-effectiveness will change.  Just as it changed with television.

For a hundred years automobiles ran on only gas engines.
For 70 years television sets were made only with cathode ray tubes.

Today no television set in production still uses cathode ray tubes.  That transition is now 100% complete.
Over time we will see the transition from internal combustion gas engines to electric motors in cars.

We had electric cars before internal combustion.  They have been being improved for 200 years.

Until they can go 400-500 miles on a charge, charge in five or ten minutes and go another 500 miles at 70-80 mph, they will be the novelty car in a rich households garage alongside their other two or three gas powered cars. All the while being heavily subsidized, for wealthy people, from tax payers paying for their toys.

Yella

Yella

Markle wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Plus, I don't care what you believe or don't believe.


A fifty percent increase in horsepower in a 1966 GTO is a significant increase.......I just did not see that coming from simple carbs when the stock was a four barrel......if you say you had the engine rebuilt and there are plenty of after market enhancements.....but that still is a huge horsepower increase.......but nice car.....maybe a little jealousy.
Those interiors were pretty spartan, and I was a Chrysler/Dodge guy in 66, but that would still be a great car........My brother has a 67 Chevy Chevelle which he has in perfect condition......I do not know if he has varied from the factory settings.

Entire performance package was added.  The biggest single, least expensive increase in power was the exhaust manifolds.  Getting to be time to sell it though.  I can't work on it like I used to and that was a big part of the fun.

Markle, do you fear going along with anything that is offered to help preserve our planet for the future because you think Democrats had something to do with it? Could that be it? I think so. I think your hatred leaves you no choice except that of being anti-green.

http://warpedinblue,blogspot.com/

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

Markle wrote:
Bob wrote:Also,  your title is really misleading.  When the word "Berkeley" is used,  the use of that word has become synonymous with The University of California at Berkeley.   Your link has nothing to do with the University of California.
It's just the musings of some motorhead who happens to live in the town of Berkeley.  


Please show us where I used the phrase University of California at Berkeley.  I did not, nor did I infer any such thing.

So in your opinion, anyone opposed to enlarged golf carts are "motorheads".  Do you ridicule the title of everyone who has done research which disagrees with your beliefs?  Sorry...foolish question.

I bet you'd like to take my '66 Goat modified to over 500 hp with three carburetors too.  You want to put an golf cart motor in there don't you?  

Are you also saying that BERKELEY is NOT one of the most Progressive cities in the most Progressive state?

Awwww...you just can't make these things up!

The inference is in your title, Dumbass!!!! "....a study from BERKELEY no less...." You wouldn't know this, but the name to a Californian implies the school....

Forget the Socrates quote--he was a pederast, anyway, and if you admire him.... well, maybe the FBI needs to see what you are hiding on your computer.....

You got spanked hard on this thread.... Twisted Evil

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Markle wrote:

We had electric cars before internal combustion.  They have been being improved for 200 years.

Until they can go 400-500 miles on a charge, charge in five or ten minutes and go another 500 miles at 70-80 mph, they will be the novelty car in a rich households garage alongside their other two or three gas powered cars.  All the while being heavily subsidized, for wealthy people, from tax payers paying for their toys.
That's true,  electric cars were produced in the 1800's.  But your statement "they have been being improved for 200 years" is not only untrue,  I'm not even sure it's good grammar.  lol

Electric car production was abandoned in the early 20th century.  Because the technology was abandoned.  There were no "improvements" being made for almost another hundred years.  

The first really "electric cars" to become practical will not need to "go 400-500 miles on a charge and be charged in five or ten minutes".

The first ones will be PEHV's. ( Plug-In Electric Hybrid Vehicle).
The Chevy Volt was the first one of these.  It can travel 40 miles on electric only and then go another 3-400 miles on gasoline.  But of course the deal-killer right now is not the 40 mile range,  it's the initial price of the vehicle.  It is not competitive with conventional hybrids or gas-only cars either one.

When we have a PEHV which can go 50 to 100 miles on electric and is priced competitively with a hybrid or gas car,  that will be the game changer.
Most of us on most days don't drive more than 50-100 miles.  And we can recharge the battery pack overnight at home.
That will mean that most of us on most days WILL NO LONGER NEED GASOLINE.
It will be much preferable to buy electricity for that driving at 1/3 the cost of buying gasoline.
And for longer distance trips,  a PHEV can travel the same distance using gasoline as a gas only car.  Except then it will be a hybrid when doing that which gets maximum gasoline fuel economy.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 3]

Go to page : 1, 2, 3  Next

Pensacola Discussion Forum » General Discussion » Study: Electric cars no greener than gasoline vehicles...a study from BERKELEY no less. How far to the left can we go?

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum