How Electric Cars Save The Planet

[Boges]

9 minutes ago, Gaétan said:

Battery vehicles are not a responsible choice because of the waste of resources and the pollution generated by the extraction of minerals and recyclable does not mean recycled, you will have tons of batteries which will accumulate like bottles that we don't know what to do with and which will pollute the environment, you would have to have multiple charging stations everywhere and wait an hour to recharge your vehicle, I see the queues appearing, that requires a network of huge infrastructure that needs to be built. When people are forced to wait 6 hours to recharge their vehicles they will buy one with hydrogen, battery cars are miserable and can hardly be used in the trucks which pollute the most. We must favor hydrogen, current service stations can offer charging which only takes a few minutes and allows you to drive more than 1,000 km on a single tank. To produce green hydrogen you need electricity but nuclear energy can be considered like wind turbines or the production of hydrogen could be done when the demand for electricity is less strong such as at night. The most ecological and future-proof choice is hydrogen. Hydrogen is an inexhaustible resource, it is everywhere in the universe. Battery factories will end up being big white elephants, they have no future. Billions in subsidies for battery factories are wasted money.

As I said you can not only take into account the gas emissions produced by the car, but every waste of precious ore and the overall pollution produced by the batteries in the end even the gas car has an impact less polluting, you are better off with hydrogen, wind turbines and nuclear power plants. Another case where the cure is worse than the disease.

Study: Electric Vehicles Pollute More Than Gas-powered Cars - The New American

Lots of stale talking points here. 

It's funny how in one breath ya'll will say that Batteries contain too many rare earth metals and in a second breath you claim that all those valuable metals will just sit in a landfill and not be recycled. 

I just did a road trip from the Toronto area to Montreal and need to charge 6 times. I didn't have to wait once. 

But most EV owners that own a single family home will charge at home for a vast majority of their EV usage. 

[taxme]

On 3/21/2023 at 5:30 AM, Boges said:

So EVs in Quebec that get charged from Hydro Power are Fossil fuel based? 

Nuclear Power is Fossel Fuel based? 

Solar and Wind? 

Solar and wind? Useless on a cloudy or a non windy day. Hello lefty? ?

[Boges]

7 minutes ago, taxme said:

Solar and wind? Useless on a cloudy or a non windy day. Hello lefty? ?

Energy storage will be a game changer for renewable energy in the coming years. 

[taxme]

On 3/21/2023 at 5:21 AM, reason10 said:

Considering ALL EV charging is fossil fuel based, and considering that battery material is the product of CHILD SLAVE LABOR (kinda like American cotton production in the 19th Century) I'd say there's nothing green or conservational about EVs.

I just love my fossil fuel carbon emitting vehicle. Carbon is good for the planet. Carbon helps me to keep breathing and helps to keep me alive. Although, EV's need fossil fuels to charge up their batteries, which i suppose is good for the planet also. It's just that when an EV needs charging, one must sit and wait around for the EV to get charged up and ready to go which takes plenty of time to do so. With a fossil fuel gas running vehicle, it takes approx five minutes to tank up and i am ready to go. I will stick with my fossil fuel vehicle. It works well for me. ?

[Gaétan]

4 minutes ago, taxme said:

I just love my fossil fuel carbon emitting vehicle. Carbon is good for the planet. Carbon helps me to keep breathing and helps to keep me alive. Although, EV's need fossil fuels to charge up their batteries, which i suppose is good for the planet also. It's just that when an EV needs charging, one must sit and wait around for the EV to get charged up and ready to go which takes plenty of time to do so. With a fossil fuel gas running vehicle, it takes approx five minutes to tank up and i am ready to go. I will stick with my fossil fuel vehicle. It works well for me. ?

Hydrogen is more efficient than gaz and is less polluting and a waste of resources than batteries, can be use on machineries, busses and trucks, batteries don't and you don't have to wait for services, actual service stations can be used and we don't need to build a huge electrical structure. Battery cars just pollute as much as fuel cars.

[herbie]

You're not going to be able to switch your gas tank for a hydrogen tank and go merrily on your way, so you're whole rant against batteries is moot, rehashing tired but out of date objections again and again.
Batteries do get recycled. No matter what you make, you use resources. The pollution, labour problems and carbon objections of resource extraction are another issue.
Somewhat hypocritical as one is posting objections to BEVs from their lithium battery powered laptop, tablet or phone.
Just as the concern over the electrical grid is as we simultaneously prod people to switch to electric heat exchangers instead of oil & gas. Obviously we have to boost the electrical supply and acting like that is simply not possible is foolish.

[taxme]

1 hour ago, Boges said:

Energy storage will be a game changer for renewable energy in the coming years. 

And just how are you going to store all of the energy that will be needed in the coming years? Just asking? 

[taxme]

1 hour ago, Gaétan said:

Hydrogen is more efficient than gaz and is less polluting and a waste of resources than batteries, can be use on machineries, busses and trucks, batteries don't and you don't have to wait for services, actual service stations can be used and we don't need to build a huge electrical structure. Battery cars just pollute as much as fuel cars.

One has to wonder why the greenies pushing EV's are not in on the use of hydrogen? Not much money to be made there, maybe? All this climate change nonsense is all and only about some scumbags like Al Gore, Leonardo Decrapio, Bill Gates and of course Klaus the Swabster who stand to make millions of dollars with this climate change bullshit nonsense. And those people mentioned above, among many more, will never practice what they preach. They do just the opposite.

All those climate change globalist liars spend a lot of time flying around the world using and driving fossil fuel cars and yachts. They also will not eat bugs. They will have their steaks for dinner while they want us to eat fried bugs. Aren't they just a wonderful bunch of globalist elite bastards. ?

[Gaétan]

44 minutes ago, taxme said:

One has to wonder why the greenies pushing EV's are not in on the use of hydrogen? Not much money to be made there, maybe? All this climate change nonsense is all and only about some scumbags like Al Gore, Leonardo Decrapio, Bill Gates and of course Klaus the Swabster who stand to make millions of dollars with this climate change bullshit nonsense. And those people mentioned above, among many more, will never practice what they preach. They do just the opposite.

All those climate change globalist liars spend a lot of time flying around the world using and driving fossil fuel cars and yachts. They also will not eat bugs. They will have their steaks for dinner while they want us to eat fried bugs. Aren't they just a wonderful bunch of globalist elite bastards. ?

You have to find out who benefits from the crime and they are the ones who put these ideas in your head, the fossil fuel industry

[Aristides]

5 hours ago, taxme said:

One has to wonder why the greenies pushing EV's are not in on the use of hydrogen? Not much money to be made there, maybe? All this climate change nonsense is all and only about some scumbags like Al Gore, Leonardo Decrapio, Bill Gates and of course Klaus the Swabster who stand to make millions of dollars with this climate change bullshit nonsense. And those people mentioned above, among many more, will never practice what they preach. They do just the opposite.

All those climate change globalist liars spend a lot of time flying around the world using and driving fossil fuel cars and yachts. They also will not eat bugs. They will have their steaks for dinner while they want us to eat fried bugs. Aren't they just a wonderful bunch of globalist elite bastards. ?

Climate change is no longer debatable, it's real. The fact there are hypocrites does not change that.

The main problem with hydrogen is it takes a lot of energy to produce green hydrogen.

[Gaétan]

22 hours ago, Aristides said:

Climate change is no longer debatable, it's real. The fact there are hypocrites does not change that.

The main problem with hydrogen is it takes a lot of energy to produce green hydrogen.

It takes energy too to use battery car but we can build nuclear power plan fot that.

[Aristides]

43 minutes ago, Gaétan said:

It takes energy too to use battery car but we can build nuclear power plan fot that.

A battery is just a storage device. The amount of electricity required to make green hydrogen through electrolysis is greater than just putting it in a battery. I think we will need nuclear power as one of the sources to provide enough power to electrify the economy. Hydro, wind and solar won't be enough.

[reason10]

On 10/27/2023 at 3:21 PM, taxme said:

I just love my fossil fuel carbon emitting vehicle. Carbon is good for the planet. Carbon helps me to keep breathing and helps to keep me alive. Although, EV's need fossil fuels to charge up their batteries, which i suppose is good for the planet also. It's just that when an EV needs charging, one must sit and wait around for the EV to get charged up and ready to go which takes plenty of time to do so. With a fossil fuel gas running vehicle, it takes approx five minutes to tank up and i am ready to go. I will stick with my fossil fuel vehicle. It works well for me. ?

Not to mention the EVs use up more fossil fuels than your gasoline engine car.

At some point, the FREE MARKET will find a way for EV batteries to (a) last longer than a year, (b) cost less than $26,000. Right now, EVs are the vehicle of the rich and stupid.

[reason10]

On 10/27/2023 at 10:47 PM, Aristides said:

Climate change is no longer debatable, it's real. The fact there are hypocrites does not change that.

The main problem with hydrogen is it takes a lot of energy to produce green hydrogen.

Nobody with an education denies that the climate changes (on a local level,that's what CLIMATE is.) And global climate has changed LONG before homo sape arrived on this planet, (assuming the records are anywhere near accurate.)

Only a brain dead mor0n (most of which are Democrat) somehow think human activity can change the climate.

[Aristides]

3 minutes ago, reason10 said:

Nobody with an education denies that the climate changes (on a local level,that's what CLIMATE is.) And global climate has changed LONG before homo sape arrived on this planet, (assuming the records are anywhere near accurate.)

Only a brain dead mor0n (most of which are Democrat) somehow think human activity can change the climate.

Global warming is a reality and it is accelerating. Glacial melt rates and ocean temperatures confirm this. The fire season Canada just experienced had been expected  but not for at least another decade. You are a fool if you think climate change gives a shit about anyone's politics. 

[herbie]

Ram's future commercial vehicle lineup could include both battery-electric and hydrogen fuel-cell vans.
https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1141210_ram-electric-van-lineup-to-expand-gain-hydrogen-fuel-cell-version

17 hours ago, Aristides said:

The amount of electricity required to make green hydrogen through electrolysis is greater than just putting it in a battery.

Oh. (about the limit of my response)
Choosing to ignore the energy expenditures in every other type of fuel production, delivery,construction and motor efficiency? And who says we must only use 'green hydrogen'?
The goal is to reduce CO2 emissions from vehicles. Hybrids only reduce that. BEVs, fuel cells and H2 powered ICE eliminate it.

These primary arguments revolve around more electric grid as if that's an unsolvable problem which it isn't. Many countries now get more of their electricity from alternate sources than from traditional ones, most without going nuclear. The sun, wind, moon and the core of the earth are right there to use.

[Aristides]

I've never said the problem is unsolvable, we have to solve it, just that it will take a variety of technologies and energy sources to replace fossil fuels.  Hydrogen has its own issues like the extremely low temperatures required to keep it liquid and  embrittlement because the H2 atom is so small it can penetrate apparently solid materials. Hydrogen will be suitable for some applications, batteries for others. Both will need sources of electrical energy either to produce the hydrogen fuel or to store in a battery. Synthetic fuels will also be necessary in applications where hydrogen and batteries aren't viable. I don't believe there is a single silver bullet that can replace fossil fuels and replacing them is a more complicated problem than many would like to admit.

Edited October 29, 2023 by Aristides

[Gaétan]

On 10/29/2023 at 5:41 PM, Aristides said:

I've never said the problem is unsolvable, we have to solve it, just that it will take a variety of technologies and energy sources to replace fossil fuels.  Hydrogen has its own issues like the extremely low temperatures required to keep it liquid and  embrittlement because the H2 atom is so small it can penetrate apparently solid materials. Hydrogen will be suitable for some applications, batteries for others. Both will need sources of electrical energy either to produce the hydrogen fuel or to store in a battery. Synthetic fuels will also be necessary in applications where hydrogen and batteries aren't viable. I don't believe there is a single silver bullet that can replace fossil fuels and replacing them is a more complicated problem than many would like to admit.

It doesn't make sense to me to replace fuel cars by batteries that produce as much as pollution as fuel cars and a waste of resources, there are hydrogen cars on the market right now. It can be used for ships, airplanes, trucks, heavy machineries and cars off course.

[Aristides]

14 minutes ago, Gaétan said:

It doesn't make sense to me to replace fuel cars by batteries that produce as much as pollution as fuel cars and a waste of resources, there are hydrogen cars on the market right now. It can be used for ships, airplanes, trucks, heavy machineries and cars off course.

 

Cars using fuel cells are EV's. Instead of storing electricity in a battery to power an electric motor, they convert the hydrogen to electricity on board. Right now most hydrogen is produced using natural gas and involves emissions. Producing hydrogen using electricity through electrolysis requires huge amounts of electricity and putting more energy in than you get out.

The biggest problem with hydrogen is the process used to extract it and the main problem with batteries is their low energy density. I don't think it is one or the other, both will probably be needed.

[reason10]

On 10/29/2023 at 11:58 AM, Aristides said:

Global warming is a reality and it is accelerating. Glacial melt rates and ocean temperatures confirm this. The fire season Canada just experienced had been expected  but not for at least another decade. You are a fool if you think climate change gives a shit about anyone's politics. 

If global warming had arrived when you Nazis first suggested, Florida would be under water. Over the past 25 years, I have watched the Gulf coast water lines and they haven't moved an inch. Al the OZONE MAN has been proven WRONG.

No intelligent person would deny the planet's ability to warm and cool. Assuming the records of the past are accurate, the planet has warmed and cooled, to the point where an ICE AGE wiped out the dinosaurs. That's not an issue.

The issue is whether or not human activity can warm an entire  planet when humans only take up less than 10 percent of the entire surface of this planet.

Humans cannot warm a town in winter. Humans can't even PREDICT warm trends or cooling trends with any reliable accuracy.

You give Homo Sape way too much credit for the weather.

[Gaétan]

42 minutes ago, Aristides said:

The biggest problem with hydrogen is the process used to extract it and the main problem with batteries is their low energy density. I don't think it is one or the other, both will probably be needed.

Hydrogen can be extracted from a non polluting product as water and with nuclear powered electricity. Battery cars just make as much pollution as fuel cars and is a waste of resources.

[reason10]

On 10/27/2023 at 3:39 PM, Gaétan said:

Hydrogen is more efficient than gaz and is less polluting and a waste of resources than batteries, can be use on machineries, busses and trucks, batteries don't and you don't have to wait for services, actual service stations can be used and we don't need to build a huge electrical structure. Battery cars just pollute as much as fuel cars.

At some point, when the FREE MARKET decides,  perhaps hydrogen will become the fuel of the future.

It is interesting to note that for centuries the transportation fuel was basically horse feed, which took many acres to create. No one could have predicted that horses would have been replaced by those smoky, loud internal combustion four wheeled thingys. But they did.

[Aristides]

9 minutes ago, Gaétan said:

Hydrogen can be extracted from a non polluting product as water and with nuclear powered electricity. Battery cars just make as much pollution as fuel cars and is a waste of resources.

What's the difference between using electricity to make hydrogen or storing it in a battery? Fuel cells use a lot of platinum in their construction so they have their own impact on resources. If you burn hydrogen in a conventional ICE, you are using huge amounts of electricity to produce the hydrogen and then burning it in an engine that is probably not more than 40% efficient.

I don't think we can make the transition without using more nuclear power.

Edited October 31, 2023 by Aristides

[Gaétan]

5 hours ago, Aristides said:

What's the difference between using electricity to make hydrogen or storing it in a battery? 

They say that battery cars use a lot of resources, pollude to make the resource available, cars are overweighted, need more use of brakes and tire use and is also pollute more at use, it is just a big scam of ore industries.

Edited October 31, 2023 by Gaétan

[herbie]

2 hours ago, Aristides said:

I don't think we can make the transition without using more nuclear power.

I disagree, but don't condemn it's use. Maybe Scott Moe should be pushing it as Sask. could have a future. Maybe we could be training nuclear scientists and engineers again instead of coders to produce more scams (and have to compete with wages in India)....