Battery Electric Vehicle News / Enjoying the Transportation Revolution

GreatApe

Anyway I will say one thing which I think Marty said before, long term more BEVs allow more wind to be placed onto the grid so long term BEVs emmissions will be lower even if they are worse today in most the world which is coal marginal (China Germany many US states India Indonesia Pakistan Japan...well pretty much everyone)

So 15+ years out BEVs male sense if the aim is to lower CO2 emmissions
Not now though now they are worse than a hybrid in most the world and about par in the UK

TBH it's even further out than 15 years more like 25-30+ years out when BEVs make sense because heating can be Electrified first to allow the grid to integrate huge quantities more wind/solar without the need for BEVs to try and solve curtailment

A £30 smart heater solves curtailment and the problem of 'too much wind' we don't need to be spending £30,000 on BEVs to solve a problem a £30 heater can solve

Anyway the future is positive software will solve everything

almillar

Conventional power stations respond via the laws of physics

No, crossed wires here. I'm talking about having to estimate the big peaks in demand, having to power them up and shut them down. It's not relevant here, I shouldn't have mentioned it.

Come on now, we've established that in a CCGT heavy grid like the UK using BEVs are a little more efficient depending on how it's used and which particular model we are talking about. For instance the e golf of used mostly on motorways is less efficient than a Prius or corrolla ICE

We most certainly have not. On any kind of distance motorway journey, your hybrid will be out of electric, so you'll be running on petrol. That 106g/km will shoot up. The figure isn't static for a hybrid, see. People asking what MPG an Outlander does, shouldn't be given one answer.

And if in a coal heavy grid (most of the world) then the BEV is less efficient

Not the UK! I thought we were talking about the UK now.

I wasn't double counting heating
I looked at the model 3 and the e golf miles per kWh without heating

I have given you my figures for all year round. That includes power to the motor, heated windscreen, heated seats, heated steering wheel, air con including heating and all the bloody accessories on the car. STOP the double counting. If you're going to use figures, share them. I have, and you're refusing to use them.

100+ drivers ideally the electricity measured at the meter before the charger.
This way we could see total energy into the charger Vs miles and indeed get a total all in miles per KWh

Will you accept 90% efficiency as a broad generalisation? You quoted 85% yourself. Why do you get to make up/estimate numbers, whereas when I give you actual measured figures, you want a survey done? It just doesn't suit your narrative.

'In the UK probably 70-120g depending on model and useage'

'Electricity isn't a physical product for you to say your electricity goes into your car'

'It really doesn't matter what people think'

I wasn't asking you, I was asking JKenH.

It's not zero as per your assertion
The additional CO2 is marginal emmissions from your 4KWh charge

But it isn't

(NET)

Oh my word. You demand that a load is placed on the grid when my dad charges his car. Accepted. I've tried to explain that his solar panels are relaxing the load somewhere else. You refuse to accept that. It's like the solar panels don't even exist in your head!!

two parallel universes. One where you charge one where you don't, you can provide that the one where you charged up there are greater emmissions.

Let's go with this. In the third one, my dad doesn't have those solar panels. Subtract his production. By your logic, he's now using X2 the electric!

JKenH

almillar wrote: »

JKenH:


GA's argument applies to every single thing you ever switch on, that is connected to the grid. He has focussed on EVs, and now you're repeating it. I think it's wrong to obsess over marginal. The discussion is above for all to read, and make up their own minds but I'll repeat this fact, 'if EVs use marginal FF energy to charge, so does every other grid connected device'.

First, can I say, I don’t believe there is necessarily a right or wrong answer to this issue of BEVs using marginal FF energy. It can be argued either way. This is the point I was making. GA makes a valid argument and so do you. I entirely understand your point that all generation can be considered marginal. I recall making a similar comment to GA about switching a kettle on earlier in the thread. I have though since changed my mind.

almillar wrote: »

Just to confirm you're paying attention, how many g/km of CO2 does a BEV produce, according to our discussion?

Pass on actual figures. When it comes to CO2 from driving that entirely depends on whether you regard the generation used to charge your car as marginal or core generation. If the former then unless wind is being curtailed I would probably take the CO2 figure for gas produced electricity. When wind is being curtailed then the marginal generation is CO2 free.

If we regard charging our cars as core generation then it will be an average of whatever the CO2 cost of electricity is at the time. What we cannot do is claim it is marginal generation when the wind is blowing and claim it is an average of the grid figure at other times.

almillar wrote: »

Again, let me understand your standpoint. My dad produces 4kWh from his solar panels, and they go directly to his Leaf. He drives 12 miles, at 3 miles/kWh. He has used 4kWh.

Is that a Zero Emission journey or not? I argue it is, NET. GA argues that a load has been placed on the grid so emmissions were produced. I think this ignores the production from the panels. What do YOU think?

.

When this discussion started I was 100 % in agreement with you that electricity sourced from one’s own solar PV was emission free. Now I see it like GA does.

I had solar before I had an electric car. Some of my generation got used in the house and the rest got used in the grid, perhaps by my neighbours or perhaps by you or anyone else who was drawing from the grid. Now, I have bought an EV, let’s say I manage to put 10kwh into the car on a sunny day. That is 10kwh that doesn’t get exported to the grid and so 10kwh more has to be generated by the grid to meet that shortfall. How dirty that 10kwh is will depend on the mix of the grid that day. So the marginal CO2 generated as a result of me putting 10kwh of energy into my car is not the zero CO2 it would be from my solar but the CO2 from the extra generation the grid has to produce.

I hope that makes my own viewpoint a bit clearer. What I have just argued and what GA argues is probably not how everyone sees it but to me the argument seems valid. I do get fed up with some (not aimed at you) however who are very entrenched in their views and claim every time I express an opinion with which they disagree that it is an attempt to undermine RE, BEVs, AGW, the forum or whatever. It isn’t; one can be a supporter of RE and BEVs and still accept there may be drawbacks that need discussing. I just don’t subscribe to the “with us or against us mentality”. Life isn’t black and white and what works for one person will not necessarily be the prescription for all.

ABrass

This is the news thread, not the bickering thread.

For the US the electric F150 is showing more signs of being a real thing. Due 2021 or so

Tuesday, Ford made good on that plan for its Michigan plants, confirming and detailing the role that they’ll have in delivering electric and hybrid versions of the F-150 pickup, autonomous vehicles, and other products.

https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1126453_electric-ford-f-150-pickup-confirmed-for-michigan-assembly-likely-for-2021

GreatApe

almillar wrote: »

We most certainly have not. On any kind of distance motorway journey, your hybrid will be out of electric, so you'll be running on petrol. That 106g/km will shoot up. The figure isn't static for a hybrid, see.

I'm not talking about a plug in hybrid I'm talking about a normal hybrid
It gets this 106g across the range
In fact I think it tends to do a little bit better on the motorway but not by much

Not the UK! I thought we were talking about the UK now.

No we are talking about BEVs we just happen to be in the UK so reference it often but regarding the technology it's more reasonable to talk about the big car markets like China USA Japan etc which are more marginal coal than gas or s mix.

I have given you my figures for all year round. That includes power to the motor, heated windscreen, heated seats, heated steering wheel, air con including heating and all the bloody accessories on the car. STOP the double counting. If you're going to use figures, share them. I have, and you're refusing to use them.

I accept your 75g and 3.7m/kWh

Will you accept 90% efficiency as a broad generalisation? You quoted 85% yourself. Why do you get to make up/estimate numbers, whereas when I give you actual measured figures, you want a survey done? It just doesn't suit your narrative.

I'm happy to use whatever it most accurate I started off by looking at s graph and it varied depending on how it was charged and most people seemed to use a round 85%. The other ooster here said 87% he had a meter on his wall so let's go with 87% if you like

That takes your 3.7m/kWh @ 87% @ 407g = 79g.... Wait....is your 3.7m/kWh behind the charger?

Are you getting 3.7m/kWh as reported by the car or a meter behind your charger?

I assume it's your car if so 3.7 / 0.87 = 3.22m/kWh through your home socket @407g = 79g/km

Oh my word. You demand that a load is placed on the grid when my dad charges his car. Accepted. I've tried to explain that his solar panels are relaxing the load somewhere else. You refuse to accept that. It's like the solar panels don't even exist in your head!!

The solar panels exist and offset marginal gas in fact they do even more than that they help improve lower grid losses too. If the panels generate 4,000 units a year they save about 407g a unit = 1.63 tons per year saved

So the PV saves emissions of CO2

To say the PV charges the car and lowers the cars emmissions makes as much sense as me saying the apple tree I planted last year lowers my diesel cars emmissions.

Let's go with this. In the third one, my dad doesn't have those solar panels. Subtract his production. By your logic, he's now using X2 the electric!

Whatever the solar panels do are allocated to the solar panels not the car

If someone stole your solar panels and broke them then the alternative universe sees emmissions of 1.63 additional tons

The car is irrelevant in the picture
Having the car not having the car the solar panels reduce emmissions by the same sum

Solarchaser

Keep going Al.

I think anyone reading can see your making your points clear and concise, and obviously dealing in truths.... however much wriggling goes on from the other side

Soon enough you will give up and scroll by like the majority of readers of this board.

Just as some cats to meet the pigeons.... when I got my ev, I also added more solar panels.
So they weren't there before.... nothing going back to the grid....
Marginal ff, my rear end!

Cardew

Martyn1981 wrote: »

@Al.



So whilst I agree with what you are saying, and normally believe it's worth pushing back on all the denial, FUD, negative nonsense and lies ....... in the case of this poster (and his other account cells), it's probably best to do what dozens of us have already done, and place him on ignore.

If you all put him on ignore there wouldn't be a problem. He could make his points and those who haven't got him on ignore can respond if they wish.


The truth is that you cannot bear your dominance of this Board challenged, and like so many others in the past with whom you disagreed, you resort to personal attacks.



P.S.
I note that you no longer argue against solar farms being much less efficient than sub-4kWh systems on the roofs of houses dotted around the country;)

Kernel_Sanders

GreatApe wrote: »

The solar panels exist and offset marginal gas in fact they do even more than that they help improve lower grid losses too. If the panels generate 4,000 units a year they save about 407g a unit = 1.63 tons per year saved

So the PV saves emissions of CO2

To say the PV charges the car and lowers the cars emmissions makes as much sense as me saying the apple tree I planted last year lowers my diesel cars emmissions

I get this, because the PV can't be offsetting carbon elsewhere on the Grid if it's charging the car.

GreatApe wrote: »

Whatever the solar panels do are allocated to the solar panels not the car

If someone stole your solar panels and broke them then the alternative universe sees emmissions of 1.63 additional tons

The car is irrelevant in the picture
Having the car not having the car the solar panels reduce emmissions by the same sum

I don't get this, because charging the car from the PV means that elsewhere on the Grid, an identical demand will have to be satisfied by fossil fuel generation instead. Therefore, how can it be irrelevant as to whether the car is charged or not?

GreatApe

Kernel_Sanders wrote: »

I get this, because the PV can't be offsetting carbon elsewhere on the Grid if it's charging the car.

Yes

I don't get this, because charging the car from the PV means that elsewhere on the Grid, an identical demand will have to be satisfied by fossil fuel generation instead. Therefore, how can it be irrelevant as to whether the car is charged or not?

I can see why my wording is confusing

What I mean is the car is responsible for its own emmissions and the PV panels for their own emmissions reduction

So if someone broke the PV panels there are more emmissions because the PV panels have been broken, not because the car is plugged in.


Also interestingly to confuse matters further, if someone buys an EV and then decides to buy solar panels because they have an EV then I'd say you can argue the combo of the two offset each other. Because new solar was added to the grid as a result of the EV. Still the EV is causing emmissions because let's say this guy crashes his EV and has to walk for the rest of the year. Are emmissions lower? Yes because the solar panels that would have been 'charging the car' will be offsetting grid CCGTs output. If emmissions are lower due to crashing the car and walking. Then emmissions are clearly higher if the car doesn't get crashed. Irrespective of solar on the roof or not. Another example of why 'my solar panels charge my car so it's zero Emissions isn't quite the full picture

Kernel_Sanders

GreatApe wrote: »

If emmissions are lower due to crashing the car and walking, then emmissions are clearly higher if the car doesn't get crashed. Irrespective of solar on the roof or not.

No, they aren't higher, they are still neutral because in your scenario, that solar on the roof is cancelling out the electrical demands of the EV. You appear have duplicated the effects of the EV's disablement.

If you apply some logic and clear thinking, I think you will come to the conclusion that total carbon emmissions must differ when this particular PV installation is taken into account.