Electric vehicles miles per KWh

Martyn1981

JKenH wrote: »

I don’t think it is true that diesel/petrol fleet emisssions are constant. There has been a continual tightening of ICE emissions regulations and this is continuing. The latest testing regime is having a significant impact on real world emissions after the dieselgate scandal so I believe we will see cleaner ICE fleets ( but not necessarily more economic vehicles). As the older vehicles leave the fleets they pass into the hands of motorists who on average are doing lower mileages so total ICE emissions will fall.

1. They may be cleaner, but they are still vastly dirty, and ICEV's can never meet the zero target for CO2 that we need to meet. [Not even possible if bio-energy was used, since the demand would be far too great.]

2. You say 'after the dieselgate scandal', I assume you mean Dieselgate 1, not Dieselgate 2 that has just popped up as it's been found that the VW 'fix' only works within a temperature window, and they failed to explain that in cold or hot weather it doesn't work. This has resulted in new litigation.

3. As ICEV's get older, their emissions actually rise per mile as the ICE wears.

4. Again, we need to be careful when talking about emissions, as we may only focus on CO2 (which of course is a BEV winner too) but with ICEV's we also have to consider the enormous localised pollution that they create, regardless of efficiency.

1961Nick

Martyn1981 wrote: »

1. They may be cleaner, but they are still vastly dirty, and ICEV's can never meet the zero target for CO2 that we need to meet. [Not even possible if bio-energy was used, since the demand would be far too great.]

2. You say 'after the dieselgate scandal', I assume you mean Dieselgate 1, not Dieselgate 2 that has just popped up as it's been found that the VW 'fix' only works within a temperature window, and they failed to explain that in cold or hot weather it doesn't work. This has resulted in new litigation.

3. As ICEV's get older, their emissions actually rise per mile as the ICE wears.

4. Again, we need to be careful when talking about emissions, as we may only focus on CO2 (which of course is a BEV winner too) but with ICEV's we also have to consider the enormous localised pollution that they create, regardless of efficiency.

The problem is that all ICE vehicles need to be at operating temperature with a hot exhaust for emissions controls to work effectively. Some vehicles never get warm enough for that to happen. You only need to look at the number of diesel vehicles with DPF issues to see that this is a widescale issue.

JKenH

Martyn1981 wrote: »

So, the true question, yet again, comes back to this -

Why, when we have a motoring forum, and extensive EV discussions on there, would you create a thread on the Green & Ethical Board to promote diesel over BEV's?

As with all your new threads, this one also appears to be nothing more than a 'vehicle' (see what I did there?) for your campaign against RE, AGW and FF emissions.

Mart, please don’t turn every thread into an us and them argument questioning the poster’s motives and complaining that any view that doesn’t accord with your black and white view of the world constitutes a campaign against RE and AGW.

Is it unreasonable to discuss how green an EV is compared to an ICE on this forum? I am pro EVs but open to the views of others even if they suggest in some circumstances EVs may not be as green as I had first thought. As a poster on another thread said we can each reach our own views on the merits of the arguments made. We are not snowflakes.

Martyn1981

1961Nick wrote: »

The problem is that all ICE vehicles need to be at operating temperature with a hot exhaust for emissions controls to work effectively. Some vehicles never get warm enough for that to happen. You only need to look at the number of diesel vehicles with DPF issues to see that this is a widescale issue.

I understand that, but I'm talking about external temperatures (not vehicular) and VW's new attempt to mislead on emissions and their 'dieselgate' fix. The court filings in Germany are that when VW settled the dieselgate case, they actually cheated with their software fix. :eek:

Effectively, when tested, the vehicles appeared to have been fixed. Tested of course in testing centres ....... inside testing centres.

But the fix only works when outside temps are between 10C and 32C.

So far this case applies to the software fix on the Tiquan, but could expand.


Plus you also have to consider VW going forward, and they seem to still be obsessed with the mythical 'clean diesel':

Sebastian Willman head of VW engine development recently said - "Diesel has always been very economical and now it is absolutely clean. Vehicles with the latest emissions technology, such as our current diesel engines, emit only very low nitrogen oxide emissions."

Martyn1981

JKenH wrote: »

Mart, please don’t turn every thread into an us and them argument questioning the poster’s motives and complaining that any view that doesn’t accord with your black and white view of the world constitutes a campaign against RE and AGW.

Is it unreasonable to discuss how green an EV is compared to an ICE on this forum? I am pro EVs but open to the views of others even if they suggest in some circumstances EVs may not be as green as I had first thought. As a poster on another thread said we can each reach our own views on the merits of the arguments made. We are not snowflakes.

Ken, you don't need to rush to GA's defence every single time.

The basis of this thread, like his others, is not to discuss green issues, but to spread anti-green agenda, and mis-information.

If you can defend his claims about diesel vehicles v's BEV's, and his figures, then do so, otherwise please stop running cover for him.

Thanks.

JKenH

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Ken, you don't need to rush to GA's defence every single time.

The basis of this thread, like his others, is not to discuss green issues, but to spread anti-green agenda, and mis-information.

If you can defend his claims about diesel vehicles v's BEV's, and his figures, then do so, otherwise please stop running cover for him.

Thanks.

I’m not defending GA, only his right to post without you attacking him because of who he is rather than what he says.

I don’t believe diesels are cleaner than BEVs. But BEVs are not pure as snow. They are better but because of the manufacturing cost and the fact we are a long way from a perfectly clean grid they will never be zero carbon.

Please have a read of this ICCT paper. Here is just one quote to demonstrate my point but please read the whole paper which is pro BEV.

An average electric vehicle in Europe produces 50% less life-cycle greenhouse gases over the first 150,000 kilometers of driving, although the relative benefit varies from 28% to 72%, depending on local electricity production.

1961Nick

Martyn1981 wrote: »

I understand that, but I'm talking about external temperatures (not vehicular) and VW's new attempt to mislead on emissions and their 'dieselgate' fix. The court filings in Germany are that when VW settled the dieselgate case, they actually cheated with their software fix. :eek:

Effectively, when tested, the vehicles appeared to have been fixed. Tested of course in testing centres ....... inside testing centres.

But the fix only works when outside temps are between 10C and 32C.

So far this case applies to the software fix on the Tiquan, but could expand.


Plus you also have to consider VW going forward, and they seem to still be obsessed with the mythical 'clean diesel':

Sebastian Willman head of VW engine development recently said - "Diesel has always been very economical and now it is absolutely clean. Vehicles with the latest emissions technology, such as our current diesel engines, emit only very low nitrogen oxide emissions."

Manufacturers have been fiddling the figures ever since engine management systems were invented. It started with simple stuff like leaning the mixture at 56mph & 75mph to improve fuel test cycle results. Everyone knew this was happening, including the authorities, and because of that it became accepted practice to tune an engine for testing. All VAG did was to take it one step too far at a time when the threshold for acceptable behaviour was increasing.

Even before engine management systems, it was normal practice to select gear ratios to enable a performance car to reach 60mph in second gear.

GreatApe

Martyn1981 wrote: »

"]Share of coal in UK's electricity system falls to record lows[/URL]

Dr Iain Staffell, of Imperial College London, said: “An electric vehicle in the UK simply cannot be more polluting than its petrol or diesel equivalent – even when taking into account the upfront carbon cost of manufacturing their batteries. Any EV bought today could be emitting just a tenth of what a petrol car would in as little as five years’ time, as the electricity it uses to charge comes from an increasingly low-carbon mix.”



I think this is false accounting

EVs are marginal load and what matters is marginal generation

If the grid is 90 units wind 10 units gas and you plug in a thousand EVs the grid becomes 90 units wind 11 units gas. On a fair accounting the EVs are being charged fully by gas in that example even if the grid is 90% wind 10% gas

As such the good doctors analysis is false


Also as mentioned the UK is a small part of the global vehicles market
The UK while now is marginal gas it will soon be marginal clean (mostly marginal french nuclear imports) so soon UK EVs will indeed be quite clean

However the two mamoth sized car markets are China and the USA combined accounting for about 50 million new cars per year. The Chinese grid is coal marginal and the USA is coal/gas marginal.

GreatApe

JKenH wrote: »

I don’t think it is true that diesel/petrol fleet emisssions are constant. There has been a continual tightening of ICE emissions regulations and this is continuing. The latest testing regime is having a significant impact on real world emissions after the dieselgate scandal so I believe we will see cleaner ICE fleets ( but not necessarily more economic vehicles). As the older vehicles leave the fleets they pass into the hands of motorists who on average are doing lower mileages so total ICE emissions will fall.

There is pressure to increase the provision of workplace charging points with tax breaks for employees and this may well lead to a change in charging habits for those who are lucky enough to have free charging at work. As EV performance is reduced in winter (colder weather, increased use of lights, wipers, heaters etc) the demand on the grid during the working day will increase. There is a possibility therefore that the EV fleet emissions may in the short term get dirtier.

Both good points

However I would say the UK is soon (5 years) marginal green
That means EVs especially if charged during the night will be clean

That isn't the case for China (30 million new cars per year) USA (20 million new cars per year) or Germany (4 million new per year) who are mostly marignal coal or in the US case coal and NG

Anyway my main point of this thread is that headline figures for EVs are misleading
They use a lot of energy while stationary so while quite efficient when moving they are negative efficiency when stationary. All of the losses added up EVs are around 17-25% efficient which isn't much better than petrol/diesel.

Of course even of they are no more efficient the ability to shift away from oil (most expensive FF) to gas and coal (much cheaper 3-6x cheaper) and no tailpipe emmissions is an advantage and in due course marignal clean powered.

GreatApe

JKenH wrote: »

I’m not defending GA, only his right to post without you attacking him because of who he is rather than what he says.

I don’t believe diesels are cleaner than BEVs. But BEVs are not pure as snow. They are better but because of the manufacturing cost and the fact we are a long way from a perfectly clean grid they will never be zero carbon.

Please have a read of this ICCT paper. Here is just one quote to demonstrate my point but please read the whole paper which is pro BEV.

An average electric vehicle in Europe produces 50% less life-cycle greenhouse gases over the first 150,000 kilometers of driving, although the relative benefit varies from 28% to 72%, depending on local electricity production.

Mart is a holy troll only he wraps it up in holier than thou speech to hide it from others and himself

Regarding BEVs there is a huge difference if you think of their charging as average load or marginal load. I view EVs as marginal load charged by marginal generation

If the grid is 90 units wind 10 unit coal and you plug an EV in what happens?
Well it becomes 90 units wind 11 units coal

Is that EV being charged with 90% wind 10% coal
Or 0% wind 100% coal?

Depending on how you view it it makes a huge difference to how 'clean' or not EVs are

I'd argue, I think correctly, that EVs should be accounted for as marginal generation charged bad such they are not very clean. Unless marginal generation in your grid is clean. That's true for say France (marignal nuclear at least for 9 months of the year) but not for say Germany (marginal coal)