If you're driving any miles you must have a huge array of solar panels in order to do that... I had 24 panel is lived in Hawaii where I had an amazing amount of sunlight and produced about 20 kW total of power each day. My house took 10 kilowatts so if I was charging in a Eevee I would have 10 kilowatts for the EV and that 10 kilowatts would give me about 30 mi of travel.
Let me add for you to talk about. Grid blindness in the land of the new battery technologies.The grid needs $100BILLIONs in cash flow. 😮😮😮😮😮😮😮 24hrs, 7 days a week, for years, decades. Nobody looks at the economics. I am a Construction Engineer with decades of pricing, tendering, and building. 'Neck on the line' hard $ contracting. So, I see what many do not see and I politely wait for them to finish, the same stuff repeated. You are not wrong. I see $100SBILLIONS in cashflow from the customer into the $TRILLIONS and $TRILLIONS infrastructure that is the national electricity grid. I see a future of broken cashflow into the national grid from millions and millions and millions of customers with massive oversized battery in BVs parked 23hrs every day and all night long. I see millions and millions and millions and millions and millions of customers with a small part of their rooftop with PV. I see the grid owners and investors scrabbling to maintain cashflow. To maintain ROI. I see $kWh supply rate increasing. I see customers looking at more dirt cheap electricity and a free battery in their BV parked all night long. I am talking economics. So yes, your technical comment is accurate but if the sunshines the grid economics is f..... Strong language but sadly accurate. Have a look at the grid numbers for your self, "it is the grid economics stupid " to quote an old saying 😉
It grate isn't it we also have moved from the city and changed to off grid solar and EVs. Unfortunately not soon enough to save our son. An estimated 5.13 million (3.63 to 6.32) excess deaths per year globally are attributable to ambient air pollution from fossil fuel. Stay safe and healthy and thank you for making people lives better by not using a ICE vehicle.
That is a common omission. It's also hard to calculate, because much of the energy to refine crude oil comes from the crude oil, without accounting for that.
100% agree with you. They - "let's expand the box where we measure EV emissions" (But let's not do that for fossil fuels. That would be honest) They always try to say: "they didn't think this through" when in reality, we did think it through and they did not.
As a reminder: TED = high-profile experts delivering talks at major conferences, usually based on peer-reviewed science. TEDx = literally anyone that contacted the local event organizer can get on stage and say any contrary non-verified stuff they want.
Here in Oklahoma 44% of our power is renewables and less than 6% is coal. And since wind picks up at night, it lines up well with charging habits. Couple that with the 3-fold increase in motor efficiency over an ICE vehicle, and it’s a huge emissions & pollution benefit for my city.
@@comment6864It’s not a static figure. Every state in the US is adding renewable capacity. Yet, nobody is making your ICE vehicle more efficient as time goes on. 🤪
To be honest, I did not switch to electric to reduce CO2. I wanted to reduce oil use. The most evil governments and regimes are almost all funded by oil. No one ever seems to talk about that. And since oil is a fungible, global resource and need, reducing our use will cause the money available to fund terrorism and other oppressive regimes to dry up. The other thing is the electric line is not linear. The grid will continue to get cleaner so the BEV will become cleaner as it gets older. And ICE engine loses a bit of efficiency over time so an older car will probably pollute more over time. So the ICE and hybrid cars should curve slightly upwards, and the BEV should flatten over time. The time to start switching is now. The money wasted improving ICE efficiency would be much better spent improving BEV. Spending on improving ICE is just wasted.
There you go!!! Exactly what i say - it's an ideology! Well hope you are free to buy an EV, while those of us who like the oil producing countries can continue to support them by buying ICE and Hybrids.
@@comment6864 of course it's just an ideology, most of them don't even know what's the concentration of the CO2 in the air. Instead of funding evil governments with oil now we fund them with lithium or cobalt or batteries. It's a big win.
@@comment6864to me it's a compound issue. It's co2, it's combustion related emissions and not supporting petro-states. Yes ev's need resources, but batteries are recyclable, the petrol in a tank is not
Yeah it seems to me the people who try to make the environmental case against EVs always leave out how much electricity was used to refine oil into gas
I Used to work on a petrochemical plant tah at one time produced half the gasoline neede to fuel the Puerto Rico car fleet. Energy consumption per day was huge, it used a whole power plant for its normal operation. Also worked on a refinery (crude oil), and also had a dedicated power plant.
And not only that, but oil pipelines take a remarkable amount of energy to operate. And then there's the huge amount of energy that goes into oil shipping on supertankers, and distribution by road and rail.
stupid question er not , is this adressed in simcity 3000 or 4000 ? ive played 300 alot but not enough . im curious as then your avg person who plays such games (and there are alot of ppl that do ! ) would know this huge lol literal smoking gun of a truth ? in terms of scale this could acutally win the argument and easily , . i think more ppl need to play simcity more perhaps theyd understand more about the real world
We charge our EVs with residential solar. But my major disagreement with the notion of better ICE engines, cleaner fuels - and even hybrids - is that you've still got more moving parts - valves, lifters, pistons, cam shafts, transmissions, fuel injectors, etc - and more consumables - belts, hoses, lubricants, engine coolants, and so on. This means ICEVs will, ultimately, cost more to produce, more to maintain, and they will never, ever be as energy efficient as an EV. Such proposals are a clever bit of sophistry but, ultimately, are a bait and switch. They promise more, but deliver more of the same weaknesses. The simple fact is that EVs are the better choice for personal transportation. They may not ever be a better choice for large trucks, tractors or airplanes, but they are already the best choice for cars and light trucks (up to a ton). It's just a matter of continuing to improve and standardize batteries, motors and distribution methods, continuing to move to renewable electricity generation, and getting sufficient infrastructure in place. The future is now!
I charge both my EVs 100% from my roof. Except for road trips. When they are full and power is free I let local EVs charge for free, instead of turning the panels off.
No you don't. That's a lie. There is no such thing. Unless your solar array is large enough to power you 24/7, which is highly unlikely, you aren't charging your battery. John Cordogan, the Australian auto expert just did a video on this in the last few days. You would be FAR better off with an efficient ICE car and a decent sized solar and battery for your house.
I didn't buy an EV to be more sustainable. Is it a net benefit if it is? absolutely. I bought it because there is no ICE car that can give me the same combination of comfort, tech, and performance for the price point without needing modification, lots of maintenance, premium gas and the need for me to find a reputable and trustworthy technician. Added benefit was never really needing to go to a gas station unless for a beverage. Also any modification urge I get will be directed to an appreciating asset: my home. Adding outlets and improving the electronics in my home as a result of learning about home charging has been an indirect benefit. Also I'm spending somewhere around $40 month to charge this car and it is a CUV. My GTI took $240-$300 of premium a month.
And when that battery reaches end-of-life... how much you gonna pay to replace it? How much will they charge you to remove it and take it to a landfill? If you get into a fender bender, your car may combust later on at some unspecified point. Firefighters won't be able to put it out because it burns so fast. Not all costs are up front.
@@michaeldavid6832 and what if a tornado sweeps up my home and launches my EV into someone's home in a fiery ball? The battery is warrantied for longer than most ICE cars, is protected better than most engine powertrains. And if I ever have to replace, I'm sure it will be expensive enough where it may not work for me. If that happens 8-10 years out, then I got my money's worth and my gas savings form that same time could go towards a battery. When the battery is deemed replaceable is at 70% of total life and could be reused somewhere else as storage. The pistons that came out of one of my blown engines has also been reused - as decoration.
@@michaeldavid6832 Since the current generation of batteries are lasting over 300k miles, most people will not need to replace the battery. In comparison the average gas car only lasts about 200k miles. The cost to replace it has come down to $9k - $15k or so, at least for Tesla cars. My Tesla has saved me over $7k in fuel costs just in its first 2 years. The batteries are recyclable and will get turned into new batteries, not go to the landfill. A fender bender is not going to cause a fire issue. Only accidents that cause intrusion into the battery might cause that but insurance will total the car if it's that bad, just like a gas car with a bent frame gets totaled by insurance.
I really love how there is never the argument to add all the additional things involved in getting gas into a ICE vehicle. The gas has to be made, transported by large vehicles creating emissions, and then electricity is used to get the gas into the vehicles and run the stations. Adding that kind of data only seems fair.
@fozzyrinker313 If this was privately being paid for by Independantly owned businesses, more power to you. Where all the EV ectrical needs are being paid for by all usthe tax payers. The Oil& Gas Stations are all profitable paid for by 6 enterprise for the last 100 years.
@@ImLivinSD Good lord no! US taxpayers pay billions in subsidies directly to oil companies. We also pay trillions for the military to stabilize the middle east and keep that sweet crude coming to keep prices stable.
@@messertlyou presumably posted this from a mobile phone which contains cobalt in its battery. P.S. EV batteries are moving away from using cobalt in their batteries
You may not be a huge anti hybrid guy, but I am. 2 separate powertrains that need to be maintained, and you have to use the gas in the tank every now and then because gas goes bad
@@Pegaroo_ except that it's integrated with the ICE drivetrain, so it needs more maintenance than a standalone electric motor, making it worse than just going EV
@@Pegaroo_ maintenance wise it's also worse than pure ICE since it has extra components to maintain, and if you don't drive far enough to actually need the ICE engine, the gas in the tank can go bad. The only good hybrid design was the volt that used the engine purely as a generator and didn't have it connected to the drivetrain at all
I agree. I've seen hybrids have issues that costs thousands to repair and it made me realize that there's almost twice as many parts that can go bad and the parts still cost as much to repair as any other car.
Henry Ford originally envisioned his cars running on locally-sourced ethanol (in fact, the _real_ driving force behind American prohibition was to make this infeasible). Rudolf Diesel imagined generators running on locally-sourced biofuel. Now, biofuels are complicated topics in terms of climate impact, but all that to say: your point is well-supported by logic and historical precedent. 👍
@@faster6329 Solar power can supply the powr for 100% of Earth necesities occuping only 3% of its area. There is penty of are in building roof, home roof, manufacturing plants roof, parking lots, etc. NO agricultural land needs to be used. Solar panel manufacturing is realy cheap. In Germany they are using them to built fences at residential homes. Dual purpose a fence, and a solar generator.
@@EnriqueAThieleSolivan My point was it takes energy to manufacture solar panels. The OP saying you can't make gas at home, sounded as if you can make solar panels at home and they appear out of thin air. Just like gas, solar panels need an industry to manufacture them. Yes you can place them on your roof but they have to comes from somewhere.
@@faster6329 Yes, it takes energy to make solar panels, that's why in the video, total lifecycle emissions are discussed at length. That is the relevant metric.
An EV takes less than 2 years to offset it's manufacturing pollution in such a case. I'm in the same situation. My car runs on water. Better yet: on gravity!
@@chrisdunbar3400 yes but both are more expensive than alternative energy now. The international energy association projects coal use to be flat in 2025 and to begin declining in 2026.
I have solar on my roof and battery storage. Las Vegas could lose power and I could still cool my house, cook my dinner and charge my cars, pretty much indefinitely. I have energy independence. How awesome is that? All homes should go for energy independence.
@@rickcollins2814 the downside of freedom is accepting consequences for your actions. If I choose to live in Alaska because it’s super remote then I will have to deal with the fact that I don’t get much sunshine in winter.
I am a believer that all new homes being manufactured should include solar power as a requirement. That will lower the price of solar and will also make old house owners to go solar in order to havea decent resale value. That will have a greater impact than ev (that are also needed)
@@EnriqueAThieleSolivan absolutely!! I am surprised that some places don’t require this. For some reason solar in the US is still very expensive but everyone who gets it loves it.
The sad part is that the ICE industry has consistently and STILL CONTINUE to resist regulations that enforce them to be more efficient. The ICE is over 100 years old and the improvement in miles per gallon is woeful. Now all of a sudden the industry is telling us that we can have amazingly efficient ICE's tomorrow. Too little too late. They contributed to their own long overdue demise.
@@Winnetou17 It's the same in all markets. It's a matter of scale. Sure EU cars are more efficient and burn cleaner, but the cars are bigger and MPG has hardly improved overall. My first car was a mini back in the 70's and I could get 45 MPG if I drove carefully. What's the average now? It's probably not much more than 45 once you factor in the ridiculous amounts of tanks on the road. I guess that we are as much to blame. We want bigger cars, with more features etcétera, etcétera, so the cars just get bigger and less efficient overall. Look at the mini and then something like a Toyota Yaris. Both are nearly twice the size of the original version.
@@simonpaine2347 True, the bigger cars is totally a thing. Worldwide... I think (really don't know what is selling in Japan). But we still have small cars in EU, even if a smaller percentage. And with the EVs now microcars are a thing too. Though you are right in your OP that the manufacturers are resisting regulations. I remember just this year or the previous one how everybody wanted to relax or delay Euro 7 saying that it's almost impossible and it will f*&k up the market or something, I forget the exact quote.
I along with thousands of people who charge there EV at home with solar panels. I will never go back to an ICE vehicle for many reasons but for now I will just mention that I am saving money and our planet. If everyone put solar panels on their house there would never be a need for fossil fuels whatsoever.
Funny how, 20 years later, the hybrid is suddenly the answer. 20 years ago, when Prius hit the mainstream, it got all the criticism. "Hummers will last longer!" "You'll need a new battery every 3 years." Its' not worth the "Hybrid Premium". Well, 20 years later the Prius is EVERYWHERE. The Hummer is extinct. Everybody's wife, sister, brother, neighbor, parent, etc. drives a Prius. They're everywhere and nobody even bothers to hate them anymore. But then, .....if only we could have MORE electric range. Hence the plug-in hybrid. But, nobody could understand those. "If I gotta put gas in it, why plug it in?" "It's the best of both worlds, but the worst of both worlds." "Why lug an ICE engine around everywhere you go?" "Not worth the Premium" (again). Chevy made a great one, called the VOLT. But it didn't sell despite being quite good. BUT, Once you get a taste of electric you don't want to go back. Hence the EV. And, a dang good and long range EV. TESLA Oh wait, Hybrid is he answer !!!! And the cycle continues. I actually heard my (older) mom-in-law comment the other day, She'd consider a hybrid as her next car! Over 20 years it has taken to get thru to the masses, with just a simple hybrid. I personally have owned all the above in the last 20 years. Loved each one at the time. But the Tesla EV is for me. Simply fantastic so far.
@@chadhaire1711 I think he was pointing out more that Priuses aren't the devil they were once painted as by fossil fuel shills, as more and more people bought them because they got tired of high gas prices and/or lots of maintenance that a regular gas car needs. Yes, a hybrid still has a gas engine, but that engine isn't running 100% of the time either the way a traditional gas car engine does. So a 100k mile Prius might only have maybe 80k miles on its engine, with the rest coming from when it's running on electric.
Of course! Because hybrid is the most logical choice .. that is if you care to go electric at all. Pure EV is just not a good source of energy for a vehicle, never was, never will be (except for short-range golf carts and such), and that's why it's never really taken off. It can only become wide spread BY FORCE, which will in the end be a disaster in many ways. On the other hand the concept of charging a battery from an engine is genius .. that is if you're not at all concerned about EMF. That's why when the batteries got tolerably good it took off. Makes perfect sense. No loss of convenience or anything else. We'll leave health to the side for the moment, cause nobody's talking about that anyway. For now.
@@comment6864 Hybrid is for idiots...adds $3K to the price and will take 120,000 miles to pay for itself, and by then that battery can cost $4k to replace at any time. NOTHING beats a common simple four cylinder engine.
@@chadhaire1711 Absolutely fair point.. I did say IF you care to go electric at all. Your choice is as valid as any other and should be no less subsidized than any other or shown any discrimination
Yes...a horse may emit the same amount as a Corvette but no mention of the waste and Methane they produce. In the 1800 there was 2000 Tons of waste of the streets every day.....
I'm not sure that a horse will manage 100,000 miles in its lifetime, carrying two people plus luggage. Where would you keep them if you live in an apartment? 😊
@@rugbygirlsdadg Well that's why we went from horses to cars - the CONVENIENCE. People WANTED to make this transition because it made their lives EASIER. But EVs are LESS convenient than what we have now, at least for the vast majority of people.
If you are not in the financial market space right now, you are making a huge mistake. I understand that it could be due to ignorance, but if you want to make your money work for you... prevent inflation
Thanks for continuing updates I'd rather trade the crypto market as it's more profitable. I make a good amount of money per week even though I barely trade myself.
A lot of people still make massive profit from the crypto market, all you really need is a relevant information and some ‹professional advice. ‹it's totally inappropriate for investors to hang on while suffering from dip during significant
So, yeah, the EV that travel 280 miles and has a much lower CO2 emission level after 60,000 miles over a comparable gasoline automobile is not ready but capturing CO2 from a vehicle to create new fuel for the eternal combustion engine, which no one knows how to do, is ready. The old Lie-O-Meter is broken and needs to go back to the repair shop.
Also, Capturing CO2 should be the last thing on the bucket list after converting all energy to renewable. As of now, capturing CO2 cost a lot of energy. Even getting this energy from renewables would waste it unless it's a surplus. I would argue that surplus should go into batteries, then maybe electrolysis for hydrogen, then last, CO2 capture.
@@radiotec76 disregarding tree hugging, the EV is just a better vehicle with less moving parts, less maintenance, cheaper to operate, and higher performance per dollar.
@@orionbetelgeuse1937 corrected. Poor choice of words. EVs have much lower CO2 emissions after 60,000 miles than a comparable gasoline powered automobile.
The other issue that Graham is totally ignoring is the increased percentage of batteries coming from Recycled Lithium, which requires zero mining. EV will become a circular economy, but oil never will be emissions free.
They're leaving out refineries' (approx. 15,8% loss of energy) and distribution (approx. another 7,9%). So approximately 23,7% of energy loss has to be added, apart from all the the things you have already rebutted. Hybrids will keep refining alive which is a bad idea in this respect.
@rickrutledge9363 the graph he shows is attributing an offset of 20 tons additional for a EV with large battery. The IVL sweden meta study that compiled in 2019 (so 5 years ago already) more than 17 different studies shows that production of battery emit between 60-100kg CO² /kWh. It means that a 80kWh battery had generated 4.8-8t of CO². But obviously, electrical car emission is much less than an ICE engine + gearbox + emission pipe ... and NMC 811 today are 30% more dense for the same quantity of raw material and LFP are also produced with lower emission. So how come on earth he can come with 20 ???? When it should be much lower than 4.8-8 additional?
I bought a 2023 Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV last weekend. I charged it from empty at home overnight ysing a standard 240volt outlet and it was full the next day. Driven each day around town and it still has half a battery charge!
the problem with PHEVs is that people are lazy, and most end up using them as regular hybrids.And that's why they are not optimized for max efficiency. Automakers take for granted customers will use them just as hybrids, without charging them, and engineer them accordingly. In addition, almost all PHEVs on the market are ICE cars with an electric drivetrain strapped on. Instead, they should be engineered as EVs with a generator on board working at max efficiency.
@@natehill8069 not really. The volt still had the engine connecting to the wheels in some instances. More like the i3rex, if the engine wasn't underdimensioned. Or, the ram1500rev, if both battery and engine were optimized. But clearly, they are assuming people will end up not charging the battery. There is the mx30rev, but the car is an inefficient EV by itself, and the rotary generator is inefficient too. Waiting for ioniq9erev to see if they get it right
Because of regenerative braking, which allows driving with very little use of the friction brakes, EVs save us from the very nasty brake dust pollution.
@@harveypaxton1232 😂I haven’t seen too many EVs in the street takeovers. The donuts and burnouts are done by V8s. Jokes aside, the pollution from tires has been greatly exaggerated for all cars by using a worst case scenario number of 9.28 g of rubber dust created per mile. We would be driving on rims within a couple of months… EVs are also not much heavier than ICE cars. Stop taking the extreme example of the Hummer EV. A Tesla model 3 or a Hyundai Ioniq 5 are of pretty average weight and way lighter than the millions of ICE suvs currently on our roads. Try again.
The best reasons for driving an EV have nothing to do with CO2 emissions from the tailpipe or anywhere else. If you believe that Global Warming is a hoax, you can still love an EV.
@@laughingjackaso8163 Much lower cost of fuel, instant torque, better acceleration, quiet starting and driving, lower maintenance costs. Tailpipe emissions are important if you care about such things, and some people do, but everyone cares about a much lower cost of fuel and maintenance, and if you've experienced the torque and acceleration, you'll love that too. You don't experience lower tailpipe emissions similarly.
@@tarstarkusz Your data is really old. Recent stats show, EV’s are 30 times less likely to catch fire than gas cars. A lot of areas have gone to carbon free electricity.
When a trucker commented that I80 was closed down for days because of the Tesla Semi fire, he said a diesel fire would have been extinguished and cleared if a few hours. I responded that firefighters, hazmat teams and road crews are so quick with the cleanup because of the FREQUENCY of diesel truck fires. He didn’t respond. The news said they shutdown I80 because of the toxic fumes from the battery fire. They don’t shutdown highway because of ICE vehicle fires that spew toxic fumes too.
There is a new German channel on RUclips that covers electric semi trucks. He became a semi trucker to show how it works and what needs to improve. But the first impression after a few month is, the electric semi is ready for Primetime.
Our grid in Scandinavia is at 98% co2-free, so any electric car or other electric thingamabob (weedwacker, lawnmower, etc) is at worst using 2% fossil-fuel electricity. Since many also have solar panels (like most of my neighborhood) we use even less so pretty much 100% fossil-free
@@gavjlewis well, I'm from Sweden and I wish we had fossil fuels to sell like Norway - they actually have a negative national debt like Saudi and the UAE. You are right however, drug use isn't only the fault of the drug user, the dealer is of course just as culpable (if not more). But to be clear, ONLY Norway is producing fossil fuels - the other four countries are not and we are still at 98% fossil free. So it is fully possible to do even if you don't have a huge cash cow funding government.
As so many EV detractors do, he’s completely ignoring the electricity needed to extract oil from the ground, ship it, refine it and ship it again to get it to the pump. The petroleum industry is one of the largest consumers of grid electricity yet these numbers are always conveniently omitted from the calculations.
If I look at the electricity sources for Seattle, WA (where I live) - Hydro - 88%, Wind - 5%, Nuclear - 4%, Unspecified - 2%, Biogas - 1% (Seattle City Light does not have coal or natural gas resources in its power supply portfolio.) If I have solar panels, I'm pretty sure I have closest to zero for CO2 emissions for my electric vehicle.
So we have estimates for the CO2 for manufacturing ICE. We have estimates for BEV and manufacturing the battery. We have estimates for CO2 in battery charging. Where is the CO2 data for the extraction and refinement of fossil fuels?
Where’s the acknowledgment that less and less power is from fossil fuels, ensuring that the numbers will be making EVs look better and better every year
It takes 8 kWhrs just to refine one gallon of gasoline. That would take the typical vehicle about 25 real life miles. It would take my EV about 27 miles. That doesn’t count the other costs to produce gasoline.
He assumes that an EV will also be scrapped at 180,000 miles. With far fewer moving parts this seems unlikely but perhaps there is limited data out there to confirm. Hybrid longevity is an interesting question, again maybe not much data out there. Cobalt is also used in refining of fuel/gas. It cannot be recycled there but can be recycled from batteries.
Back when this was made, we saw the trajectory towards renewables, greater efficiencies in battery/car production. Also one has to look down the line when batteries are eventually recycled. What are the emissions associated with that? By the time we get there, we will mostly be renewable. The thing is, with this new ev tech, we see solutions unfolding in front of our eyes. Meanwhile, in Canada, the oil sands still have large amounts of polluted water byproducts that in theory tech was supposed to solve but we are still waiting. Its a much more difficult problem. We got solar panels in anticipation with going electric. Our panels produce on average 25 kwh/day while a trip to town takes about 7 kwh.
All these anti-EV studies are based on at least one flawed variable. Often it's a severe underestimation of the life of the vehicle. In this presentation, it's the insistence that an equivalent EV must have the same range as an ICE. That allows him to compare the ICE to hypothetical EVs with batteries bigger than anything that exists in reality instead of looking the actual EVs people drive.
@@leroyharder4491 so if you count in a tec that doesn't exist to make a calculation the ice group could made the same argument and by the next ten year there's gonna be a fuel that not pollute. Make the assestement by today tec and standars
@@SebastianScida No need to speculate on future tech. By now it is a fact that ev batteries last 300,000 miles and are still about 80%. That means the ev car last twice the live on an ICE car. New batteries (tested but available on 2025) have expected life of 600,000 miles ad CATL has one good gor 1,000,000 miles. New ev will have lifetime battery guaranties, so there is one less problem.
Not to get too political, but the Southwest Research Institute that he works for is Right leaning. It has been my experience that far too many Right and Libertarian think tanks rely on pure theory or cherry picked data. And all too often that data has no source.
EVs are just a natural progression of the ICE cars. It's like you wouldn't be buying a Blackberry now, after using smart phones for nearly 20 years. Why buy a ~150 years old tech called internal COMBUSTION engine when you can have an electric motor in your car?
I'm not disputing this but just simply pointing out the fact that at some point in the near future, most of our transportation will be EV. The only thing that cannot be electrified are rockets.
@@lylestavast7652 Yea but also: we have now batteries which don't need cobalt and there are going to be more of them and better ones in the future. I doubt it's the same for the fossil fuel industry.
It's used as a catalyst so not consumed in the process. On the other side more and more batteries that are being made are LiFePO4 (LFP) which don't need cobalt or nickel so even the cobalt argument is getting weaker as more battery tech is developed
Roughly 8% of all cobalt produced annually is used in gasoline production. While it *is a catalyst and recyclable* , it's still about 550 *tons* per year that's irretrievable.
1.) When they tell me the grid can't handle it I ask them do you say the same thing when a new housing community is built. Do you say that when a strip mall is built. Do you say that when new condos go up. Do you say that when they're building new hi-rise office buildings. All of these things use a tremendous amount of electricity when built. So why is it the grid can't handle EV adoption over time. 2.) As far as the Cobalt, I don't let people use that as an argument against EVs considering the oil industry has been using Cabal as a catalyst in refining oil.
@@KineticEV The USA could double its grid capacity by replacing all its steel transmission cables with kevlar core aluminium. Like the UK did 50 years ago.
@@PassportToPimlico something tells me the USA, with its humongous deficit and pathological obsession with supporting Ukraine, Israel and who knows what else, will not be spending on anything like this any time soon, but we'll see.
@@jamesvandamme7786 actually the pushers are rushing it because they're worried that their popularity will reach a premature peak before that is even close. So they tell you look! it's still growing. Well yeah, it's still a novelty (the modern EVs, of course not the idea of electric vehicles) and not all the rich kids have their plaything yet. As always we live in a marketing (not market!) driven economy, so you make something up and then manipulate everybody into thinking they want it (or consider force if that doesn't work 😁). Teslas have that feel of driving a big computer, which is supposed to elicit that shiny new tech gadget lust along with the 'i'm smart and progressive' self-image. Drooling yet? 😛
Big pharma won't like getting rid of pollution, that for sure. The oligarchs own big pharma, gonna have to decide what to do with them before they decide what to do with us.
10:40 oops, the same mistake folks make about energy consumption vs electric generation. That graph includes petro going into cars. This segment should have the 38.9% methane, 21.3% renewables, 19.7% coal, 18.2% nuclear, from EIA for 2022.
I think the key data point here is that the proportion of electricity generated by coal is decreasing year over year. However the slack seems to be being picked up by natural gas rather than renewables.
I love how people think the country that went to the Moon 55 years ago somehow cant figure out how to increase grid capacity in the next decade. That said gas cars have reached their zenith in terms of efficiency in respect to fuel and manufacture. Electric cars will be radically more efficient in both respects in the near future plus the transport as a service movement will curtail all sales by an estimated 35% in under 10 years. Less car overall will be built as a result of the BEV movement and this is a good thing. @21:40 this is why transport as a service will crush car ownership in urban areas the cost benefits and convenience will be so great most will just give up on individual car ownership. An ancillary benefit will be that it empower the mobility of some who cannot drive at this time such as blind, elderly and those with medical conditions (also those who have no license due to say a DUI) . This will boost the economy with their spending and productivity.
who cares about carbon footprint.. what matters in a car is convenience and affordability and safety. Pollution too of course, but that has reduced hugely over the past decades with just incremental improvements, even in public transit that is not EV .. though cancer rates continue to rise.
Air pollution is not Co2, is more about fine dust. Ev consume tires 20% faster, so more dust in the air, just related to tires. Of course, having no combustion I think they're cleaner overall
It's true it does use Cobalt. But Cobalt isn't carbon intensive to mine so the CO² to produce it is relatively low in the grand scheme of things. But Cobalt mining also has a good side. It has helped double the GPD of the DRC in the last 10 years and it has reduced its debt from over 100% to around 12% in the last 20 years. Some pretty impressive numbers.
There is an old saying "a half truth is a whole lie". About 20 years ago or so I came across a study what's compared the emissions of 50,000 vehicles powered by gas or diesel versus the amount of coal powered needed to generate the same energy to drive electric vehicles. The conclusion was, the coal-fired plants run at an exact highest efficiency and if One compares the emissions from this cold plant, powering electric vehicles versus 50,000 vehicles run on gasoline or diesel, the emissions from the coal powered electric plant, powering EV's, the ICE vehicles would be polluting for more there are several reasons, they're omitting while idling in traffic, they are nowhere near as efficient as the coal powered plant. However for some odd reason is never mentioned. Scientia Habet Non Domus, (Knowledge Has No Home) antiguajohn
The problem of synthetic fuels (if I understood the mechanism) is that it needs H2 to be done (so the efficiency is worse than H2). When he says combining water with CO2, it's in fact electrolysis to obtain H2 then combined with CO2 to make synthetic fuel. Very inefficient and energy intensive, and hardly scalable. Oh, and I live in France so the "no CO2" (still a little CO2) part of our mix is kind of very very big (around 94%).
The only pilot plant for syn fuel is in Chile . It was a proof of cancept plant. The technology for recovering the CO2 from the atmosphere (44 ppm) does not exist. The plat used comercial grade CO2 cylinders. Syn Fuel was 3X more expensive than gasoline (about $10/ galon) That is without the non existing technology energy consumption. It is a fools dream created by the oil companies to divide the public opinion without showing the "details" of the concept.
So, based on his solution of power generation, making a grid that is CO2 free is all you need, then many places in the world have already met that. I live in Ontario, and we have zero coal plants and very few natural gas plants. Most of the province is nuclear or hydro. My power is hydro from Niagara Falls. So basically, most of his arguments doesnt even apply to me.
I don't have solar panels, but I charge my EV between 2am - 5am at an extremely low cost due to the fact that my electricity supply company has generators run through the night on low load! So the CO2 would be being produced anyway. I am hoping to see more renewable power generation as soon as possible! Did I not recently read that Hybrid are inefficient due to the fact the electric part is hauling around a heavy engine, gearbox, fuel tank, etc, 😳 A 🏴 living in 🇮🇪
Another valid point is that EVs are now demonstrating extended life spans way beyond those of an ICE vehicle. It’s simple - they don’t have as many moving parts and the batteries are lasting longer with every new iteration. Soon, we will expect our vehicles to last 250,000 to 500,000 miles as a matter of course. The resultant reduction in raw materials usage will be a huge benefit. The impact on the auto industry, though, is a matter for further discussion.
Has he included the CO2 released during the extraction of oil, the transport of the raw oil to the refinery, the refining of that oil and the transport of that petrol/diesel to the forecourt? And the materials - including cobalt, in that refining? And the water usage?
My experience with a used Fiat 500e over 7 years regarding maintenance has been one 12dc battery and tires. Zero trips to the dealer. Still on the original brakes. Hybrids keep the customer returning for service over time creating recurring income for dealers. Mechanical Engineer
Not forgetting it's a good source of methane which is apparently 15x worse than CO2 for global warming. Now go listen to the recent fully charged podcast about the uncapped oil wells in LA and Texas, the title is about the Methane hunter. Those wells just keep giving (not oil though).
Hi Ben, I’ve got some up-to-date UK stats for ya and personal testimony. I’ve purchased this summer a 6 years old, 50K miles Toyota C-HR hybrid. It cost £15K and has more than doubled my MPG from 32mpg in a Ford C-Max to 67mpg AVERAGE. In my first 1K miles driven in city and country journeys at the usual road speeds and conditions for summer. That’s more than a little bit more efficient, it’s doubled my MPG and is half the cost of buying an EQUIVALENT EV with 450 mile range. Right now in the summer of 2024, EV sales are really taking a hit with brans new sales. Growth is only 2% this years, (almost stagnant). The reason is 90% are now company sales (it used to be 50% but tax incentives have increased this). The depreciation, Insurance and competition for public charging at reasonable cost have severely limited EV appeal to the public outside of corporate sales. Some fast chargers in the UK at 150kWh charge 80p per kW ($1!). Depreciation of 75% for some Audi and Porsche models have been headline news and with the economic uncertainly around. Future growth is far behind government targets and something is going to give this autumn or major car brands are going bust in Europe and National governments are going to let that happen on pain of civil unrest and general strikes. With our high energy costs, electric only cars will continue to struggle in Europe. You do a great job mate, sorry to make this so long, but wanted to get these bits of info off my chest.
Right.. it's no secret that EVs have NOT taken off market wise, but now a days the most powerful economies are all about marketing, not market, and so things will continue to be very confusing to most of the public that doesn't question MSM and the other pushers
Yes, the total CO2 generated drops as more renewables are added to the existing grid. No one constructs al old tech power plat. The take years on permits and construction. A solar farm takes a single year fom permits to start up, with very little mainteance.
Shifting pollution away from where people live is good. Less than 10 years ago, there were at least 60 days a year where you couldn't see 200 yards in Guangzhou China because of pollution. It's a lot better now. China is also producing more clean energy. Their goal is to shutdown all coal plants. Their cities have 10 tens of thousands of electric buses. They are building high speed and local electric trains.
I did a review paper, about 2 years ago to study the use of hybrids in the future of transportation. I would like to see hybrids in the sense of having a small back up generator for an EV rather than an ICE vehicle with a motor. However, hybrids are only good at this point for assisting those hesitant to change to get into EVs. ICE vehicles had over 100 years to reach their peak. PS. Carbon capture is unreasonable on a vehicle. Carbon capturing at a power plant is very possible and useful.
The mental gymnastics at the end there was incredible. If you get a bunch of renewable energy, add some unknown magic pixie dust, you can convert emitted carbon back into energy. If you already have the bunch of renewable energy, why did you need to emit the carbon to begin with?
Dude if you take a gallon of gas and you burn it and in industrial power plant you'll get 120 mi of energy from it and even though it's roughly 52% efficient that's still like 60 miles per gallon. You're also forgetting about the emissions from production of electricity used to create the gallon of fuel. It still takes about 10 kilowatts of energy to create a gallon of fuel in total, which funny enough can drive an electric car 30 mi alone. Just from the electricity used to create the gas
He says that most of our electricity comes from coal. I guess that depends upon which country you are looking at, but here in the UK hardly any comes from coal - most days none of it does. Some comes from gas. I have an app running which shows where our electricity is coming from. It varies - most days it is about 10% comes from gas, though sometimes it goes up to 30 to 40% comes from gas. Hardly any comes from coal. And I believe the last coal fired power station is going to be turned off towards the end of this year. I have an EV (Nissan Leaf) and solar panels. My charger allows me to charge the car from the panels - off grid - if I wish. I don't, because I get 15p per kWh that I supply to the grid, and at night I pay about 6.5p per kWh. The company I buy the electricity only buys electricity produced by renewable generation - so wind, solar, hydro and, I guess, nuclear. This is easily done, and quite common. So when I plug my EV in, I am getting much more of the electricity generated by non-CO2 generation than by CO2 generation. Yes, I am not fixing the CO2 problem - but at least I am not part of it any more than I must be. I am surprised by his sophistry. He is, I assume, a reasonably intelligent person, but he is deliberately skewing things. As for hybrids - you now have an ICE engine to make, so your initial CO2 is increased. And, sadly, hybrids are far more likely to catch fire than ICE cars - and way more likely to do so than EVs. Hut hey - it keeps him in a job that he understands.
Ben, you made a few mistakes here (which are actually in his favor), you were looking at "Energy" sources, not "Electricity" sources. When talking about where your electricity for an EV comes from you want to use the Electricity numbers, not energy. The numbers are very different when you look at Electricity. Less than 1% is Petroleum products, about 18% is coal, but about 23% is renewable, 39% natural gas, and 18% nuclear (that was 2023 numbers). "Energy" includes transportation, heating, all kinds of things that are not just for producing electricity. You also can't compare a PHEV's MPGE milage to an EV's if you want to discuss driving it in "hybrid" mode. In EV mode (which is what the MPGE is for) it is an electric car. Use the actual MPG for the comparison. Graham's numbers were not even correct 4 years ago when he made this video, and I (and many others) slammed it for using false numbers and providing no sources of data.
That the funny graph is missing is the huge emissions for producing the gasoline from oil - for some reason, all the graphs about the emissions somehow miss the part about "where does the fuel come from"? :)
Many here are missing the main issue. With petrol you are 100% dependent on the price at the pump (and that includes hydrogen cars). If, for some reason, the price of petrol / whatever fuel doubles, you WILL have to fill up and pay whatever the current price is. It hurts even more when you discover Venezuelan petrol is 13,2¢ US per US gallon. Oh yes. You are getting shafted by price speculation. Big time. And you can't even vote with your pocket book! It's clear it takes a lot of solar panels to fill up an electric car but it can be done. You can produce your own energy. You can ditch the gas station entirely. Funny how people are now fed up and want their power back. We want to be free of intermediaries that just are not reasonable. We want our news to be as far as possible from corporate hands. We want our governments to be as aligned to our needs and intentions as possible. Corporations are pushing hard to make sure we stay dependent, and getting an ICE car / hating electric cars is one way of making sure we don't break free.
I have been really loving the videos lately! A new breath of fresh air! And gives me great data to share with ev skeptics. I want to get a Tesla so bad, but just can’t financially swing it right now. Let me put my situation into prospective. My wife works from home, my job is less than 3 miles away from home and our kids school is right between there. Currently driving a 2022 Honda Insight. Yes, hybrid. My wife drives a 2020 Tacoma for the rare times she actually has to go somewhere. We both fill up about once a month currently. I bought an electric bicycle and will start using that to commute to work when the weather cools off a bit (Kansas) My goal might be to use my E-bike every day in the month of September.
Energy for ICE vehicles is not fungible - it can't be easily replaced with another energy source. EVs take electricity and they don't care what are the energy sources for that electricity. That means that as electricity generation gets cleaner over time, that immediately translates to cleaner energy consumption for cars. That's why encouraging (not forcing) the transition to EVs will yield the best impact on greenhouse gas generation for the long term.
I am actually building a 5000W solar charging station for my Lightning, off grid in the woods. We are on the verge of a battery revolution; we need to invest in EV now to get better, cleaner, less impactful technology in the future. Did I miss the regenerative breaking part, no mention of it? What about the motor not running in slow/stopped traffic?
Nice! That's one of my future goals for my Model S. Quick question - what are you using as your battery bank? After some research it seems like using a Model 3 LFP battery is much cheaper than getting standard LFP server rack batteries, which is my plan B.
Harm reduction is still a good and useful thing, you just have to be careful not to confuse it with actual solutions. Ultimately, if we redesign our cities such that people don't *need* to own cars, many will elect not to. This has the additional benefit of helping offset the higher cost of living in cities. You can already see this in action all over the world (including, yes, some American cities).
@@hibob841 We used to have trams and trolley busses, and we didn't "need" cars. People walked more and were healthier. EVs continue the unhealthy heirarchical classism of ICE, have you seen the massive and inefficient designs? Hummer EV?! Hyper consumerism disguised by greenwash. They're also an environmental disaster of about the same potency as ICE...not saving any environment except the business one, temporarily. Transport emissions are stuff all compared to those produced in manufacturing an ultra-disposable world.
In principle, all stages of mining/transport/manufacturing could use electricity, and all electricity is trending "green", so CO2 emissions can all eventually drop to zero.
At 11:30, we may not have "solid data" on how much energy EV owners get from solar, but what we do know is what percentage of EV owners ALSO own roof-top solar and therefore get at least some non-trivial percentage of their power needs from self-generated solar. For example, a customer survey by the Australian power company Ausgrid conducted in 2020 indicated that 60% of EV owners also owned rooftop solar. 30% of those who owned solar said that they installed it specifically for their EV. A survey conducted by NREL revealed that EV owners in San Francisco are 3 times more likely to have rooftop solar than non-EV owners.
Why is Musk part of your thumbnail for your videos? I think he is quite toxic and divisive so should not share center stage. We can discuss EVs without him.
Who's being toxic and devisive now? It's a shame people from the apparent side of tolerance are so amazingly intolerant of any opinion differing from their own. Hypocrit!
He is not counting gasoline "manufacture" That is why the difference he shows is not big. The overall eff of an ICVE from drill to burned gasoline is only 20%. The overall eff of an ev is "only" 80%, but can be as high as 90% if there is solar in the at home. Somewhere in between if there is a close solar power plant due to loss of distribution.
Hi Ben, so right at 8:40 He skipped right over the energy required to produce fuel from crude and all the pollution it generates and the pollution from extraction. Also, emissions are not only C02 but also minoxide, including sulphur and NOX.
We have had a plugin hybrid since 2019 and it’s great around town. I personally got tired of the competition between the gas and electric motors so l bought an EV6 and I could not be happier. BEV are the future and batteries are only improving. After you drive with electric motors you realize how much more energy efficient they are.
How much CO2 is generated digging up materials for cars, transportation of materials and production of cars in the future where all machines, trucks etc are fully electric? Not very much I think.
The grid has plenty of capacity to convert all transportation to electricity. They actually help balance the grid by increasing the off-peak loads. This is exceptionally beneficial for thermal plants by leveling their plant factors. Additionally, EVs are 3-4x more efficient than ICE. Also, 90% of the energy required for passenger cars can be supplied by solar panels covering a single car garage. Regardless, EVs are not the problem. Data centers are! They are on the path to 3-4x the current grid capacity, 24/7. AI has already reached a limit for most utilities, and it has caused old coal plants to restart and run full load 24/7.
@onlyme972 The grid didn't go down because of EVs, nor data centers. In fact, Tesla's megapack grid storage batteries prevented a massive blackout in the Texas a couple of weeks ago.
I often think, it would be even better without cars or with a lot less cars. But you Ben, actually said something years ago which I agree with 100%. Roughly: "It's basically impossible to convince people to not drive at all. So we need EVs as a replacement. Otherwise we can't change it at all." It's easy to see that people are even irrationally angry at changing from ICE to EV. I can't even imagine trying to ask them to not drive. :D
If there will be AI and the 9 seater bus drives from person to person and gets em to the same place work, shops, railways, other bigger bus, I would be so happy but all these bus projects where droped becouse not used by people :(
The other thing we are seeing is 3rd world countries are leap frogging technologies. In the West we went through technology trees, 3rd world countries are jumping over stages to catch up. Cell phones are a prime example. We created phone infrastructer ran phone lines everywhere then have been slowly swithcing to cell phones. Other countries havent run phone lines everywhere they jump straight to cell phone. Ethiopia has banned gas cars and is jumping straight to EV because they have tons of electricity production but no oil and gas.
The electric car isn't the answer because it's still a car. The infrastructure to support the individual motor car guts our cities and costs more than the revenue generated to maintain it. And it reduces the economic density of the cities to the point where the city can't afford to subsidize the automotive infrastructure and the city goes bankrupt. We need to stop bulldozing our cities to make room for cars and return to the traditional patterns that made cities productive and livable. There will still be plenty of room for electric vehicles, but the biggest selling class of EVs is the electric bicycle. The infrastructure is far smaller and cheaper, and the return is greater than the cost of construction and maintenance over the life of the lanes.
Too many people crowded together is not good for families, for raising children, is not optimal for families at all and in general not an optimal way for humans to live. I love the privacy of my car and always will. Mass transit is awful and spreads disease
Many people have trouble with estimating the time it takes for disruption to take affect (think of an iPhone). This guy is in that camp. He really has no idea about how fast disruption takes affect. Proof is that he talks about decades and trillions of dollars while it's only been less than 4 years from his talk and we are already way ahead of his curve.
One thing all of these people seem to mess. Is the smog in the cities. We as human beings have to breathe in that smog. Air quality isn't necessarily a direct relation to climate change but it is something to do with our health
Why i would buy that BEV that is way worse in many aspects as my ICE? Simple its safer and gets me to work for WAY less money i could spend on car day trips whit an app rented car
A couple of years ago, I would have seriously considered an BEV. However, a number of things have occurred since. 1. In Ontario, the number of charging stations is not sufficient. There needs to be more and better maintained. 2. The cost of insurance is astronomical. This because of the high cost of repair and the rate of vehicles being written off. 3. An extreme shortage of mechanics able to service them. My mechanic will not touch Tesla's because of the difficulty of getting parts as well as Tesla not giving out diagnostic information. 4. The long wait for parts to service or repair. When my current ICE vehicle needs to be replaced, I will consider a PHEV, but probable go with a hybrid. My sister only has onstreet parking so she will continue to buy Hybrids. My other sister attempted a road trip in her Bolt to accept an environmental award. She said it was the trip from hell. My brother in Vancouver uses his Model 3 around town which he charges with an ordinary 120 volt outlet. When he goes out of town he uses his old VW diesel Jetta. It is fine fir the early fans, but the rest will wait and see. This shown by the slow down in sales and inventory piling up at dealers.
I have 8 years of living off the grid including charging a EV .
If you're driving any miles you must have a huge array of solar panels in order to do that... I had 24 panel is lived in Hawaii where I had an amazing amount of sunlight and produced about 20 kW total of power each day. My house took 10 kilowatts so if I was charging in a Eevee I would have 10 kilowatts for the EV and that 10 kilowatts would give me about 30 mi of travel.
Let me add for you to talk about.
Grid blindness in the land of the new battery technologies.The grid needs $100BILLIONs in cash flow. 😮😮😮😮😮😮😮
24hrs, 7 days a week, for years, decades.
Nobody looks at the economics.
I am a Construction Engineer with decades of pricing, tendering, and building. 'Neck on the line' hard $ contracting.
So, I see what many do not see and I politely wait for them to finish, the same stuff repeated.
You are not wrong.
I see $100SBILLIONS in cashflow from the customer into the $TRILLIONS and $TRILLIONS infrastructure that is the national electricity grid.
I see a future of broken cashflow into the national grid from millions and millions and millions of customers with massive oversized battery in BVs parked 23hrs every day and all night long.
I see millions and millions and millions and millions and millions of customers with a small part of their rooftop with PV.
I see the grid owners and investors scrabbling to maintain cashflow.
To maintain ROI.
I see $kWh supply rate increasing.
I see customers looking at more dirt cheap electricity and a free battery in their BV parked all night long.
I am talking economics.
So yes, your technical comment is accurate but if the sunshines the grid economics is f.....
Strong language but sadly accurate.
Have a look at the grid numbers for your self, "it is the grid economics stupid " to quote an old saying 😉
It grate isn't it we also have moved from the city and changed to off grid solar and EVs. Unfortunately not soon enough to save our son. An estimated 5.13 million (3.63 to 6.32) excess deaths per year globally are attributable to ambient air pollution from fossil fuel. Stay safe and healthy and thank you for making people lives better by not using a ICE vehicle.
He’s leaving the production and distribution of fossil fuels out of his CO2 calculations.
they always do
That is a common omission. It's also hard to calculate, because much of the energy to refine crude oil comes from the crude oil, without accounting for that.
Pumping, refining, piping, diesel truck drives it to the gas station-all left out of the equation.
It's a shame - solar power has free delivery.
Plus the methane produced when the wells close.
100% agree with you. They - "let's expand the box where we measure EV emissions" (But let's not do that for fossil fuels. That would be honest)
They always try to say: "they didn't think this through" when in reality, we did think it through and they did not.
As a reminder:
TED = high-profile experts delivering talks at major conferences, usually based on peer-reviewed science.
TEDx = literally anyone that contacted the local event organizer can get on stage and say any contrary non-verified stuff they want.
Thanks! I was wondering this whole time how this guy was doing a TED talk. I didn't know there was a difference between TED and TEDx.
Good reminder, I might look into doing my own some day… 🤔
@@ShawnGBR even flat earthers?
@@dezza718Flat Earthers are not real. There are people pretending to get attention.
@@ShawnGBR A bit like those "podcast" interviews where they throw a joe Rogan style curtain up in the background 😂
Here in Oklahoma 44% of our power is renewables and less than 6% is coal. And since wind picks up at night, it lines up well with charging habits.
Couple that with the 3-fold increase in motor efficiency over an ICE vehicle, and it’s a huge emissions & pollution benefit for my city.
Fossil fuels is still much more than renewables overall
@@comment6864It’s not a static figure. Every state in the US is adding renewable capacity. Yet, nobody is making your ICE vehicle more efficient as time goes on. 🤪
To be honest, I did not switch to electric to reduce CO2. I wanted to reduce oil use. The most evil governments and regimes are almost all funded by oil. No one ever seems to talk about that. And since oil is a fungible, global resource and need, reducing our use will cause the money available to fund terrorism and other oppressive regimes to dry up.
The other thing is the electric line is not linear. The grid will continue to get cleaner so the BEV will become cleaner as it gets older. And ICE engine loses a bit of efficiency over time so an older car will probably pollute more over time. So the ICE and hybrid cars should curve slightly upwards, and the BEV should flatten over time. The time to start switching is now. The money wasted improving ICE efficiency would be much better spent improving BEV. Spending on improving ICE is just wasted.
There you go!!! Exactly what i say - it's an ideology! Well hope you are free to buy an EV, while those of us who like the oil producing countries can continue to support them by buying ICE and Hybrids.
@@comment6864 of course it's just an ideology, most of them don't even know what's the concentration of the CO2 in the air. Instead of funding evil governments with oil now we fund them with lithium or cobalt or batteries. It's a big win.
@@comment6864to me it's a compound issue.
It's co2, it's combustion related emissions and not supporting petro-states.
Yes ev's need resources, but batteries are recyclable, the petrol in a tank is not
@@Belrmar It doesn't need to be recycled LOL, it's burned! I support the petro-states, since Russia is one of them.
@@comment6864 that's my point
Yeah it seems to me the people who try to make the environmental case against EVs always leave out how much electricity was used to refine oil into gas
I Used to work on a petrochemical plant tah at one time produced half the gasoline neede to fuel the Puerto Rico car fleet. Energy consumption per day was huge, it used a whole power plant for its normal operation. Also worked on a refinery (crude oil), and also had a dedicated power plant.
@@evinthestix7451 They also leave out the environmental damage caused by fracking.
And not only that, but oil pipelines take a remarkable amount of energy to operate. And then there's the huge amount of energy that goes into oil shipping on supertankers, and distribution by road and rail.
Leave out a lot of things, blur exaggerate and lie about most of the rest
stupid question er not , is this adressed in simcity 3000 or 4000 ? ive played 300 alot but not enough . im curious as then your avg person who plays such games (and there are alot of ppl that do ! ) would know this huge lol literal smoking gun of a truth ? in terms of scale this could acutally win the argument and easily , . i think more ppl need to play simcity more perhaps theyd understand more about the real world
We charge our EVs with residential solar. But my major disagreement with the notion of better ICE engines, cleaner fuels - and even hybrids - is that you've still got more moving parts - valves, lifters, pistons, cam shafts, transmissions, fuel injectors, etc - and more consumables - belts, hoses, lubricants, engine coolants, and so on. This means ICEVs will, ultimately, cost more to produce, more to maintain, and they will never, ever be as energy efficient as an EV. Such proposals are a clever bit of sophistry but, ultimately, are a bait and switch. They promise more, but deliver more of the same weaknesses. The simple fact is that EVs are the better choice for personal transportation. They may not ever be a better choice for large trucks, tractors or airplanes, but they are already the best choice for cars and light trucks (up to a ton). It's just a matter of continuing to improve and standardize batteries, motors and distribution methods, continuing to move to renewable electricity generation, and getting sufficient infrastructure in place. The future is now!
Excellent point.
I charge both my EVs 100% from my roof. Except for road trips.
When they are full and power is free I let local EVs charge for free, instead of turning the panels off.
i also am on this,
panels + hybrid inverters got very cheap..
Smart man good for our home planet 🌎
The engineering, production, transportation, and installation of the solar panels is NOT free.
No you don't. That's a lie. There is no such thing. Unless your solar array is large enough to power you 24/7, which is highly unlikely, you aren't charging your battery.
John Cordogan, the Australian auto expert just did a video on this in the last few days.
You would be FAR better off with an efficient ICE car and a decent sized solar and battery for your house.
@@messertl True, you do have to pay for it!! 🙃 He's saying he lets other EVs charge up for free, as in he isn't asking for money.
I didn't buy an EV to be more sustainable. Is it a net benefit if it is? absolutely.
I bought it because there is no ICE car that can give me the same combination of comfort, tech, and performance for the price point without needing modification, lots of maintenance, premium gas and the need for me to find a reputable and trustworthy technician. Added benefit was never really needing to go to a gas station unless for a beverage.
Also any modification urge I get will be directed to an appreciating asset: my home. Adding outlets and improving the electronics in my home as a result of learning about home charging has been an indirect benefit.
Also I'm spending somewhere around $40 month to charge this car and it is a CUV. My GTI took $240-$300 of premium a month.
Love that
Exactly. I charge my Model 3 for free and saved $3,600 last year just in fuel costs.
And when that battery reaches end-of-life... how much you gonna pay to replace it? How much will they charge you to remove it and take it to a landfill?
If you get into a fender bender, your car may combust later on at some unspecified point. Firefighters won't be able to put it out because it burns so fast.
Not all costs are up front.
@@michaeldavid6832 and what if a tornado sweeps up my home and launches my EV into someone's home in a fiery ball?
The battery is warrantied for longer than most ICE cars, is protected better than most engine powertrains.
And if I ever have to replace, I'm sure it will be expensive enough where it may not work for me. If that happens 8-10 years out, then I got my money's worth and my gas savings form that same time could go towards a battery.
When the battery is deemed replaceable is at 70% of total life and could be reused somewhere else as storage.
The pistons that came out of one of my blown engines has also been reused - as decoration.
@@michaeldavid6832
Since the current generation of batteries are lasting over 300k miles, most people will not need to replace the battery. In comparison the average gas car only lasts about 200k miles. The cost to replace it has come down to $9k - $15k or so, at least for Tesla cars. My Tesla has saved me over $7k in fuel costs just in its first 2 years. The batteries are recyclable and will get turned into new batteries, not go to the landfill.
A fender bender is not going to cause a fire issue. Only accidents that cause intrusion into the battery might cause that but insurance will total the car if it's that bad, just like a gas car with a bent frame gets totaled by insurance.
I really love how there is never the argument to add all the additional things involved in getting gas into a ICE vehicle. The gas has to be made, transported by large vehicles creating emissions, and then electricity is used to get the gas into the vehicles and run the stations. Adding that kind of data only seems fair.
@fozzyrinker313 If this was privately being paid for by Independantly owned businesses, more power to you. Where all the EV ectrical needs are being paid for by all usthe tax payers. The Oil& Gas Stations are all profitable paid for by 6 enterprise for the last 100 years.
@@ImLivinSD Good lord no! US taxpayers pay billions in subsidies directly to oil companies. We also pay trillions for the military to stabilize the middle east and keep that sweet crude coming to keep prices stable.
Children mine the cobalt for EV's. The lithium doesnt come at 0 cost either.
@@messertl Cobalt is also used in oil refining.
@@messertlyou presumably posted this from a mobile phone which contains cobalt in its battery.
P.S. EV batteries are moving away from using cobalt in their batteries
Well if anything. This TED talk shows just how fast EV tech is moving. His info. was out of date before the ink on his contract was dry.
You may not be a huge anti hybrid guy, but I am.
2 separate powertrains that need to be maintained, and you have to use the gas in the tank every now and then because gas goes bad
the electric powertrain doesn't really need much maintenance so really just same amount of maintenance as a gas car
@@Pegaroo_ except that it's integrated with the ICE drivetrain, so it needs more maintenance than a standalone electric motor, making it worse than just going EV
@@pdxmarine1430 Obviously it's worse than going pure EV but I didn't compare it to an EVs maintenance
@@Pegaroo_ maintenance wise it's also worse than pure ICE since it has extra components to maintain, and if you don't drive far enough to actually need the ICE engine, the gas in the tank can go bad.
The only good hybrid design was the volt that used the engine purely as a generator and didn't have it connected to the drivetrain at all
I agree. I've seen hybrids have issues that costs thousands to repair and it made me realize that there's almost twice as many parts that can go bad and the parts still cost as much to repair as any other car.
You can’t make gas at home but you can lay out some solar panels, etc. not hard to see why some people/corporations are against it.
Yes, those solar panels are manufactured by water.
Henry Ford originally envisioned his cars running on locally-sourced ethanol (in fact, the _real_ driving force behind American prohibition was to make this infeasible). Rudolf Diesel imagined generators running on locally-sourced biofuel. Now, biofuels are complicated topics in terms of climate impact, but all that to say: your point is well-supported by logic and historical precedent. 👍
@@faster6329 Solar power can supply the powr for 100% of Earth necesities occuping only 3% of its area. There is penty of are in building roof, home roof, manufacturing plants roof, parking lots, etc. NO agricultural land needs to be used. Solar panel manufacturing is realy cheap. In Germany they are using them to built fences at residential homes. Dual purpose a fence, and a solar generator.
@@EnriqueAThieleSolivan
My point was it takes energy to manufacture solar panels. The OP saying you can't make gas at home, sounded as if you can make solar panels at home and they appear out of thin air. Just like gas, solar panels need an industry to manufacture them. Yes you can place them on your roof but they have to comes from somewhere.
@@faster6329 Yes, it takes energy to make solar panels, that's why in the video, total lifecycle emissions are discussed at length. That is the relevant metric.
My grid is 98% clean/renewable. Has been for years.
An EV takes less than 2 years to offset it's manufacturing pollution in such a case. I'm in the same situation. My car runs on water. Better yet: on gravity!
The funny thing is he's a Brit and the UK produces only 1% of its electricity from coal now.
is he? The ted talker sounds american to me. The host sounds british.
And will soon dissapear from the power mixture.
The world is slightly larger than the US and the UK, coal is about 35% world wide for electricity followed by Gas at around 23%.
@@chrisdunbar3400 yes but both are more expensive than alternative energy now.
The international energy association projects coal use to be flat in 2025 and to begin declining in 2026.
At the rate batteries are improving, coal will be extremely impractical relative to solar very soon
I have solar on my roof and battery storage. Las Vegas could lose power and I could still cool my house, cook my dinner and charge my cars, pretty much indefinitely. I have energy independence. How awesome is that? All homes should go for energy independence.
Not everyone gets 7 days a week of sunshine.
@@rickcollins2814 the downside of freedom is accepting consequences for your actions. If I choose to live in Alaska because it’s super remote then I will have to deal with the fact that I don’t get much sunshine in winter.
@@rickcollins2814 you can supplement your solar with urban windmills; that are very quiet, and can generate as much power as solar.
I am a believer that all new homes being manufactured should include solar power as a requirement. That will lower the price of solar and will also make old house owners to go solar in order to havea decent resale value. That will have a greater impact than ev (that are also needed)
@@EnriqueAThieleSolivan absolutely!! I am surprised that some places don’t require this. For some reason solar in the US is still very expensive but everyone who gets it loves it.
The sad part is that the ICE industry has consistently and STILL CONTINUE to resist regulations that enforce them to be more efficient. The ICE is over 100 years old and the improvement in miles per gallon is woeful. Now all of a sudden the industry is telling us that we can have amazingly efficient ICE's tomorrow.
Too little too late.
They contributed to their own long overdue demise.
That might be the case in US, but in EU, cars are definitely much more efficient and with lower emmissions (of all kinds) than cars of 30 years ago.
@@Winnetou17 It's the same in all markets. It's a matter of scale. Sure EU cars are more efficient and burn cleaner, but the cars are bigger and MPG has hardly improved overall. My first car was a mini back in the 70's and I could get 45 MPG if I drove carefully. What's the average now? It's probably not much more than 45 once you factor in the ridiculous amounts of tanks on the road. I guess that we are as much to blame. We want bigger cars, with more features etcétera, etcétera, so the cars just get bigger and less efficient overall. Look at the mini and then something like a Toyota Yaris. Both are nearly twice the size of the original version.
@@simonpaine2347 True, the bigger cars is totally a thing. Worldwide... I think (really don't know what is selling in Japan).
But we still have small cars in EU, even if a smaller percentage.
And with the EVs now microcars are a thing too.
Though you are right in your OP that the manufacturers are resisting regulations. I remember just this year or the previous one how everybody wanted to relax or delay Euro 7 saying that it's almost impossible and it will f*&k up the market or something, I forget the exact quote.
We can't buy decent cheap EVs in the USA, and the politicians (listening to the UAW) have 100% tariffs against Chinese cars. "NO EV FOR YOU!"
I along with thousands of people who charge there EV at home with solar panels. I will never go back to an ICE vehicle for many reasons but for now I will just mention that I am saving money and our planet. If everyone put solar panels on their house there would never be a need for fossil fuels whatsoever.
Wonderful dream.
I have the ioniq5 since 2022 and I've never had such a great car before. I charge it 50% from my PV panels. EVs are the future. No doubt
Funny how, 20 years later, the hybrid is suddenly the answer. 20 years ago, when Prius hit the mainstream, it got all the criticism. "Hummers will last longer!" "You'll need a new battery every 3 years." Its' not worth the "Hybrid Premium".
Well, 20 years later the Prius is EVERYWHERE. The Hummer is extinct. Everybody's wife, sister, brother, neighbor, parent, etc. drives a Prius. They're everywhere and nobody even bothers to hate them anymore.
But then, .....if only we could have MORE electric range.
Hence the plug-in hybrid.
But, nobody could understand those. "If I gotta put gas in it, why plug it in?" "It's the best of both worlds, but the worst of both worlds." "Why lug an ICE engine around everywhere you go?"
"Not worth the Premium" (again).
Chevy made a great one, called the VOLT. But it didn't sell despite being quite good.
BUT, Once you get a taste of electric you don't want to go back.
Hence the EV. And, a dang good and long range EV. TESLA
Oh wait, Hybrid is he answer !!!!
And the cycle continues.
I actually heard my (older) mom-in-law comment the other day, She'd consider a hybrid as her next car! Over 20 years it has taken to get thru to the masses, with just a simple hybrid.
I personally have owned all the above in the last 20 years. Loved each one at the time. But the Tesla EV is for me. Simply fantastic so far.
Prius are not everywhere...plug in are less than 1% of cars.....PHEV takes over 300,000 miles to pay for itself.....go back to school kid.....
@@chadhaire1711 I think he was pointing out more that Priuses aren't the devil they were once painted as by fossil fuel shills, as more and more people bought them because they got tired of high gas prices and/or lots of maintenance that a regular gas car needs.
Yes, a hybrid still has a gas engine, but that engine isn't running 100% of the time either the way a traditional gas car engine does. So a 100k mile Prius might only have maybe 80k miles on its engine, with the rest coming from when it's running on electric.
Of course! Because hybrid is the most logical choice .. that is if you care to go electric at all. Pure EV is just not a good source of energy for a vehicle, never was, never will be (except for short-range golf carts and such), and that's why it's never really taken off. It can only become wide spread BY FORCE, which will in the end be a disaster in many ways. On the other hand the concept of charging a battery from an engine is genius .. that is if you're not at all concerned about EMF. That's why when the batteries got tolerably good it took off. Makes perfect sense. No loss of convenience or anything else. We'll leave health to the side for the moment, cause nobody's talking about that anyway. For now.
@@comment6864 Hybrid is for idiots...adds $3K to the price and will take 120,000 miles to pay for itself, and by then that battery can cost $4k to replace at any time. NOTHING beats a common simple four cylinder engine.
@@chadhaire1711 Absolutely fair point.. I did say IF you care to go electric at all. Your choice is as valid as any other and should be no less subsidized than any other or shown any discrimination
Yes...a horse may emit the same amount as a Corvette but no mention of the waste and Methane they produce. In the 1800 there was 2000 Tons of waste of the streets every day.....
Plus the requirements to feed them and what it takes to produce their food. Also, replacing all cars with horses... THAT'S A LOT OF HORSES!
I'm not sure that a horse will manage 100,000 miles in its lifetime, carrying two people plus luggage. Where would you keep them if you live in an apartment? 😊
@@rugbygirlsdadg Well that's why we went from horses to cars - the CONVENIENCE. People WANTED to make this transition because it made their lives EASIER. But EVs are LESS convenient than what we have now, at least for the vast majority of people.
Yum
@@comment6864 EVs are far more convenient when you can charge at home. No more gas station, no more changing oil.
Dude went thru all this to cheerlead hybrids?... I owned a hybrid before my EV. Why would I ever go backwards?
That is the point!
Dude is funded by a right wing source.
Expect his argument to be whatever bolsters fossil fuel demand yet might seem to pass as reasonable
You don't have to charge a hybrid. It charges itself. Very cool!! Now THAT'S innovation. EVs as such, that you have to charge🙄, are nothing new.
My folks have a plug-in hybrid which is
If you are not in the financial market space right now, you are making a huge mistake. I understand that it could be due to ignorance, but if you want to make your money work for you... prevent inflation
Thanks for continuing updates I'd rather trade the crypto market as it's more profitable. I make a good amount of money per week even though I barely trade myself.
A lot of people still make massive profit from the crypto market, all you really need is a relevant information and some ‹professional advice. ‹it's totally inappropriate for investors to hang on while suffering from dip during significant
You trade also?, I
No I don't trade on my own anymore, I always required help and assistance
From my personal financial advisor
..
So, yeah, the EV that travel 280 miles and has a much lower CO2 emission level after 60,000 miles over a comparable gasoline automobile is not ready but capturing CO2 from a vehicle to create new fuel for the eternal combustion engine, which no one knows how to do, is ready. The old Lie-O-Meter is broken and needs to go back to the repair shop.
Also, Capturing CO2 should be the last thing on the bucket list after converting all energy to renewable. As of now, capturing CO2 cost a lot of energy. Even getting this energy from renewables would waste it unless it's a surplus. I would argue that surplus should go into batteries, then maybe electrolysis for hydrogen, then last, CO2 capture.
“Eternal”
@@radiotec76 disregarding tree hugging, the EV is just a better vehicle with less moving parts, less maintenance, cheaper to operate, and higher performance per dollar.
how does an ev "recoup CO2 emissions" ?
@@orionbetelgeuse1937 corrected. Poor choice of words. EVs have much lower CO2 emissions after 60,000 miles than a comparable gasoline powered automobile.
The other issue that Graham is totally ignoring is the increased percentage of batteries coming from Recycled Lithium, which requires zero mining. EV will become a circular economy, but oil never will be emissions free.
Ah you've mentioned this, I hadn't reached that point of the video 😂
Exactly......
They're leaving out refineries' (approx. 15,8% loss of energy) and distribution (approx. another 7,9%). So approximately 23,7% of energy loss has to be added, apart from all the the things you have already rebutted. Hybrids will keep refining alive which is a bad idea in this respect.
Yes but. Many people including myself buy EVs because they're simply better. Nothing to do with climate change.
@@midac7069 I'm with you totally.
Not to mention that a good EV will last to nearly 500,000 miles.
Don’t think we know yet
@rickrutledge9363 the graph he shows is attributing an offset of 20 tons additional for a EV with large battery. The IVL sweden meta study that compiled in 2019 (so 5 years ago already) more than 17 different studies shows that production of battery emit between 60-100kg CO² /kWh. It means that a 80kWh battery had generated 4.8-8t of CO². But obviously, electrical car emission is much less than an ICE engine + gearbox + emission pipe ... and NMC 811 today are 30% more dense for the same quantity of raw material and LFP are also produced with lower emission. So how come on earth he can come with 20 ???? When it should be much lower than 4.8-8 additional?
Really??? How many do you know with that much mileage???
@@SigFigNewton Some have reached 400,000 already. A lot have reached 300,000.
@@natehill8069 sweet
By what percentage has mileage per charge degraded in those cars
I bought a 2023 Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV last weekend. I charged it from empty at home overnight ysing a standard 240volt outlet and it was full the next day. Driven each day around town and it still has half a battery charge!
that's it?? Wow glad you don't have to go on a very long trip
the problem with PHEVs is that people are lazy, and most end up using them as regular hybrids.And that's why they are not optimized for max efficiency. Automakers take for granted customers will use them just as hybrids, without charging them, and engineer them accordingly.
In addition, almost all PHEVs on the market are ICE cars with an electric drivetrain strapped on. Instead, they should be engineered as EVs with a generator on board working at max efficiency.
Phevs will be obsolete in ten years.
Can’t compete with how cheap EVs will get
So they should all be Chevy Volts...
@@natehill8069 not really. The volt still had the engine connecting to the wheels in some instances. More like the i3rex, if the engine wasn't underdimensioned. Or, the ram1500rev, if both battery and engine were optimized. But clearly, they are assuming people will end up not charging the battery. There is the mx30rev, but the car is an inefficient EV by itself, and the rotary generator is inefficient too. Waiting for ioniq9erev to see if they get it right
Because of regenerative braking, which allows driving with very little use of the friction brakes, EVs save us from the very nasty brake dust pollution.
It was even worse in the days of asbestos brake pads!
@@dialy1 There is far more pollution from rubber dust which EVs due to their weight wear tires faster.
@@harveypaxton1232 😂I haven’t seen too many EVs in the street takeovers. The donuts and burnouts are done by V8s. Jokes aside, the pollution from tires has been greatly exaggerated for all cars by using a worst case scenario number of 9.28 g of rubber dust created per mile. We would be driving on rims within a couple of months… EVs are also not much heavier than ICE cars. Stop taking the extreme example of the Hummer EV. A Tesla model 3 or a Hyundai Ioniq 5 are of pretty average weight and way lighter than the millions of ICE suvs currently on our roads. Try again.
@@harveypaxton1232don't forget the rubber particles from the the fuel tankers delivering petrol and diesel to the gas stations.
Don't hybrids have this ability too?
The best reasons for driving an EV have nothing to do with CO2 emissions from the tailpipe or anywhere else. If you believe that Global Warming is a hoax, you can still love an EV.
@@restonthewind sounds like you drive a tesla!
@@justohird5685 It's a Bolt EV.
yeah? what are they??
i would respectfully retort that one of the only reasons for doing so is in fact cleaner air in our cities and suburbs, ie tailpipe emissions.
@@laughingjackaso8163 Much lower cost of fuel, instant torque, better acceleration, quiet starting and driving, lower maintenance costs. Tailpipe emissions are important if you care about such things, and some people do, but everyone cares about a much lower cost of fuel and maintenance, and if you've experienced the torque and acceleration, you'll love that too. You don't experience lower tailpipe emissions similarly.
Lots of charlatans on the anti EV train.
EVs are ridiculously expensive, extremely dangerous and have little if any benefit in terms of pollution.
@@tarstarkusz You are on a EVangelical site. NO facts will make a dent here :)
@@tarstarkusz
Your data is really old. Recent stats show, EV’s are 30 times less likely to catch fire than gas cars. A lot of areas have gone to carbon free electricity.
@@tarstarkusz my Ten years EV is still dangerous to you?
@@contra_plano Yes. Even more dangerous than when it was new. This is not just an opinion, it is fact.
When a trucker commented that I80 was closed down for days because of the Tesla Semi fire, he said a diesel fire would have been extinguished and cleared if a few hours. I responded that firefighters, hazmat teams and road crews are so quick with the cleanup because of the FREQUENCY of diesel truck fires. He didn’t respond. The news said they shutdown I80 because of the toxic fumes from the battery fire. They don’t shutdown highway because of ICE vehicle fires that spew toxic fumes too.
The chemical make up of these fires is vastly different thanks to battery chemistry...
Fires per 100,000 new vehicles, ICE approx 1500. Hybrids, approx 3000, EVs approx 26. Twenty Six.
@@Anax100 Most of the ICE fires are electrical...
There is a new German channel on RUclips that covers electric semi trucks.
He became a semi trucker to show how it works and what needs to improve. But the first impression after a few month is, the electric semi is ready for Primetime.
Our grid in Scandinavia is at 98% co2-free, so any electric car or other electric thingamabob (weedwacker, lawnmower, etc) is at worst using 2% fossil-fuel electricity. Since many also have solar panels (like most of my neighborhood) we use even less so pretty much 100% fossil-free
Yes you don't use the fossil fuels, you just sell it for others to burn! 😂🤔
@@gavjlewis well, I'm from Sweden and I wish we had fossil fuels to sell like Norway - they actually have a negative national debt like Saudi and the UAE. You are right however, drug use isn't only the fault of the drug user, the dealer is of course just as culpable (if not more). But to be clear, ONLY Norway is producing fossil fuels - the other four countries are not and we are still at 98% fossil free. So it is fully possible to do even if you don't have a huge cash cow funding government.
As so many EV detractors do, he’s completely ignoring the electricity needed to extract oil from the ground, ship it, refine it and ship it again to get it to the pump. The petroleum industry is one of the largest consumers of grid electricity yet these numbers are always conveniently omitted from the calculations.
efuels are a bait and switch. You can't buy them at the gas station.
You can buy hydrogen. Somewhere, at ridiculous prices, and made from fossil methane. Synfuels will be even more expensive, if they're green.
Wow. I thought Tedx had higher standards.
Should be and needs a an upgrade.
No standards
That was Ted Talks that had standards
BMW i3 was around 125 miles of range at the end of its production, and on one of his graphs it showed an image of an i3
Good catch!
If I look at the electricity sources for Seattle, WA (where I live) - Hydro - 88%, Wind - 5%, Nuclear - 4%, Unspecified - 2%, Biogas - 1% (Seattle City Light does not have coal or natural gas resources in its power supply portfolio.) If I have solar panels, I'm pretty sure I have closest to zero for CO2 emissions for my electric vehicle.
That’s wonderful that you live in a geography that has rivers and dams to produce hydro electricity.
So we have estimates for the CO2 for manufacturing ICE. We have estimates for BEV and manufacturing the battery. We have estimates for CO2 in battery charging.
Where is the CO2 data for the extraction and refinement of fossil fuels?
Smart attendees at TED ! No bluff passable.
Where’s the acknowledgment that less and less power is from fossil fuels, ensuring that the numbers will be making EVs look better and better every year
@SigFigNewton the data is quantitative not relative.
It takes 8 kWhrs just to refine one gallon of gasoline. That would take the typical vehicle about 25 real life miles. It would take my EV about 27 miles. That doesn’t count the other costs to produce gasoline.
He assumes that an EV will also be scrapped at 180,000 miles. With far fewer moving parts this seems unlikely but perhaps there is limited data out there to confirm.
Hybrid longevity is an interesting question, again maybe not much data out there.
Cobalt is also used in refining of fuel/gas. It cannot be recycled there but can be recycled from batteries.
Back when this was made, we saw the trajectory towards renewables, greater efficiencies in battery/car production. Also one has to look down the line when batteries are eventually recycled. What are the emissions associated with that? By the time we get there, we will mostly be renewable.
The thing is, with this new ev tech, we see solutions unfolding in front of our eyes. Meanwhile, in Canada, the oil sands still have large amounts of polluted water byproducts that in theory tech was supposed to solve but we are still waiting. Its a much more difficult problem.
We got solar panels in anticipation with going electric. Our panels produce on average 25 kwh/day while a trip to town takes about 7 kwh.
All these anti-EV studies are based on at least one flawed variable. Often it's a severe underestimation of the life of the vehicle. In this presentation, it's the insistence that an equivalent EV must have the same range as an ICE. That allows him to compare the ICE to hypothetical EVs with batteries bigger than anything that exists in reality instead of looking the actual EVs people drive.
@@leroyharder4491 so if you count in a tec that doesn't exist to make a calculation the ice group could made the same argument and by the next ten year there's gonna be a fuel that not pollute. Make the assestement by today tec and standars
Less than driving a HUGE DIESEL to mining zones transporting it all over the world i suppose.
@@SebastianScida No need to speculate on future tech. By now it is a fact that ev batteries last 300,000 miles and are still about 80%. That means the ev car last twice the live on an ICE car. New batteries (tested but available on 2025) have expected life of 600,000 miles ad CATL has one good gor 1,000,000 miles. New ev will have lifetime battery guaranties, so there is one less problem.
@@EnriqueAThieleSolivan There will come a day where you will buy a new carcass of a car for under 5000$, and transfer your old battery in it!
Not to get too political, but the Southwest Research Institute that he works for is Right leaning. It has been my experience that far too many Right and Libertarian think tanks rely on pure theory or cherry picked data.
And all too often that data has no source.
Another case of anti EV voices being amplified by fossil fuel money
most left-leaning (or liberal is the more accurate term) think tanks subscribe to the climate religion
EVs are just a natural progression of the ICE cars. It's like you wouldn't be buying a Blackberry now, after using smart phones for nearly 20 years. Why buy a ~150 years old tech called internal COMBUSTION engine when you can have an electric motor in your car?
I'm not disputing this but just simply pointing out the fact that at some point in the near future, most of our transportation will be EV. The only thing that cannot be electrified are rockets.
Cobalt is also used to remove sulfur in gasoline production.
True (an not just in gasoline specifically) - it is also recovered and reused in catalyst down the line, same as batteries can be.
@@lylestavast7652 Yea but also: we have now batteries which don't need cobalt and there are going to be more of them and better ones in the future. I doubt it's the same for the fossil fuel industry.
It's used as a catalyst so not consumed in the process. On the other side more and more batteries that are being made are LiFePO4 (LFP) which don't need cobalt or nickel so even the cobalt argument is getting weaker as more battery tech is developed
Roughly 8% of all cobalt produced annually is used in gasoline production. While it *is a catalyst and recyclable* , it's still about 550 *tons* per year that's irretrievable.
And more sulfur is obtained than there is a demand for it. You will never be close to a sulfur fire, but I was.
1.) When they tell me the grid can't handle it I ask them do you say the same thing when a new housing community is built. Do you say that when a strip mall is built. Do you say that when new condos go up. Do you say that when they're building new hi-rise office buildings. All of these things use a tremendous amount of electricity when built. So why is it the grid can't handle EV adoption over time.
2.) As far as the Cobalt, I don't let people use that as an argument against EVs considering the oil industry has been using Cabal as a catalyst in refining oil.
@@KineticEV The USA could double its grid capacity by replacing all its steel transmission cables with kevlar core aluminium. Like the UK did 50 years ago.
@@PassportToPimlico something tells me the USA, with its humongous deficit and pathological obsession with supporting Ukraine, Israel and who knows what else, will not be spending on anything like this any time soon, but we'll see.
They always say "If we all changed to EVs tomorrow...." Which is not gonna happen.
@@jamesvandamme7786 actually the pushers are rushing it because they're worried that their popularity will reach a premature peak before that is even close. So they tell you look! it's still growing. Well yeah, it's still a novelty (the modern EVs, of course not the idea of electric vehicles) and not all the rich kids have their plaything yet. As always we live in a marketing (not market!) driven economy, so you make something up and then manipulate everybody into thinking they want it (or consider force if that doesn't work 😁). Teslas have that feel of driving a big computer, which is supposed to elicit that shiny new tech gadget lust along with the 'i'm smart and progressive' self-image. Drooling yet? 😛
Big pharma won't like getting rid of pollution, that for sure. The oligarchs own big pharma, gonna have to decide what to do with them before they decide what to do with us.
So at least there are two enemies to the change. Oil industry (7 million death worldwide) and the pharmaceutical industry (lower sales)
You should be looking at the data for electrical production not energy production for the USA.
10:40 oops, the same mistake folks make about energy consumption vs electric generation. That graph includes petro going into cars. This segment should have the 38.9% methane, 21.3% renewables, 19.7% coal, 18.2% nuclear, from EIA for 2022.
I love that other graph because it knocks petroleum down to 0.8% which I figure must be generators at remote sites.
Just found the 2023 page: 43.1% methane, 21.4% renewables, 18.6% nuclear, 16.2% coal, 0.8% petroleum.
I think the key data point here is that the proportion of electricity generated by coal is decreasing year over year. However the slack seems to be being picked up by natural gas rather than renewables.
I love how people think the country that went to the Moon 55 years ago somehow cant figure out how to increase grid capacity in the next decade. That said gas cars have reached their zenith in terms of efficiency in respect to fuel and manufacture. Electric cars will be radically more efficient in both respects in the near future plus the transport as a service movement will curtail all sales by an estimated 35% in under 10 years. Less car overall will be built as a result of the BEV movement and this is a good thing. @21:40 this is why transport as a service will crush car ownership in urban areas the cost benefits and convenience will be so great most will just give up on individual car ownership. An ancillary benefit will be that it empower the mobility of some who cannot drive at this time such as blind, elderly and those with medical conditions (also those who have no license due to say a DUI) . This will boost the economy with their spending and productivity.
What all EV critics forget or ignore is that the next generation batteries made from recycled batteries will have significantly lower carbon footprint
They repeat the arguments of propagandists who ignore as much as they can
who cares about carbon footprint.. what matters in a car is convenience and affordability and safety. Pollution too of course, but that has reduced hugely over the past decades with just incremental improvements, even in public transit that is not EV .. though cancer rates continue to rise.
@@comment6864 what matters most in a world wide collective fleet of vehicles is carbon footprint
@@SigFigNewton No it isn't! That's just one opinion LOL
@@comment6864 quadrillions of dollars in damages set in motion
Air pollution is not Co2, is more about fine dust. Ev consume tires 20% faster, so more dust in the air, just related to tires. Of course, having no combustion I think they're cleaner overall
EV batteries do indeed *_combust._*
The dirty secret of oil refining is that it uses a lot of cobalt. Wonder if anybody has compared it to cobalt use in batteries and tooling.
@djstraylight Yes slap man reported this way back when
It's true it does use Cobalt. But Cobalt isn't carbon intensive to mine so the CO² to produce it is relatively low in the grand scheme of things.
But Cobalt mining also has a good side. It has helped double the GPD of the DRC in the last 10 years and it has reduced its debt from over 100% to around 12% in the last 20 years. Some pretty impressive numbers.
There is an old saying "a half truth is a whole lie".
About 20 years ago or so I came across a study what's compared the emissions of 50,000 vehicles powered by gas or diesel versus the amount of coal powered needed to generate the same energy to drive electric vehicles.
The conclusion was, the coal-fired plants run at an exact highest efficiency and if One compares the emissions from this cold plant, powering electric vehicles versus 50,000 vehicles run on gasoline or diesel, the emissions from the coal powered electric plant, powering EV's, the ICE vehicles would be polluting for more there are several reasons, they're omitting while idling in traffic, they are nowhere near as efficient as the coal powered plant.
However for some odd reason is never mentioned.
Scientia Habet Non Domus,
(Knowledge Has No Home)
antiguajohn
The problem of synthetic fuels (if I understood the mechanism) is that it needs H2 to be done (so the efficiency is worse than H2).
When he says combining water with CO2, it's in fact electrolysis to obtain H2 then combined with CO2 to make synthetic fuel.
Very inefficient and energy intensive, and hardly scalable.
Oh, and I live in France so the "no CO2" (still a little CO2) part of our mix is kind of very very big (around 94%).
The other problem is some synthetic fuels are still made from natural gas.
The only pilot plant for syn fuel is in Chile . It was a proof of cancept plant. The technology for recovering the CO2 from the atmosphere (44 ppm) does not exist. The plat used comercial grade CO2 cylinders. Syn Fuel was 3X more expensive than gasoline (about $10/ galon) That is without the non existing technology energy consumption. It is a fools dream created by the oil companies to divide the public opinion without showing the "details" of the concept.
So, based on his solution of power generation, making a grid that is CO2 free is all you need, then many places in the world have already met that. I live in Ontario, and we have zero coal plants and very few natural gas plants. Most of the province is nuclear or hydro. My power is hydro from Niagara Falls.
So basically, most of his arguments doesnt even apply to me.
I don't have solar panels, but I charge my EV between 2am - 5am at an extremely low cost due to the fact that my electricity supply company has generators run through the night on low load! So the CO2 would be being produced anyway.
I am hoping to see more renewable power generation as soon as possible!
Did I not recently read that Hybrid are inefficient due to the fact the electric part is hauling around a heavy engine, gearbox, fuel tank, etc, 😳
A 🏴 living in 🇮🇪
Another valid point is that EVs are now demonstrating extended life spans way beyond those of an ICE vehicle. It’s simple - they don’t have as many moving parts and the batteries are lasting longer with every new iteration. Soon, we will expect our vehicles to last 250,000 to 500,000 miles as a matter of course. The resultant reduction in raw materials usage will be a huge benefit. The impact on the auto industry, though, is a matter for further discussion.
Has he included the CO2 released during the extraction of oil, the transport of the raw oil to the refinery, the refining of that oil and the transport of that petrol/diesel to the forecourt? And the materials - including cobalt, in that refining? And the water usage?
My experience with a used Fiat 500e over 7 years regarding maintenance has been one 12dc battery and tires. Zero trips to the dealer. Still on the original brakes.
Hybrids keep the customer returning for service over time creating recurring income for dealers. Mechanical Engineer
He forgot about the crap horses leave behind
LOL
Fertilizer production is among the many benefit of equestrianary vehicles, yes.
Farmers usually want that.
@@UfrankTube gotta calculate the miles per hay bale
Not forgetting it's a good source of methane which is apparently 15x worse than CO2 for global warming. Now go listen to the recent fully charged podcast about the uncapped oil wells in LA and Texas, the title is about the Methane hunter. Those wells just keep giving (not oil though).
Hi Ben, I’ve got some up-to-date UK stats for ya and personal testimony. I’ve purchased this summer a 6 years old, 50K miles Toyota C-HR hybrid. It cost £15K and has more than doubled my MPG from 32mpg in a Ford C-Max to 67mpg AVERAGE. In my first 1K miles driven in city and country journeys at the usual road speeds and conditions for summer. That’s more than a little bit more efficient, it’s doubled my MPG and is half the cost of buying an EQUIVALENT EV with 450 mile range. Right now in the summer of 2024, EV sales are really taking a hit with brans new sales. Growth is only 2% this years, (almost stagnant). The reason is 90% are now company sales (it used to be 50% but tax incentives have increased this). The depreciation, Insurance and competition for public charging at reasonable cost have severely limited EV appeal to the public outside of corporate sales. Some fast chargers in the UK at 150kWh charge 80p per kW ($1!). Depreciation of 75% for some Audi and Porsche models have been headline news and with the economic uncertainly around. Future growth is far behind government targets and something is going to give this autumn or major car brands are going bust in Europe and National governments are going to let that happen on pain of civil unrest and general strikes. With our high energy costs, electric only cars will continue to struggle in Europe.
You do a great job mate, sorry to make this so long, but wanted to get these bits of info off my chest.
Right.. it's no secret that EVs have NOT taken off market wise, but now a days the most powerful economies are all about marketing, not market, and so things will continue to be very confusing to most of the public that doesn't question MSM and the other pushers
Where I live electricity generates 0.389 Kg Co2/Kwh. Each state is different and the value changes yearly.
Yes, the total CO2 generated drops as more renewables are added to the existing grid. No one constructs al old tech power plat. The take years on permits and construction. A solar farm takes a single year fom permits to start up, with very little mainteance.
Shifting pollution away from where people live is good. Less than 10 years ago, there were at least 60 days a year where you couldn't see 200 yards in Guangzhou China because of pollution. It's a lot better now. China is also producing more clean energy. Their goal is to shutdown all coal plants. Their cities have 10 tens of thousands of electric buses. They are building high speed and local electric trains.
You're giving this guy a bit too much grace. He's spreading nonsense on a big stage, which has real consequences.
I did a review paper, about 2 years ago to study the use of hybrids in the future of transportation. I would like to see hybrids in the sense of having a small back up generator for an EV rather than an ICE vehicle with a motor. However, hybrids are only good at this point for assisting those hesitant to change to get into EVs. ICE vehicles had over 100 years to reach their peak. PS. Carbon capture is unreasonable on a vehicle. Carbon capturing at a power plant is very possible and useful.
Love your videos keeping people honest. I just bought a model Y. Great car
Time to change all my electric home appliances for combustion engine appliances because some ratio electricity is generated by fossil fuels. So smart.
The mental gymnastics at the end there was incredible. If you get a bunch of renewable energy, add some unknown magic pixie dust, you can convert emitted carbon back into energy.
If you already have the bunch of renewable energy, why did you need to emit the carbon to begin with?
Dude if you take a gallon of gas and you burn it and in industrial power plant you'll get 120 mi of energy from it and even though it's roughly 52% efficient that's still like 60 miles per gallon. You're also forgetting about the emissions from production of electricity used to create the gallon of fuel. It still takes about 10 kilowatts of energy to create a gallon of fuel in total, which funny enough can drive an electric car 30 mi alone. Just from the electricity used to create the gas
He says that most of our electricity comes from coal. I guess that depends upon which country you are looking at, but here in the UK hardly any comes from coal - most days none of it does. Some comes from gas. I have an app running which shows where our electricity is coming from. It varies - most days it is about 10% comes from gas, though sometimes it goes up to 30 to 40% comes from gas. Hardly any comes from coal. And I believe the last coal fired power station is going to be turned off towards the end of this year.
I have an EV (Nissan Leaf) and solar panels. My charger allows me to charge the car from the panels - off grid - if I wish. I don't, because I get 15p per kWh that I supply to the grid, and at night I pay about 6.5p per kWh. The company I buy the electricity only buys electricity produced by renewable generation - so wind, solar, hydro and, I guess, nuclear. This is easily done, and quite common. So when I plug my EV in, I am getting much more of the electricity generated by non-CO2 generation than by CO2 generation. Yes, I am not fixing the CO2 problem - but at least I am not part of it any more than I must be.
I am surprised by his sophistry. He is, I assume, a reasonably intelligent person, but he is deliberately skewing things.
As for hybrids - you now have an ICE engine to make, so your initial CO2 is increased. And, sadly, hybrids are far more likely to catch fire than ICE cars - and way more likely to do so than EVs. Hut hey - it keeps him in a job that he understands.
Ben, you made a few mistakes here (which are actually in his favor), you were looking at "Energy" sources, not "Electricity" sources. When talking about where your electricity for an EV comes from you want to use the Electricity numbers, not energy. The numbers are very different when you look at Electricity. Less than 1% is Petroleum products, about 18% is coal, but about 23% is renewable, 39% natural gas, and 18% nuclear (that was 2023 numbers). "Energy" includes transportation, heating, all kinds of things that are not just for producing electricity.
You also can't compare a PHEV's MPGE milage to an EV's if you want to discuss driving it in "hybrid" mode. In EV mode (which is what the MPGE is for) it is an electric car. Use the actual MPG for the comparison.
Graham's numbers were not even correct 4 years ago when he made this video, and I (and many others) slammed it for using false numbers and providing no sources of data.
That the funny graph is missing is the huge emissions for producing the gasoline from oil - for some reason, all the graphs about the emissions somehow miss the part about "where does the fuel come from"? :)
Many here are missing the main issue. With petrol you are 100% dependent on the price at the pump (and that includes hydrogen cars). If, for some reason, the price of petrol / whatever fuel doubles, you WILL have to fill up and pay whatever the current price is. It hurts even more when you discover Venezuelan petrol is 13,2¢ US per US gallon. Oh yes. You are getting shafted by price speculation. Big time. And you can't even vote with your pocket book!
It's clear it takes a lot of solar panels to fill up an electric car but it can be done. You can produce your own energy. You can ditch the gas station entirely.
Funny how people are now fed up and want their power back. We want to be free of intermediaries that just are not reasonable. We want our news to be as far as possible from corporate hands. We want our governments to be as aligned to our needs and intentions as possible. Corporations are pushing hard to make sure we stay dependent, and getting an ICE car / hating electric cars is one way of making sure we don't break free.
I have been really loving the videos lately! A new breath of fresh air! And gives me great data to share with ev skeptics.
I want to get a Tesla so bad, but just can’t financially swing it right now.
Let me put my situation into prospective. My wife works from home, my job is less than 3 miles away from home and our kids school is right between there.
Currently driving a 2022 Honda Insight. Yes, hybrid. My wife drives a 2020 Tacoma for the rare times she actually has to go somewhere.
We both fill up about once a month currently.
I bought an electric bicycle and will start using that to commute to work when the weather cools off a bit (Kansas)
My goal might be to use my E-bike every day in the month of September.
Love it, save your money absolutely 👍
Energy for ICE vehicles is not fungible - it can't be easily replaced with another energy source. EVs take electricity and they don't care what are the energy sources for that electricity. That means that as electricity generation gets cleaner over time, that immediately translates to cleaner energy consumption for cars.
That's why encouraging (not forcing) the transition to EVs will yield the best impact on greenhouse gas generation for the long term.
I am actually building a 5000W solar charging station for my Lightning, off grid in the woods. We are on the verge of a battery revolution; we need to invest in EV now to get better, cleaner, less impactful technology in the future. Did I miss the regenerative breaking part, no mention of it? What about the motor not running in slow/stopped traffic?
Isn't the 233 BILLION dollars the US Govt has spent enough for you ?
Nice! That's one of my future goals for my Model S.
Quick question - what are you using as your battery bank? After some research it seems like using a Model 3 LFP battery is much cheaper than getting standard LFP server rack batteries, which is my plan B.
@@ElMistroFeroz I'll use a 5 kWh 51V Volthium LFP self heating battery.
When he said "trillions of dollars and decades away" my eyes rolled into the back of my head 💀 you can't make this stuff up 🤣
There is absolutely nothing "sustainable" about cars, whether ICE or EVs.
Harm reduction is still a good and useful thing, you just have to be careful not to confuse it with actual solutions. Ultimately, if we redesign our cities such that people don't *need* to own cars, many will elect not to. This has the additional benefit of helping offset the higher cost of living in cities. You can already see this in action all over the world (including, yes, some American cities).
@@hibob841 We used to have trams and trolley busses, and we didn't "need" cars. People walked more and were healthier.
EVs continue the unhealthy heirarchical classism of ICE, have you seen the massive and inefficient designs? Hummer EV?! Hyper consumerism disguised by greenwash.
They're also an environmental disaster of about the same potency as ICE...not saving any environment except the business one, temporarily.
Transport emissions are stuff all compared to those produced in manufacturing an ultra-disposable world.
Very correct
In principle, all stages of mining/transport/manufacturing could use electricity, and all electricity is trending "green", so CO2 emissions can all eventually drop to zero.
I have the charge on solar setting for my Tesla. as opposed to sending excess electricity back to the grid, it charges my car or my power walls.
At 11:30, we may not have "solid data" on how much energy EV owners get from solar, but what we do know is what percentage of EV owners ALSO own roof-top solar and therefore get at least some non-trivial percentage of their power needs from self-generated solar. For example, a customer survey by the Australian power company Ausgrid conducted in 2020 indicated that 60% of EV owners also owned rooftop solar. 30% of those who owned solar said that they installed it specifically for their EV. A survey conducted by NREL revealed that EV owners in San Francisco are 3 times more likely to have rooftop solar than non-EV owners.
Why is Musk part of your thumbnail for your videos? I think he is quite toxic and divisive so should not share center stage. We can discuss EVs without him.
Agreed, except to acknowledge that there wouldn’t be an EV industry without Tesla, and Musk
Because Elon pretty much started this. I like the guy.
Not part of the thumbnail anymore
Who's being toxic and devisive now? It's a shame people from the apparent side of tolerance are so amazingly intolerant of any opinion differing from their own. Hypocrit!
Triggered by a video thumbnail 🤦♂️😂
He is not counting gasoline "manufacture" That is why the difference he shows is not big. The overall eff of an ICVE from drill to burned gasoline is only 20%. The overall eff of an ev is "only" 80%, but can be as high as 90% if there is solar in the at home. Somewhere in between if there is a close solar power plant due to loss of distribution.
Hi Ben, so right at 8:40
He skipped right over the energy required to produce fuel from crude and all the pollution it generates and the pollution from extraction. Also, emissions are not only C02 but also minoxide, including sulphur and NOX.
So much FUD! So much effort by the fossil fuel industry to spread disinformation!
We have had a plugin hybrid since 2019 and it’s great around town. I personally got tired of the competition between the gas and electric motors so l bought an EV6 and I could not be happier. BEV are the future and batteries are only improving. After you drive with electric motors you realize how much more energy efficient they are.
So you bought both problems. Smart move.
How much CO2 is generated digging up materials for cars, transportation of materials and production of cars in the future where all machines, trucks etc are fully electric? Not very much I think.
The grid has plenty of capacity to convert all transportation to electricity. They actually help balance the grid by increasing the off-peak loads. This is exceptionally beneficial for thermal plants by leveling their plant factors. Additionally, EVs are 3-4x more efficient than ICE. Also, 90% of the energy required for passenger cars can be supplied by solar panels covering a single car garage.
Regardless, EVs are not the problem. Data centers are! They are on the path to 3-4x the current grid capacity, 24/7. AI has already reached a limit for most utilities, and it has caused old coal plants to restart and run full load 24/7.
Tell people in Texas that when the grid goes down again.
@onlyme972 The grid didn't go down because of EVs, nor data centers. In fact, Tesla's megapack grid storage batteries prevented a massive blackout in the
Texas a couple of weeks ago.
My ev has unlimited range, I just have to charge it every 200 miles.
I often think, it would be even better without cars or with a lot less cars. But you Ben, actually said something years ago which I agree with 100%.
Roughly: "It's basically impossible to convince people to not drive at all. So we need EVs as a replacement. Otherwise we can't change it at all."
It's easy to see that people are even irrationally angry at changing from ICE to EV. I can't even imagine trying to ask them to not drive. :D
If there will be AI and the 9 seater bus drives from person to person and gets em to the same place work, shops, railways, other bigger bus,
I would be so happy but all these bus projects where droped becouse not used by people :(
I would love to live in a city where I didn’t need a car (looking at you Madrid ❤)
The other thing we are seeing is 3rd world countries are leap frogging technologies. In the West we went through technology trees, 3rd world countries are jumping over stages to catch up. Cell phones are a prime example. We created phone infrastructer ran phone lines everywhere then have been slowly swithcing to cell phones. Other countries havent run phone lines everywhere they jump straight to cell phone. Ethiopia has banned gas cars and is jumping straight to EV because they have tons of electricity production but no oil and gas.
So, basically, if we ignore all of the facts, what Ben's saying is 100% correct! Yay!!! FFS.
The electric car isn't the answer because it's still a car. The infrastructure to support the individual motor car guts our cities and costs more than the revenue generated to maintain it.
And it reduces the economic density of the cities to the point where the city can't afford to subsidize the automotive infrastructure and the city goes bankrupt.
We need to stop bulldozing our cities to make room for cars and return to the traditional patterns that made cities productive and livable.
There will still be plenty of room for electric vehicles, but the biggest selling class of EVs is the electric bicycle. The infrastructure is far smaller and cheaper, and the return is greater than the cost of construction and maintenance over the life of the lanes.
Too many people crowded together is not good for families, for raising children, is not optimal for families at all and in general not an optimal way for humans to live. I love the privacy of my car and always will. Mass transit is awful and spreads disease
Many people have trouble with estimating the time it takes for disruption to take affect (think of an iPhone). This guy is in that camp. He really has no idea about how fast disruption takes affect. Proof is that he talks about decades and trillions of dollars while it's only been less than 4 years from his talk and we are already way ahead of his curve.
One thing all of these people seem to mess. Is the smog in the cities. We as human beings have to breathe in that smog. Air quality isn't necessarily a direct relation to climate change but it is something to do with our health
I drive electric vehicles for one reason only … 0-60 in under 4 seconds. I don’t even think about the environmental impact, but good video.
Why i would buy that BEV that is way worse in many aspects as my ICE?
Simple its safer and gets me to work for WAY less money i could spend on car day trips whit an app rented car
A couple of years ago, I would have seriously considered an BEV. However, a number of things have occurred since.
1. In Ontario, the number of charging stations is not sufficient. There needs to be more and better maintained.
2. The cost of insurance is astronomical. This because of the high cost of repair and the rate of vehicles being written off.
3. An extreme shortage of mechanics able to service them. My mechanic will not touch Tesla's because of the difficulty of getting parts as well as Tesla not giving out diagnostic information.
4. The long wait for parts to service or repair.
When my current ICE vehicle needs to be replaced, I will consider a PHEV, but probable go with a hybrid.
My sister only has onstreet parking so she will continue to buy Hybrids.
My other sister attempted a road trip in her Bolt to accept an environmental award. She said it was the trip from hell.
My brother in Vancouver uses his Model 3 around town which he charges with an ordinary 120 volt outlet. When he goes out of town he uses his old VW diesel Jetta.
It is fine fir the early fans, but the rest will wait and see. This shown by the slow down in sales and inventory piling up at dealers.