EVs, Aspirations vs Reality

[kallend 1,623]

Zombie subsidies to the fossil fuel industries.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/15/climate/tax-breaks-oil-gas-us.html

We have the best government money can buy.

[brenthutch 383]

On 3/15/2024 at 6:35 AM, olofscience said:

Bill was saying that to believe, and regurgitate it here, you'd have to be...never mind.

And gas cars weigh nothing, eh?

“According to data from Emissions Analytics, EVs tend to shed around 20 percent more from their tires due to their higher weight and high torque compared to traditional internal combustion engine-powered vehicles.”

“According to a recent report issued by researchers at Imperial College London, “There is emerging evidence that tyre wear particles and other particulate matter may contribute to a range of negative health impacts including heart, lung, developmental, reproductive, and cancer outcomes.”

 

 

[lippy 771]

44 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

“According to data from Emissions Analytics, EVs tend to shed around 20 percent more from their tires due to their higher weight and high torque compared to traditional internal combustion engine-powered vehicles.”

“According to a recent report issued by researchers at Imperial College London, “There is emerging evidence that tyre wear particles and other particulate matter may contribute to a range of negative health impacts including heart, lung, developmental, reproductive, and cancer outcomes.”

 

 

What are you doing posting here?!?!? You should be running out to sell your wife's SUV and buy a Civic, now that you're aware of the dangers of heavy vehicles!

[billvon 2,400]

1 hour ago, lippy said:

What are you doing posting here?!?!? You should be running out to sell your wife's SUV and buy a Civic, now that you're aware of the dangers of heavy vehicles!

Nonsense!  Exxon told him that gas cars don't weigh anything, don't use "break" pads and don't require any metals, minerals or plastics in their manufacture.

[olofscience 421]

9 hours ago, brenthutch said:

“According to data from Emissions Analytics, EVs tend to shed around 20 percent more from their tires due to their higher weight and high torque compared to traditional internal combustion engine-powered vehicles.”

“According to a recent report issued by researchers at Imperial College London, “There is emerging evidence that tyre wear particles and other particulate matter may contribute to a range of negative health impacts including heart, lung, developmental, reproductive, and cancer outcomes.”

Both tyre wear particles and tailpipe emissions are bad, but if I had to choose between them, I'd choose tyre particles.

Tailpipe emissions have more smaller particles - PM2.5 and below, while tyre wear causes larger particles.

PM2.5 is linked more definitively to negative health impacts, and death.

 

And you HAPPILY announce any increases in coal use - they're one of the biggest emitters of mercury in the air. It's also funny how you pretend you care about pollution when plastic bag waste increases, you're almost jumping for joy.

[brenthutch 383]

3 hours ago, olofscience said:

Both tyre wear particles and tailpipe emissions are bad, but if I had to choose between them, I'd choose tyre particles.

Tailpipe emissions have more smaller particles - PM2.5 and below, while tyre wear causes larger particles.

“What the study found was that “brakes and tires on EVs release 1,850 times more particle pollution compared to modern tailpipes.”

“Recent studies show that the mass of PM 2.5 and PM 10 emissions — which are, along with ozone and ultrafine particles, the world’s primary air pollutants — from tires and brakes far exceeds the mass of emissions from tailpipes”

Edited March 17 by brenthutch

[JoeWeber 2,299]

5 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

“What the study found was that “brakes and tires on EVs release 1,850 times more particle pollution compared to modern tailpipes.”

And the first car tailpipes released a whole lot more particle pollution than horse tailpipes. But we hung in there and things got better.

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

On 3/14/2024 at 1:06 PM, billvon said:

This could be even dumber than your post about how the Shockley-Quessier effect means that solar will never work.  Because it implies that gas cars have neither brakes (not "breaks") nor tires.  And that regen braking causes brake dust.  And that gas cars have regen braking that is less stressed.

You'd have to be a regular FOX News consumer to believe any of that.

Well, I clicked on Brent's link and read the article.

The FIRST thing was that there was a pop-up whining and crying that Google is 'attacking' them. Calling them liars for having articles full of...
Lies.

And trying to get them shut down...

For lying.

And I find the comparison rather disingenuous. 

The brake dust and tire particles are much higher than tailpipe emissions from ICE cars.

But how do they compare to the ICE's brake dust and tire particles?

A typical example of the Alt-right comparing apples to bunny rabbits.
And they call the "Main Stream Media" fake.

I also found the bitching about range estimates to be laughable.

They claimed that EVs have about 60% of the promoted range, because it's 'best practice' to keep the battery between 20% and 80% state of charge (which is true).
However, it's ALSO 'best practice' to keep your gas tank in an ICE car above 1/4 tank. Many modern cars have the fuel pump in the tank, the fuel surrounding the pump keeps it cool. Running the tank low on a regular basis will let the pump run hotter and it will fail sooner.

While it's best for the battery of an EV to keep it in the 'safe area', there's no reason not to charge to 100%, or run it down close to zero, as long as you don't do it all the time.

Edit to add:
They also repeat the lie that the power generation for the electricity pollutes just as much as the tailpipe of an ICE car.
While coal generated power isn't 'super clean', it still creates less pollutants than what comes out the back of an ICE car. By a huuuuuge margin.

Also ignores the fact that coal makes up less than 20% of power generation.

Personally, my local power utility generates from hydro. They have a natural gas 'peaker' that comes on when the demand is higher than the river can provide, but I charge off peak, so my car is damned near 'zero emissions'. For real.

Edited March 17 by wolfriverjoe

[brenthutch 383]

https://e360.yale.edu/features/tire-pollution-toxic-chemicals

 

 

Report from Yale (that far right bastion of conservative propaganda)

Edited March 17 by brenthutch

[brenthutch 383]

“Used electric vehicles are depreciating 10 times faster than their gas-powered counterparts, according to a new study from iSeeCars.com. The average price of a used electric vehicle plummeted 31.8% over the last 12 months, compared with a 3.6% decline overall.”

Not only are EVs worthless they are also worth less.

[lippy 771]

4 hours ago, brenthutch said:

“Used electric vehicles are depreciating 10 times faster than their gas-powered counterparts, according to a new study from iSeeCars.com. The average price of a used electric vehicle plummeted 31.8% over the last 12 months, compared with a 3.6% decline overall.”

Not only are EVs worthless they are also worth less.

Whatever you gotta keep telling yourself there Skippy.  You already sell off all your heavy vehicles now that you're aware of their environmental impact?

[brenthutch 383]

42 minutes ago, lippy said:

Whatever you gotta keep telling yourself there Skippy.  You already sell off all your heavy vehicles now that you're aware of their environmental impact?

Honda Accord coup: 3500 lbs

Tesla model 3 3800 lbs

My wife’s GLS 450 weighs about the same as a Tesla X (5489 respectively 5390) and the GLS is more capable.

For the sake of the planet I will keep my Honda and Mercedes.

Edited March 17 by brenthutch

[JoeWeber 2,299]

30 minutes ago, lippy said:

Whatever you gotta keep telling yourself there Skippy.  You already sell off all your heavy vehicles now that you're aware of their environmental impact?

Some folks are just a bit more a product of their environment that others, I guess. If you live on top of the Marcellus Shale formation you think fracking and oil production is unbeatable. Even the Mifflin County Amish are in on it, buggying all the way to the bank with their signing bonuses. 

[brenthutch 383]

28 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Some folks are just a bit more a product of their environment that others, I guess. If you live on top of the Marcellus Shale formation you think fracking and oil production is unbeatable. Even the Mifflin County Amish are in on it, buggying all the way to the bank with their signing bonuses. 

Did a 14 miles of single track yesterday (mountain biking) and for the life of me I couldn’t see the evidence of global calamity. Clear blue skies, temperatures in the lower 40 and just enough breeze to stay comfortable. No hellscape of coal mines and fracking (even though I’m in the middle of the Marcellus shale formation) sorry but you are going to have to give me actual evidence of this climate cataclysm before I reconsider my position.

(You guys need to lay off the NPR an MSBC and trust your own eyes)

Edited March 17 by brenthutch

[JoeWeber 2,299]

24 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

(You guys need to lay off the NPR an MSBC and trust your own eyes)

No thanks. I'll instead rely on my critical reasoning faculties.

[brenthutch 383]

1 minute ago, JoeWeber said:

No thanks. I'll instead rely on my critical reasoning faculties.

How about actual evidence? One’s reasoning can be clouded by emotion.

[billvon 2,400]

9 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

The brake dust and tire particles are much higher than tailpipe emissions from ICE cars.

But how do they compare to the ICE's brake dust and tire particles?

Up next - 

Conservatives realize that EVs can go up to 100mph - and if you crash at 100mph you will DIE!  

EV's are DEATH TRAPS that can travel at UNSAFE SPEEDS and KILL YOUR KIDS!!  Stick with gas cars!

[JoeWeber 2,299]

4 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

How about actual evidence? One’s reasoning can be clouded by emotion.

And eyewitness reports are notoriously unreliable. I live on the water most of the year and travel the world regularly. The times they are a changin', and so are world weather patterns. Things invariably occur at speeds to slow or too fast for most folks to recognize or, owing to our short life spans, to care about. I'm not emotional about it, as I've posted here many times, I don't think there is hope owing to our true natures.

[brenthutch 383]

12 minutes ago, billvon said:

Up next - 

Conservatives realize that EVs can go up to 100mph - and if you crash at 100mph you will DIE!  

EV's are DEATH TRAPS that can travel at UNSAFE SPEEDS and KILL YOUR KIDS!!  Stick with gas cars!

 

9 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

The brake dust and tire particles are much higher than tailpipe emissions from ICE cars.

But how do they compare to the ICE's brake dust and tire particles?

 

EVs produce about 20% more pollution than ICE vehicles according to science.

Edited March 18 by brenthutch

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

11 minutes ago, billvon said:

Up next - 

Conservatives realize that EVs can go up to 100mph - and if you crash at 100mph you will DIE!  

EV's are DEATH TRAPS that can travel at UNSAFE SPEEDS and KILL YOUR KIDS!!  Stick with gas cars!

Mine doesn't.

Bolts are governed to 92 mph. I've been told it's because of the gearing and max RPMs on the electric drive motor.

My 928 has a rated top speed of 155 mph. 
I've had it a bit over 100, but I really don't have anywhere to go much faster without putting myself and others at an unacceptable level of risk.

I took the 928 out to California about 10 years ago, and part of the trip plan was to let it loose out in Utah or Nevada. Unfortunately, there was a balance issue with the tires, so it started shaking above 90. I've known of shakes like that that would appear at one speed, but go away at higher speeds (and reappear again at still higher speeds). But it didn't go away past 100, so I backed off. Running across Nevada at 90 was still fun.

[ryoder 1,384]

23 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Mine doesn't.

Bolts are governed to 92 mph. I've been told it's because of the gearing and max RPMs on the electric drive motor.

Now why didn't they choose to limit them to 88mph? ;-)

[headoverheels 291]

1 hour ago, ryoder said:

Now why didn't they choose to limit them to 88mph? ;-)

That lower limit only comes with the optional component installation.

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

11 hours ago, headoverheels said:

That lower limit only comes with the optional component installation.

O'Reilly Auto Parts has a sense of humor, even if GM doesn't.

https://www.oreillyauto.com/flux-capacitor

[ryoder 1,384]

5 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

O'Reilly Auto Parts has a sense of humor, even if GM doesn't.

https://www.oreillyauto.com/flux-capacitor

Peter White is a rather eccentric character who maintains an online shop with bicycle components. I have ordered parts from him in the past. His website looks pretty ordinary except for the oddity there is no way to order online; You must call to order.

However, click on the "Products" tab, then scroll down to "WMDs". ;-)

Peter White Cycles

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

5 minutes ago, ryoder said:

... His website looks pretty ordinary except for the oddity there is no way to order online; You must call to order.

However, click on the "Products" tab, then scroll down to "WMDs". ;-)

Peter White Cycles

That's pretty cool.

There's a 928 part supplier who does online ordering, but the 'most fun' way to order is to call and talk to the owner.
He's an ex-pat Brit, living in Texas, selling parts for German cars.
He's super knowledgeable about the cars, owns like 8 or 9, including a couple super rare ones, and is just an all around fun guy.

He's active on FB and the car boards, doesn't take himself too seriously, but is passionate about the 928. Phone calls for parts orders often take an extra 10 or 15 minutes, because he asks a fair amount of questions to make sure the part being ordered is correct for the specific car (there's a LOT of variance over the years) and just chatting about the cars in general.

Best story: I was talking on the phone, placing an order, and I wanted a hat. The connection wasn't the best, so he couldn't understand what I was asking for.
So I asked instead if he carried a cap. Still couldn't understand.

Thought about it a second or two, then asked for a 'chapeau' (French for hat).

He said something like "Oh, a hat. No, I don't carry those.

Talking to an ex-pat Brit, purchasing parts for a German car and we use French to understand each other.