38% of cars sold in China are now electric, Sinopec says the ICE is doomed

[marvin78]

I wonder if this spurs us into better domestic production ( Tesla finally has competition ) or greatly delays electrification here.

Orange guy will make it so oil get's 'more attractive' in any way possible, including on purpose getting into tariff wars which will strategically slow down electrification not just there, but everywhere. Because if YOU(r country) start doing this, Europe isn't getting out of that mess without getting involved in the trade wars.

It's not like it's a choice, current domestic US production, it's a matter of availability of commercially viable mining options which the US afaik just doesn't have. The US has a lot of oil though... more then SA even. So for some it's more important to get as much money with that, then 'silly things like climate change which obviously is just a hoax' /sarcasm

 

[stancecoke]

…the “range extender” was a different model , the “i3 Rex” , and is no longer available .

The REX was an optional extra that the customer could order with his i3. It only had a very small gas tank, as the regulations in California required that the range on gasoline was not greater than the electric range in order to receive ZEV credits.

Every BMW i3 has the space for the ICE in the rear. You can get a trunk extension to make that space usable:

WOKEBY - products - BMW i3 Trunk Extension

The original BMW i3 trunk extension by WOKEBY. Suitable for all BMW i3 and i3s wihtout Range Extender. It gives you about 35 liters of additional space

wokeby.de

 

[neptronix]

Orange guy will make it so oil get's 'more attractive' in any way possible, including on purpose getting into tariff wars which will strategically slow down electrification not just there, but everywhere.

I dunno, last time he was in office, everything went exactly like his predecessor in regards to tarriffs.

But grey haired guy is responsible for larger increases in tarrifs on EVs and solar panels than any president we've ever had here. He also worked on laying the groundwork for the next administration to do more than that.. on his way out.
I don't blame him too much because relations with the USA and China are really bad lately.

Brown gal didn't have particularly strong environmentalist messaging and got caught bragging about how much additional oil we produced under grey man's term.. it wasn't a good look.

I don't think any of these people are environmentalists.

Here's something to think about though. Orange guy and Tesla man are best friends. The stock market is betting on that being the case. Mouse cursor is lined up with our election date.



^-- p.s, sales wise, this is a slump year for Tesla.. we are also in a recession.

The market knows that we're a corrupt country and how decisions are made are mostly based on who stuffs the most cash in a politician's pocket. Tesla guy paid Orange guy his tribute in the form of political simping.

So the outcome of this might be that big electric gains a large political influence here.

It's not like it's a choice, current domestic US production, it's a matter of availability of commercially viable mining options which the US afaik just doesn't have.

I really wonder about that. We continue finding these awesome pockets of minerals everywhere. Other countries are starting to aggressively develop mining of EV related resources, even Saudi Arabia. I think China is known to be 'the place' where EV materials come from only because they took developing it seriously before anyone else did.

I think it's more of a supply and demand thing. Demand for EVs worldwide has been super low until the last few years. Like globally, EVs have been a single digit percentage of what cars were sold. Battery technology has also been mostly stagnant for a decade until now.

But now that someone can produce EVs cheaper than gas cars, that changes everything. Seeing 400-500whrs/kg chemistries in newer cars is gonna be a game changer too. I think EVs will win on the basis of technological supremacy and economics. Those 2 factors trump whatever government tries to do in the long term, anyway.

I think the oil industry doesn't have a trick it can pull by pulling the strings of government to save it; at best it might try to delay the inevitable.

The US has a lot of oil though... more then SA even. So for some it's more important to get as much money with that, then 'silly things like climate change which obviously is just a hoax' /sarcasm

Saudis are reacting to EVs like they are staring down the barrel of a Gatling gun. This could be the case for oil companies in the USA in the next decade or so. I think they will gradually lose influence.

The interesting thing is seeing countries like SA and oil companies ( same thing ) continue to diversify into alternative energy more as time goes on. Initially, it was to satisfy the government. Now, it's because they're terrified because they see electric technology becoming superior soon.

Go read about what SA is doing to try to pivot their economy. It's fascinating.

We live in strange times, no?

 

[marvin78]

I do agree South African guy wants something in return for his millions, but I also am fairly certain Orange guy has a base which strongly believes in the 'drill baby drill' mantra. It's a conflict of interests which I do agree will see electricity win, but the delays by the fossil fuel industry will costs us dearly. We should look back at the automotive industry and their lobbying against the scientist which discovered what leaded gasoline was doing to see the influence of money vs science. Patterson was his name iirc.

I know there are enough people even in the MAGA party which acknowledge scientific facts and who do agree that it's in America's best interest to do as much as possible to stop climate change. They know that the costs of not doing anything, the famine's and mass migrations which will happen when we do not stop artificially increasing global temperatures will be catastrophic is my solid believe.

But then I read a local article, which mentions Orange guy telling us ( and the Brits, Norwegian ect ect ) to stop putting wind farms in the North Sea, and instead refocus on oil and gas. Something else about 'those farms are in the way of ships' in the mix, just to prove it is highly likely a true quote.

I mean, I'm sorry for all the folks who voted for him and who will be disappointed, especially those who didn't know jack all about Project 2025 which will be the defacto administrations guideline on how to govern. But if I'm honest, anyone who voted and didn't know what they voted on has only themselves to blame.

As to availability of minerals, if there were so many accessible land deposits, there wouldn't be such a big push for undersea mining ( especially here in the North Sea ) where we do know there to be economically viable concentrations available for mining. The environmental impacts on the other hand.. using a vacuum hose to 'suck up' those kobalt/manganese 'balls' from the seabed. I mean, our Dutch pulse fishing fleet got shut down by the French over bogus claims that it was less friendly for the environment then the old ( destructive drag nets ). Ofc the real reason was that the French fishermen got less fish and blamed the Dutch.. and perhaps the fact that we kind of sort of broke all the rules and had 3x the amount of ships participating in the 'test'. Just to illustrate, it requires economic pressure to get things done, and in the EU this is even harder due to all the different national interests not always aligning.

Either way, unlike your optimistic approach, our social media being flooded with accounts parroting everything that populist says ( Orange guy but also South African guy ), screaming doom and gloom and trying do increase nationalism across the globe, seems to indicate things aren't really expected to go as it has gone in the past, including his last administration when he was still surrounded by people who 'took off the rough edges'. Those people seem to be gone for this administration, look at his cabinet picks it's all sorry to say but I don't know another term 'bootlickers'.

The orcs have spend decades supporting far right tendencies across their borders, because nationalism and isolationism is exactly what keeps small countries from forming larger alliances. And orcs, having one of the larger countries on their own, know that lots of smaller countries on their own would not be able to resist their efforts. No, that's not 'conspiracy talk' I can point to countless reports from our intelligence agencies ( both my own Dutch one's, and yours ).

That's my biggest fear, that to many people are still unaware the cold war never really ended.

And I'm ok with that, as long as we win

ps: I know Grey Old Guy wasn't great for the environment, but he was also not terrible ( talking off shutting down environmental agencies ... ). At least he rejoined Paris and implemented the Inflation Reduction Act, both things Orange guy already said he will undo asap

 

[neptronix]

Well..

I don't pay too any attention to the emotional aspects of partisan politics, i watch business, action governments take, and technology to see what things are gonna actually happen and what aren't.

Technology and business leads, government lags behind over here.

No amount of environmentalism and throwing more government at the problem made the EV revolution happen here. We tried that for a decade. People didn't want the cars on offer at the listed prices.

Once EVs available in the west hit technological and price parity with gassers, you could try the inverse - you can use government to try to make oil happen again, and totally fail.

I don't think orange man could do anything to stop the momentum.

 

[marvin78]

The EV revolution couldn't happen sooner, we're only now reaching a point where we can build viable vehicles for mainstream use and we still don't have the charging infrastructure needed. I don't blame current of previous administrations of any country for not getting something done which was technically impossible for them. They poured a lot of money into incentives for research and it's paying off save the charging infrastructure which will require more then just money. Many countries including my own do not have a powergrid capable of facilitating the transition we actually planned already, let alone the one we probably should strive for.

My province has a ban on new solar parks, because the power grid wouldn't be able to transport what it generates anyway. And my province isn't alone, almost all suffer from a lack of transport capacity. Factories can't be built because they would not be able to get a contract for their expected electricity usage.

It's hard to tell people to buy EV's, when prices are not economically suited for them and the usage of them isn't practical for them. And while prices, especially looking at those cheap CN ev's, are going down and the practical use case has grown to cover most people that still requires them to live in a region with proper charger density.

Placing new chargers everywhere, especially fast chargers, while our powergrid is barely able to keep up with current demand is not easy. That's I feel the next big hurdle.

Now if you'd ask me, half the people current using full size cars would be fine with a Citroen Ami / Opel Rocks-e. Which in turn would create more room for more power hungry transportation options where they are really needed.

People don't need an suv to get groceries. And if they don't want to get on a (cargo)ebike, they can get around in a micro car with their much smaller footprints.

 

[neptronix]

Yeah, a lot of power infrastructure has to be built. If your country doesn't like building more electricity sources, that ensures you're stuck on petroleum for some time.

At one point, gasoline car drivers needed to buy gas at the pharmacy in small containers for large sums of money. The gas car still succeeded. We had to build an epic amount of infrastructure to support automobiles. We did that worldwide.

So the task is possible. The will ( and appeal of the state of technology ) just has to be there.

Over here in the states, we're talking about nuclear power a lot lately. Grey hair man supported nuclear power, and a lot of conservatives are on board lately. We have a few nuclear power startups here just starting to make inroads. Our electric future might be nuclear powered.

 

[marvin78]

Fusion has been around the corner for a decade.. it will happen when it happens though, no sense holding one's breath.

We got a government also willing to invest in nuclear, two or three of those SMR's to be precise. Fully supportive of this, we need a stable source outside of wind and solar.

We don't btw have a lack of power generation ( potential ) it's the transport capacity which is not keeping up. Not many people want massive powerlines going over their back yard, but in the end the benefit of many should outweigh the discomfort of a few ( and tbh, the goverment should just buy them out, at above market price so there can't be any hard feelings imo ).

The SMR's wouldn't fix the transport issue. Maybe a bit, because you can place them spaced out across the country ( which they won't, because 'not many people even those who voted for politicians in support of nuclear, want this nuclear plant anywhere near them' ). At least Rotterdam's port wouldn't suffer from blackouts ( it's one of the prime locations alongside Borssele where our only current PWR is located ).

We also have the High Flux Reactor which is closer to me but which is not an energy producer but research reactor also generating a majority of worldwide supply of isotopes for cancer treatment ect. That's passed it operational expiration date, the new PALLAS reactor to replace it should be operational in 2030.

 

[classicalgas]

Errr ?, yes….i actually said that TO YOU way back in post#83,..when you were arguing that a hybrid is considered an EV !
“.you're calling a hybrid a gasoline vehicle, that's dumb. Most sources consider them EV's, *because they have batteries and electric motors* You can't reasonably call a hybrid a typical ICE vehicle, so you're comparing oranges to apples.”
….Where as now you seem to suggesting the opposite….that a hybrid is just an ICE with an electric drive ?
POST#83

BUT… as i also said, the hybrid RECOVERS the kinetic energy that would othewise be wasted as heat in the brakes, stores it, and reuses it to power the ancilliaries
Why are you so adverse to the differentiation of BEVs, HYBRIDs, and ICEs, as 3 very different technology groups ?

*BUT… as i also said, the hybrid RECOVERS the kinetic energy that would otherwise be wasted as heat in the brakes, stores it, and reuses it to power the ancillaries*


That's stupid. That recovered energy is not isolated, and then used to drive the ancillaries...it's stored in the battery, and most of it moves the car.

You can't reasonably call a hybrid a typical ICE vehicle, so you're comparing oranges to apples.”

Note..."Typical ICE vehicle" above...an ICE driving a car alone operates in a very different set of conditions than an ICE driving a hybrid (series or or parallel) and as a result, it's efficiency is very different, so citing the hybrid ICE efficiency as somehow representative of the type (as you did) is your typical inaccurate and deliberate misstating of reality.

Why are you so adverse to the differentiation of BEVs, HYBRIDs, and ICEs, as 3 very different technology groups ?

Because they are not ..."3 very different technology groups" ...there's quite a bit of overlap when applied to road vehicles.

Plug in hybrids...what are they? If never driven long enough per wall charge to have the ICE start, they function as a BEV. If never plugged in, they function as a parallel hybrid.

A BEV with a range extender engine, that drives on plug in charges 90% of the time, but has the ICE start on a long trip...does it suddenly change from BEV to series hybrid?

Government bodies tend to lump hybrids with plug in BEVs. That may make sense, or not, but it's common.

An Ebike with 30000W...but still has functional pedals, mechanically connected to a wheel..if you pedal, are you now the "range extender"? Does it suddenly go from BEV to hybrid when you start pedaling? What if you never do?

With 300W, your pedaling is needed, it's no longer just a range extender, though it does that too. You are now contributing an important percentage of the drive energy. That puts is squarely in the hybrid class, right? Even though you could still ride it without ever pedaling?

What about ebikes with only an electrical connection between pedals and motor? (no chain, belt, or driveshaft ) Series hybrid, right?

But if you never pedal, it's functionally a BEV.

 

[classicalgas]

Placing new chargers everywhere, especially fast chargers, while our powergrid is barely able to keep up with current demand is not easy. That's I feel the next big hurdle. ....

"Drop in" charge stations with buffer battery banks could fix that problem, There are a couple companies working on that scheme.

The idea is to pull low wattage over hours or days into a buffer bank, and draw from that bank when a high current charge is demanded. Smart software to help predict when the bank could be drawn down (or maxed out ) to assist the grid, and when it should be kept topped up for expected charging needs.

 

[marvin78]

"Drop in" charge stations with buffer battery banks could fix that problem, There are a couple companies working on that scheme.

The idea is to pull low wattage over hours or days into a buffer bank, and draw from that bank when a high current charge is demanded. Smart software to help predict when the bank could be drawn down (or maxed out ) to assist the grid, and when it should be kept topped up for expected charging needs.

I heard of this idea, but don't think it's something which can/should be implemented at scale since it puts additional load on battery production which will keep prices higher for longer and hurting the economic viability. It's a great solution to the charging stations putting additional draw on the grid, but it isn't really that great for EV adaptation as a whole ( because of that drain on a shared resource, batteries ).

Now, if they can change the storage medium from batteries into something else.. like perhaps making hydrogen generation less wasteful, then you could put a small hydrogen generator at such a charging station which would constantly generate hydrogen from water, putting it into some storage, which can be fed into a fuel cell which would convert the hydrogen into electricity to be used by the EV charging station.

edit: lol, as I posted this I looked into if it would even be viable, remembering something like an 80% loss rate in hydrogen conversion. Seems ABB in partnership with AFC Energy are working on exactly that:

"This collaboration combines ABB's energy storage solutions and DC fast chargers with AFC Energy's high-efficiency hydrogen fuel cells to create a fully autonomous, zero-emission charging system"

Edit2: after finding this 'announcement' on their actual website... it's from end 2020. If they had been really successful already we would have heard more from them

 

[Hillhater]

The REX was an optional extra that the customer could order with his i3.

True…but it had to be specifed at the time of order, ….you could not just change your mind on the delivery day for your i3 and ask for the optional Rex unit to be fitted…..like seat covers or such .
For one, the i3Rex has a fuel filler flap on the outside panel work, as well as a fuel level gauge in the dash panel.
Also there were changes to the driving modes.. such as speed restrictions on inclines etc when the Rex unit was running.
Consider it like ordering a Standard range Tesla 3, then changing you mind at delivery time and asking for the “Long range” option !… it cannot happen ..It is a different model !

 

[Hillhater]

But now that someone can produce EVs cheaper than gas cars,

Can they ?…..or are they (Chinese) just heavily subsidised and then “dumping” the excess on foreign markets to disrupt foreign manufacturers and country economies ?
Then there is also the conflict of interest over human rights , low pay etc for much of China’s supplier industries.
And of course that issue of China completely ignoring the emmisions reduction costs imposed on “Western” manufacturers.
. What is the real cost of these “cheap EVs”?
I wonder if Tesla will be able to produce EV cheaper than gas cars when the “Carbon Credits” scheme cuts off ?

Go read about what SA is doing to try to pivot their economy

SA need to do something…anything…as they are a rapidly failing state thanks to total failing and corruption of their government.
I would not suggest anyone use SA as an example to be learned from.

 

[Hillhater]

I know there are enough people even in the MAGA party which acknowledge scientific facts and who do agree that it's in America's best interest to do as much as possible to stop climate change.

Whilst the effects of climate change may be true, anybody that believes human activity can influence it at all (let alone stop or reverse it) , is deluding themselves.
We have had 30+ years of “carbon reduction” actions , yet the level of CO2 in the atmosphere continues to increase unabated.
That alone aught to give some cause to wonder if the current plan is working, or if any future human activity changes can possibly influence that trend.
Then there is the small issue of China and its emission policy.
Even if the USA and Europe etc completely reduced their emissions to zero, ..it would make no difference to any possible climate effect whilst China continues to generate CO2 at huge rates (and increasing)

 

[marvin78]

Whilst the effects of climate change may be true, anybody that believes human activity can influence it at all (let alone stop or reverse it) , is deluding themselves.

Can you point me to some peer reviewed research papers which confirm your assessment?

We have had 30+ years of “carbon reduction” actions , yet the level of CO2 in the atmosphere continues to increase unabated.

And do you realize how much worse it would be now already if we had done nothing at all? Current temperature/climate btw is still lagging behind our current co2 levels, don't think you seen the worst of it yet.

That alone aught to give some cause to wonder if the current plan is working, or if any future human activity changes can possibly influence that trend.

We already have influenced the trend.

Then there is the small issue of China and its emission policy.

Don't buy into propaganda to much. China aims to be carbon neutral in 2060, which is only a short step behind Europe, and will peak it's emissions before 2030. China btw accounted for 1/3rd of the global solar and wind capacity.. in 2020. If there is a country slacking in commitment, it's not China but the US especially with the incoming administration.

Even if the USA and Europe etc completely reduced their emissions to zero, ..it would make no difference to any possible climate effect whilst China continues to generate CO2 at huge rates (and increasing)

I would be more worried about India. Not that China isn't the biggest poluter *right now*.

Want me to list who is the HISTORICAL biggest polluter? As if: let's count up all the emissions made by that country? I think you know which country wins that 'contest', it's the US.

The reason the US economy is so big, can be correlated directly to being the biggest historical pollution source. That alone imo should make the US a lot more humble in it's approach to climate change and it's effects on other countries.

If the Dutch ever need to move because of sea level rise, I think we should just take New York back and rename it back to New Amsterdam

 

[amberwolf]

If the Dutch ever need to move because of sea level rise, I think we should just take New York back and rename it back to New Amsterdam

I'd say go ahead, but it will probably already be underwater too.

 

[marvin78]

We actually do have a plan B for when we really lose our eternal battle with the sea.

The Germans won't like it .. seriously though, relocation is on the top of those lists ( because there aren't many other options... floating cities sound nice untill you want to push 19m people in them ).

Though in honesty, sea level rise is not what will go wrong first, it's the global food supply not being able to adapt to shifting agricultural zone's.

 

[Hillhater]

Can you point me to some peer reviewed research papers which confirm your assessment?

I could, …..but i wont bother as you already have your fixed beliefs.

And do you realize how much worse it would be now already if we had done nothing at all?

No, and nor do you, as there is no way of knowing beyond speculation !

We already have influenced the trend.

Have we ?…..wishful thinking /speculation again
all we can say is the rate of increase is largely unchanged,…if anything the rate is increasing,.. with no noticable variation even during the months of emmissions reductions through the Covid period.
The only noticable influence on the CO2 increase is an annual variation,..independent of any human activity….
…..which aught to make you wonder what other underlying causes might be at play.

China aims to be carbon neutral in 2060,

Sure, and the cheque is in the post !……more wishful thinking.
China continues to commission 2 coal fired generation plants every week, and also authorises more at that rate ongoing in the future. That doesnt sound like a committment to any version of “net zero” that i can imagine.

 

[marvin78]

I could, …..but i wont bother as you already have your fixed beliefs.

And this is the point our exchange of views stop, I don't engage in discussions with people not willing to back up their pathetic claims.

 

[marvin78]

all we can say is the rate of increase is largely unchanged,…if anything the rate is increasing,.. with no noticable variation even during the months of emmissions reductions through the Covid period.

COVID lockdown causes record drop in carbon emissions for 2020

sustainability.stanford.edu

If you want to continue to get ridiculed, please keep digging your own grave, I won't engage in a discussion but I would likely enjoy debunking your claims nonetheless.

The only noticable influence on the CO2 increase is an annual variation,..independent of any human activity….

CO2 Emissions in 2023 – Analysis - IEA

CO2 Emissions in 2023 - Analysis and key findings. A report by the International Energy Agency.

www.iea.org

…..which aught to make you wonder what other underlying causes might be at play.

Nah the only thing people will be left wondering, is where those peer reviewed papers of you are hanging out, I'm sure more people would like to finally meet them.

Sure, and the cheque is in the post !……more wishful thinking.
China continues to commission 2 coal fired generation plants every week, and also authorises more at that rate ongoing in the future.

While it is true China alone is responsible for 90% of the total new coal constructions worldwide, these were old permits and China has reduced their number of new permits. Unlike the US, which is benefitting from it's enormous fossil fuel reserves, countries like China and India do not have the luxury of burning 'cleaner' fossil fuels then what's available. That's why certain maggots are trying to make it all about 'coal', and forgetting to add that if it were the other way around America would be doing the same. Because if they would not, they would be doing a disservice to their own population by holding back their economic growth. Economic growth which is already decades behind 'the west'.

As to indications China is actually taking climate change serious beyond their cutting back on permits for coal , one only has to look at their measures taken to improve air quality in their major cities.

Or China commissioning as much new solar plants in 2023 as the entire world did in 2022. Or it's wind energy production which has been increasing by 66% year on year.

The US under Biden has also done quite some solar, but only added 8GW of wind in 2023. 'Quite some' is off course no where near what China has done.

Hope you enjoyed reading this as much as I enjoyed writing it, have a good rest of your day sir.

 

[amberwolf]

We actually do have a plan B for when we really lose our eternal battle with the sea.

The Germans won't like it .. seriously though, relocation is on the top of those lists ( because there aren't many other options... floating cities sound nice untill you want to push 19m people in them ).

But you can just move underground since it is still dry down there, right?

 

[neptronix]

And this is the point our exchange of views stop, I don't engage in discussions with people not willing to back up their pathetic claims.

Ah, i see you met our resident contrarian.
That's for the better. You'll never get the guy to budge.

 

[stancecoke]

I don't engage in discussions with people not willing to back up their pathetic claims.

Never play chess with a pigeon!

 

[Hillhater]

And this is the point our exchange of views stop, I don't engage in discussions with people not willing to back up their pathetic claims.

Hmmm? .. that little tantrum didnt last long ..

COVID lockdown causes record drop in carbon emissions for 2020

sustainability.stanford.edu

If you want to continue to get ridiculed, please keep digging your own grave

it seems you dont understand the difference between a reductions in (anthropogenic) EMMISSIONS, and a reduction in ATMOSPHERIC CO2 measurements.
Everyone knew emmissions dropped dramatically doring the Covid period (2019-2021), but , as i said before, that reduction in emmissions output did not result in reduction in the recorded level, or rate of increase, in atmospheric CO2 during that period.
But i guess you dont want to consider the implications of that little detail ?,

 

[marvin78]

...co2 exists in the atmosphere for hundreds if not thousands of years, so wanting to see an immediate effect after 1 year of reduction is really... 'shortsighted'.

The buildup of CO2 from the previous decades since the industrial revolution will continue to cause atmospheric increases in co2 levels.

Nice to post an image with an unkown source. Otherwise we could see the origin? Because that's a highly selective 'measurement constraints',

10,000 Years of Carbon Dioxide - Berkeley Earth

A graph reflecting atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations over the last 10,000 years.

berkeleyearth.org

Let's present a graph which actually says something.

Do you have any more straws to grasp?