The EV debate

During this, hopefully temporary, time of high fuel costs, some have pointed to the need to change our transportation system, from a gasoline/diesel fuel powered system, which we have developed to it's current state over the last 120 some years, to a system powered by batteries and electric motors.

During that conversation, an interesting aside was a discussion on how the energy for each mode of transport is produced. The ECE vs ICE debate.. but the bottom line principal was that somewhere along the line here, the combustion process was necessary.

While it may have started as a Pun, I got to thinking about it, and as that conversation went along, I realized that often we disagree, from a misunderstanding of the subject matter.

Agreement on basic principals is the starting point of any meaningful conversation in this, or any topic. We all must understand and agree upon the basic laws of energy here.. and far too many folks participating in these discussions have forgotten their high school physics...or maybe were never taught them..

Politics and personal feelings aside, let's first agree on the basic building blocks of the energy that powers all forms of transportation, and then, we can move on to the actual economic and environmental impacts of this proposed changeover.

________________________

The First Law of Thermodynamics says in part, that "Energy cannot be created or destroyed".

A lot has been made of folks not accepting truth.. or having "their own facts"

But this one is not in question... The concept that all energy already exists in nature, is a bedrock principal in physics. There is no debate in any scientific realm that questions this, it's an accepted "law of nature" not unlike gravity.

The actual source, or starting point, of this energy is outside of the scope of this discussion, but we need to first all agree on this fundamental fact.

The Sun was brought up as "creating" energy, but that is incorrect. I don't know if it was just the use of the incorrect terminology, or signs of a deeper misunderstanding, and I thought that the discussion would be beneficial to everyone, to remind them of what most of us learned decades ago.

Our sun, like all stars, is a huge Nuclear fusion reactor, and the result of this nuclear reaction, is the production, not creation, of heat energy. Exactly the same result that our tiny little Nuclear Fission reactors here on earth produce. They take potential energy, stored at the atomic and sub-atomic levels of matter, and release that, thru fusing atoms together, or splitting them apart.

As the First Law of Thermodynamics continues..Energy can only be changed, it cannot be created or destroyed.

Additional reading:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/chemistry/first-law-of-thermodynamics

Feel free to join the discussion, but we are not interested in political points of view, just fact based information that is backed up by scientific literature. Anything I see that even smacks of politics will be immediately deleted. Users who cannot help themselves and keep posting to just create unrest, will be excluded from the conversation, or from the board in general if necessary.

We are all adults here, and regardless of the actual device, we all have access to the most comprehensive tool for learning ever created.. the internet.. use it, do your research, and think for yourself. Draw you own conclusions, don't regurgitate talking points.

But this first deal is the easiest to grasp.. and our first point of agreement.. correct?

JW

 

im lost ? what are you asking? yes energy cant die just transform.

 

Awesome! Sounds like it could be a very interesting discussion. If I read correctly we’re talking about ECE versus ICE.
I have a question I am curious about. Last night my buddies and I were all discussing how much energy does it take to charge an electric vehicle compared to the amount of energy it takes to drive let’s say 400 miles in an ICE. As you said, somewhere along the way combustion is going to be involved in the process whether it be burning coal or natural gas to power an electric plant versus gasoline to power an ICE.
PS... You forgot one part of the energy transformation Jim. You are correct that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, but every time it changes there is an energy loss usually through heat.

 

I'm in! Right now, just passively though... I've had a much simpler version of this conversation with some folks. For many, if they can't see how the sausage is made... it doesn't bother them and have no interest... If they had to start with the raw meat and a grinder, many would be mortified.
-MIG

 

I kinda sorta “get it”
I.C.E produces heat energy from gasoline, gasoline is produced from oil, oil is made from dead dinosaurs, dinosaurs were created from……… I can’t fathom anymore than that
Am I on track??

 

To me, the biggest issue with EV is the inefficient process of "fueling" and having to carry around the dead weight of a discharged battery. Beyond that, the electric motor is significantly more efficient than an ICE. The irony is electric motors are usually more efficient at highest load but that is where the friction and wind resistance are greatest. I must admit I know few specifics about the likes of Tesla motors.

I'm still on the bandwagon of either H2 fuel cells to generate the electricity at the point of use or using the principle of my cell phone's cordless charging being imbedded in the EV lane. Batteries of a smaller capacity would be for off-track driving and getting the last mile, so to speak.

 

On a good day a BBB is probably 20% efficient. With coal fired steam turbines, you have the secondary (low pressure) turbines that scavenge waste heat with would normally be rejected to the atmosphere. This coupled with a fairly steady state operational mode, can generate efficiencies much higher than ICE's. This goes for entropy and exergy efficiencies. But then you have transmission losses and the heat losses associated with the ECE operation to account for as well. FWIW.

 

[QUOTE=" oil is made from dead dinosaurs
Dinosaurs? I know they stick that in our heads when we were in elementary school, and if you were old enough to see the Sinclair gas Station commercials, but most of it was made from plant matter. There are way more plants on earth and animals

 

Oil is a long term byproduct of solar energy. My 455 is solar-powered

 

From my searches, good solar panels are about 33% efficient if things are optimal, ie pointed at the sun, no shade, etc. That makes them slightly more efficient than our BBB before you have losses with storage in the batteries. The higher the kW of charging, the more efficient they are. Best is 93% and drops as low as 70%. Best case is 33% efficient from the sun and 93% of that for the battery charging before you have a few percentage point losses in the motor.

If you use solar, it takes 10 average-sized solar panels to charge a Tesla. Basically, you'll never be able to charge a Tesla enough to significantly increase the range from covering the body in solar panels.

 

I see no close end to internal combustion engines.
That being said, I think the future is going to be electric vehicles and as time moves forward, new and better methods will be found to power them.

 

So I did a little searching around on the Internet. According to what I found it would take 20 kWh of electricity for my wife to go to work 60 miles round trip in a Tesla. About $2.63. If she continues driving her Toyota Camry, averaging 37 miles per gallon, it would cost her about $7 round-trip. (Much less 2 years ago!) There’s just one giant problem. Her Toyota is paid for and buying a new electric car would cost a fortune. Definitely not in the cards for me!

 

Either gas or electric yer a paying
Electric is super expensive to buy but MAYBE cheaper to operate.
ICE is a cheaper buy but costs a bit more to operate.
If they REALLY wanted to clean up the assmosphere, they would sell electric vehicles WAAAAAAAY cheaper.
I would never pay extra anything just to save some O Zone or whatever, they want me to help, make it affordable to me and everyone else

 

Amen to JW's original post. Well said, Jim!

 

The EV versus ICE is a non starter me me. I've never purchased a brand new vehicle, and don't ever plan to.

My current DD is fully paid for, and gets driven about 7,000 miles per year. My per mile costs are far lower than they would be to borrow the entire, or almost entire, cost of a new EV. There's also depreciation on new vehicles, although I haven't looked into how EV's fare these days. While the electric usage costs would likely be lower than gasoline costs, that won't last forever. I also don't need another monthly payment being semi retired.

I am fortunate to live where 98% of the electricity used is generated through hydro-electric power dams. Those also have massive embedded costs. EVERY one built in Manitoba used some form of hydrocarbon powered vehicles during construction. All the newer ones were built hundred of miles away from most of the population areas.

It's important to understand exactly where all this "new" electric power EV's require will come from before jumping onboard.

 

Well, seeing as we already have extensive infrastructure to create and distribute fuel for our ICE's, it just doesn't make sense to throw it all away. What we should all be striving for is a more efficient way to transform potential energy into kinetic energy. Current solar panel efficiency is not yet more efficient than ICE's, and would require massive outlays of $$ to distribute it. I was told a Tesla needs a dedicated 75 amp circuit for charging. That is 35-40% more than the average house has currently. The grid would not support that, at least not yet, and when it is upgraded so it can, you best put a tether on your electric meter because it's going to helicopter off your house and into the sky, not to mention the price increase per Kwh to pay for those grid upgrades.

Like I stated before, I'm all for newer/better forms of energy, just not ones that will put us all in the poor house.

 

^^Follow the money. Who stands to make money off this? Electric companies and those who lobby for ECE's.

 

That's always been my problem with new cars [electric or gas] is the cost associated with them along with the high tag cost when new, plus insurance. My 07 Duramax was new at one time and I cringed every year I had to get the plates/insurance renewed on it. But It's paid for and a new similar truck would be more than double the price I paid and a 1 ton electric [if they make them] would be out of the question[price-wise] and never would pay for itself. So I'll just keep paying for diesel and keep up with repairs and I tell everybody that I know this will be the last truck I'll ever own. Larry.

 

Nobody is going around confiscating ICE powered cars any time in the next 25 years.

You don't want an electric car, don't buy one. I think over time, better, smaller and less polluting electrical vehicles will eventually be introduced and in 50 years, I have to think the number of electric cars is greater than ICE cars.
But they are not taking away our hot rods.