BEVs deals and information

If you agree that vehicle emissions have fallen over time, how can you not argue that a newer fleet isn't better for the environment & therefore 'green & ethical'?

Rx8 is probably a bad example tbh, since they are almost a 2 stroke with the amount of engine oil they need to burn to keep the rotary engine happy

Martyn1981 wrote: »

I can see what you mean about some points, especially if cars don't get used to their max.

However, I can't agree with the above paragraph, the emissions of an ICE when used are enormous, made worse by their inefficiencies wasting around 75% of the gross energy in the fuel. We also need to include all the energy and emissions consumed/emitted in locating, extracting, transporting, refining and transporting (again) the fuel. Just the refining process alone consumes around 6kWh of energy per gallon.

On top of that they get less efficient and have higher emissions as they get older.

In contrast, whilst a BEV will have higher initial energy consumption due to the batt pack, it's energy consumption going forward is far lower, far more efficient, and year on year will get cleaner in line with grid CO2 reductions.

It might seem like a waste scrapping a perfectly good incandescent lamp, or CRT TV, but if the lower energy alternative is cleaner (net) then the waste can be justified, even if it seems somewhat wrong on the face of it.

Im interesting in working this out so here goes.

My car is about 130g of CO2 per km so about 210 g/mile about 40 miles to the gallon with 6kwh mentioned above extra at roughly 3.5kg extra CO2 per gallon so for 200 miles it would be roughly 56kg CO2
For 8000 miles it would be 2.24 tonnes of CO2. (really? !!!!!!!)



My electricity supplier published figures are 361g kw/h so about 90 g/mile if charged from my mains.
So for 200 miles it would be roughly 18kg CO2

8000 miles would be 0.72 tonnes (0.4 tonnes if I used all my export from solar including losses)



Difference of 1.52 tonnes.(1.84)



Takes about 15-20 tonnes of CO2 to make a tesla... so if you count in generous extra maintenance on the diesel it would be the same over the next 10 years as the tesla, which might be scrapped by then... with the old diesel van engine twice as old and replaced half the time...
...of course you might say running a diesel car for 20 years is ridiculous... ...not really I say as I look out at a 22 year old diesel campervan, although the co2 figures for that must be horrendous!



I'll help save the planet by keeping driving the old diesel thanks... ;-)
Its a simplistic point and not comparing apples with apples but its my situation now and from above you would see that it would take 10 years or more of running the old diesel to see the benefit of the tesla.

However and this goes back to my fundamental point, that that would be over 10 years from now and not front loaded into the atmosphere from the minute I hit order until the minute it arrives in the dealer. Thats also assuming I still do 8k miles a year, it might be economically unviable to do that in 5 or 6 years time or I may not need to with improvements in public transport, either way I will still have front loaded that extra 15-20 tonnes of CO2 which is there regardless of any future mileage.
Isnt some young kid banging on about the point of no return or something....

I'd guess not, as it's not a typical use deisel car.
The figure used to be 18k miles a year was expected mileage on a deisel.... I think that would change your figures somewhat, say 4.5 tonnes a year... ouch!
At 5 years old taking your top figure for the tesla, it seems the Tesla makes more sense environmentally