Electric cars will not cure environmental woes

[Anonymous]

.

 

[Zoot Katz]

Electric cages will not cure the sickness that is our motorised culture of entitlement.
The entire infrastructure required by scuds of any type is inhuman and creates the wasteland of ugliness needed for their operation.
What cars do to the civility of our society is more damaging than their noxious spewage.
Cars suk in more ways than just the obvious.

 

[Anonymous]

.

 

[jondoh]

While i agree that making everyone switch to electric cars will NOT make living completely sustainable, it's a huge second step (a big first step is hybrid cars). One million electric cars is still a small number of the total number of cars out there so it's not being unrealistically ambitious.

For real change, we need to talk about lifestyle. What i'm kind of curious to know is how much of a lifestyle change are Americans willing to make in the name of global warming or peak oil or sustainable living? Are we willing to live as closely together as the Europeans and Japanese (folks in Manhattan)? Probably not that close but living in the xburbs is probably out unless you have access to a train. I live in San Jose, CA and this is probably as dense of a population as I'd want to deal with. Traffic has seemed to have gotten worse. I've been driving lately as it's been cold and I've been running a lot of holiday errands.

 

[Zoot Katz]

While i agree that making everyone switch to electric cars will NOT make living completely sustainable, it's a huge second step (a big first step is hybrid cars). One million electric cars is still a small number of the total number of cars out there so it's not being unrealistically ambitious.

For real change, we need to talk about lifestyle. What i'm kind of curious to know is how much of a lifestyle change are Americans willing to make in the name of global warming or peak oil or sustainable living?

It's not the lifestyle changes they're willing to make for a given cause celebre, it's the dramatic and lasting changes to their standard of living that they're going to have to accept as the new reality. Who knows, neighbourhood gardens could replace strip malls, reduce urban blight and lower energy costs, while decreasing crime, water pollution and greenhouse gases.

Are we willing to live as closely together as the Europeans and Japanese (folks in Manhattan)? Probably not that close but living in the xburbs is probably out unless you have access to a train. I live in San Jose, CA and this is probably as dense of a population as I'd want to deal with. Traffic has seemed to have gotten worse. I've been driving lately as it's been cold and I've been running a lot of holiday errands.

Vancouver's population density is 5,335/km² (13,817.6/sq mi).
For San Jose the population density is 5117.9 people per square mile (1976.1/km²).

Vancouver consistently ranks among the top three most livable cities in the world. It's a city where I can walk to a supermarket and other small private businesses. San Jose CA doesn't even make it into the top 100 by the same metrics. I helped to vote in a transportation plan that places the priority of private automobiles fourth behind pedestrians/bicycles, public transit and the movement of goods. I want this to remain a livable city.

A car isn't usually need for most trips as those are statistically less than five miles. One of the joys of an Xtracycle is it can easily replace a car for the greater majority of those trips that aren't doable by another bike.

Our transit system is usable for people who must use it. It's also practical for many xburb commuters who can wean themselves off their habitual car dependency. Alternative transportation just takes a bit more thought. It's often faster than a car when you're dealing with traffic in this city. A bike can usually beat any bus in town.

The liveliest places in any town always attract more activity simply because they are densely populated and built on a human scale.
whoop! whoop! for your great weather, I guess.

 

[MitchJi]

Hi,

Well, that depends on where the energy to charge batteries comes from, no? In my opinion, for electric cars to become a real success, the short term focus needs to be on clean energy in the first place. Here in Canada we have quite a lot of hydroelectric power, but it's not as much as many people think, for example Ontario Hydro gets its power from 39% nuclear, 37% coal, oil, and gas, 21% hydroelectric, 2% low impact hydroelectric, and 2% other (I'd like to know what that "other" is). So it's certainly true that running an EV of any kind is not reducing emissions unless you have your own solar or wind power generator, live somewhere that has green sources, or pay more for something like bullfrog power which puts green energy into the grid.

The article says Obama wants to put one million EVs on the road by 2015. Well that's good, but what about increasing solar, wind, and other green energy and reducing coal, oil, and gas for starters? I wonder if either Canada or USA will seriously do that in the foreseeable future. Unfortunately given the economic situation, this might be one of the last things on their minds.

Yes and no! No because electric vehicles powered by electricity from Coal are substantially cleaner than a ICE powered vehicles (something like 30% or 50%) because Electric Motors are much more efficient (cleaner) than ICE's.

No because electric vehicles powered by electricity from Solar or Wind are much cleaner (obviously) than electric vehicles powered by electricity from Coal.

So the best solution is both (which Obama wants to do). Of course using cars less and walking, biking etc. is best but I think all three options should be pursued.

 

[dogman dan]

Obviously the electric car is only as clean as the energy source it uses. But if nothing else, the shorter range will deter the aimless driving around in circles in town that becomes so easy in an ICE car. A few times in past years before gas got expensive I'd arrive home and look at the odometer and think how the hell did I drive a hundred miles in a town 15 miles long? Wastefull habits develop if it doesn't matter to the driver. Then you have some potential benefit in removing the burning from certain localites, like Denver, LA, etc, that could use a few less ICE devices going locally.

But cure it all? Who claimed that? And why would you think one thing can cure it all? I do agree though, that the key item is to somehow make alternative energy a more affordable investment. If they raised the cap on a personal photovoltaic federal tax credit from $2000 to $10,000 I'd be ordering a grid tie system today. A lot more electric bikes would get bought if the fed would buy you half a lifepo4 pack too.

 

[Doctorbass]

Here in the Quebec province, the majority of our electricity come from Hydro and we pay 0.06$/kWh... and we sale clean terawatthour to the US at a decent price!

I really believe that it is HERE IN QUEBEC that the electric car need to be promoted!! and have large developpment!!

Our electricity is one of the most GREEN in the world.. and maybe surprizing, but more than solar panel,

This is here that the electric ev can become really green!

I just hope our politician will understand that and finance cars that can really interest people.. at least more than the Zenn car at 40km/h! from Montreal.

Doc

 

[MitchJi]

Hi,

This is here that the electric ev can become really green!
Doc

EV's can, should and hopefully will become green everywhere.

 

[Anonymous]

.

 

[TylerDurden]

If they raised the cap on a personal photovoltaic federal tax credit from $2000 to $10,000 I'd be ordering a grid tie system today.

Belly up to the bar... the cap was eliminated for residential (part of the financial bailout package).

"The complete list of the solar investment tax credit provisions in the newly passed legislation include:

• Extension for eight years of the 30% tax credit for both residential and commercial solar installations.
  Elimination of the $2000 monetary cap for residential solar electric installations, creating a true 30% tax credit (effective for property placed in service after Dec. 31, 2008).
  Elimination of the prohibition on utilities from benefiting from the credit.
  Allowance for alternative minimum tax (AMT) filers, both businesses and individuals, to take the credit.
  Authorization of $800 million for clean energy bonds for renewable energy generating facilities, including solar.

"

http://www.pv-tech.org/news/_a/solar_investment_tax_credit_extension_will_benefit_us_utilities_sepa_believ/

 

[Link]

Some random guy on YouTube tried to have the same argument. I told him ICEs are about 25% efficient and plants are around 50%. So BEVs aren't totally a solution, but would almost halve fuel use. Then I called him a n00b.

 

[dogman dan]

I missed that one Tyler, thanks. I thought they had merely extended the existing tax credit. I'll have to get cracking with a calculator and some tax stuff and see if we can swing at least a small PV setup this year. Previously I had figured on a 30% credit, but through the state, the payout would take many years since our state tax bill is small compared to a PV kit. If biking makes the cars last long enough, maybe we can get going with at least a kw, but what I want, 4kw may still be impossible with todays loan situations. Home equity loan rates were a lot higher than I thought when I was researching solar last year, but maybe we can swing something if we can get a big enough refund in 2010, and we install in the late fall of 2009, and can just float enough of it on plastic for a short enough time. A lot will depend on the economy now.

Later the next morning. Hmm, looks like I found a way to get 1.2 kw under 10 grand. The inverter could expand later to 2.5kw, now to start working on the lady with the money. Maybe snag the panels now, and when they are paid for, then finance installing at the end of 2009 or 2010. The financing decisions are the hard ones that make or break it. $3,000 a year ought to be doable though, so even if it takes three years before we install stuff, by then it is pretty much paid for by the time it runs, so to the wallet it will feel like free once it is running. Looks like 15 years till it would be actually free power, but of course there are benefits besides the dollar amount.

 

[MitchJi]

Hi,

Later the next morning. Hmm, looks like I found a way to get 1.2 kw under 10 grand. The inverter could expand later to 2.5kw, now to start working on the lady with the money. Maybe snag the panels now, and when they are paid for, then finance installing at the end of 2009 or 2010. The financing decisions are the hard ones that make or break it. $3,000 a year ought to be doable though, so even if it takes three years before we install stuff, by then it is pretty much paid for by the time it runs, so to the wallet it will feel like free once it is running. Looks like 15 years till it would be actually free power, but of course there are benefits besides the dollar amount.

I would try to wait until you are ready to install them to make a purchase. Panels are likely to decrease in price and tax breaks are likely to increase.

 

[dogman dan]

Lotta thinking to do, the panels I'm eyeing at the moment are only $2.25 a watt, hence the idea to buy now. Typical prices are around $5.00 a watt. It really might be best though, to just keep on the current program of getting paid down, so a big loan on a larger system gets easier to swing in about two years. Maybe we can time a loan for the end of a dip in interest rates. We did that on our house, and have a rate so low we were trapped by it and couldn't refinance to tap our equity like everybody now being forclosed did. That turned out well for us now! If rates get real good in a year or two, we may be able to keep a similar payment and get a bunch of cash for solar when real estate gets to going up again. Maybe some small scale experimenting now would be smart too, saving big bucks later. I'm not holding my breath though, for silicon panels to get cheaper. Thin film is supposed to get that way, but my roof is built wrong for much more than 1000 watts of thin film, but I could fit about 2500 of silicon panel. So for me, It might be cheapest to stick with silicon panels. If we do buy a few panels now, I would be at least setting up a small off grid power supply untill the bucks to install grid tied could be raised.

 

[Puppyjump]

I don't have a strong opinion about EV's and the environment, but certainly there is a benefit for national security in not sending my dollars to the Middle East for their oil. Therefore I drive an EV that is partially charged by its on-board solar panel. A full charge costs about 30 cents if I use the 110v outlet. If I add solar panels to the roof on my house, my city driving will be free and not use any power from the grid. And nobody dare spout the line that EV charging from utility power just transfers the pollution (long tailpipe argument). It only transfers SOME equivalent pollution. If I charge my EV from the even FILTHIEST coal fired power plant, mile for mile I still pollute less than if the car were running from a gasoline engine.

The solar panel on my EV seemed a bit structurally weak in regards to flexing from inertia when driving over bumps, so I reinforced it with Aluminum tubing and foam tape from Home Depot. The added bracing results in much less flexing of the glass, and therefore there is less likelihood that the internal silicon wafers will be damaged from repeated flexing of the glass substrate.