California has always been at the forefront of reducing emissions under CARB which came about after the post war boom and mass mobilisation of the Californian population in the 1950’s when smog was found to be coming from vehicles and not factories (having closed down the factories it thought was responsible). From catching VW with its pants down (along with a load of other manufacturers) to all the way back when they killed the performance (and ironically fuel economy ) of many European imports.

Probably the first part of the world to hammer cars and trucks on emissions: The emissions equipment fitted to British export cars in the 70’s was unheard of for the era elsewhere in the world; Air pumps/air injection (to light off the catalyst). Closed loop fueling control. EGR (on petrols as well as diesel) etc. British/EU cars never saw this kind of emissions control until EU regs mandated it in 1992...30years after California had it!!

Obviously all of the CARB’s efforts is totally undone when rednecks crank up the fueling on their diesel trucks purely just to ‘roll the coal’.

 

Article Jun 2020

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier...en-production/

95% of all hydrogen is created on industrial scale by burning fossil fuel by the SMR Steam Methane Reforming. which produces

This converts to 9.3 kilograms (kg) of CO2 produced per kg of hydrogen production. One kilogram of hydrogen is the energy equivalent of one gallon of gasoline, which produces 9.1 kg of CO2 when combusted.

I bet they haven't found a way, yet to store all this carbon

 

Hang on was this journalist ‘chemical engineer’ sniffing petrol fumes when he wrote that...Mixing between metric and imperial, Kilograms and Gallons - US or imperial? assuming its the former as it’s referring gasoline not petroleum so why not lbs instead of kg?Just for good measure (pun intended) he’s also switching from cubic feet to metric tons too!


Then mentioning comparing apples with apples....but not mentioning the CO2 involved in petrol or diesel production, so how many ‘Kilograms’ of of Co2 are produced when refining sweet crude into 1 litre gallon (US? imperial? **** it use what you like ) of petroleum gasoline.

I wonder if he worked for the fuel company that cocked up the metric/imperial conversion when refuelling Airbuses resulting in them running low on fuel (and completely running out of fuel mid flight in one instance!)

 

Sandy Munro really likes the new battery tech from Tesla. He also comments about the way the EV market is going, Tesla competitors lagging behind etc

 

Ownership of Tesla model 3 ridiculously cheap for 100000 miles

https://electrek.co/2020/09/26/tesla...y-degradation/

 

How reliable would the thing be in 30 years time ??

 

Who cares, no modern vehicle is kept that long. Gone are the halcyon days of classics.

 

Andy, you're Hydrogen CO2 argument also neglects the massive CO2 deficit that a BEV car starts with compared to Hydrogen FCV and similarly the battery recycling costs. Over the life of the car, the CO2 emissions attributed to a FCV are still less than a BEV and with far less other environmental damage to boot. Currently Hydrogen FCVs have the lowest carbon footprint of any vehicle. There is also significant research being done to improve the Hydrogen extraction process for more efficiency, less CO2 and less cost to the consumer.

There is also no reason why you can't get the same performance from a fuel cell vehicle as per BEV. The motors are the same and fuel cells can easily generate the power needed. The big difference, is you can repeat the performance time and time again with a fuel cell, while you need to let you're batteries cool down after a Tesla launch! Don't forget, Hydrogen has the highest energy density of any currently available vehicle power, batteries have the lowest! To get your Tesla to 60 in 2 seconds requires more energy that a similar Hydrogen car because you're carrying more weight.

 

I've yet to see a high performance production car with hydrogen fuel cell. Only standard FCEV

You're mistakan about Tesla needing to cool down. They do repeated 0-60 accelerations, still maintain performance across the whole set of attempts.

This guy did 31, yes 31. 0-60 starts and still hit around 3.2secs on the latter starts.
https://insideevs.com/news/364906/te...ated-launches/
Until hydrogen production gets away from using steam methane process, currently 95% of all hydrogen is extracted this way. the research indicates its more polluting than any other form of 'green' fuel

 

A question...why do you need hypercar performance in your family saloon Tesla? How much further could you go using smaller motors with less 'draw' on the same batteries. Or simply reduce the number of batteries and weight?

 

Good question !

 

Why did alot oy you buy turbo Imprezas, modify to go faster instead of buying the standard Impreza?

Performance is always useful even when its comes with batteries

 

Maybe they should be.

It takes 24 tonnes of CO2(e) to produce a Polestar 2.

It takes 14 tonnes CO2(e) to produce a petrol Volvo XC40.

If people are buying scalextric cars for there 'green' misnomer, they need to keep them for at least 5 years before they are anywhere near as close to being greener than petrol equivelents.

 

With an average of lowly10,000 miles per year. It would take just 4 years using your so called co2 numbers.

20,000 miles a year just 2 years to match production co2

And zero tailpipe emissions from day one for the Polestar. A much improved atmosphere in towns and cities

 

No, it wouldn't.
From Polestars head honcho, it would take 30,000mls being charged from wind powered electric source (don't think that even takes into account the amount of CO2 produced to make the wind turbines, which is colossal) to be even with the petrol on CO2.
Charged using the European grid, with a mixture of nuclear powered electricity, it would take 50,000mls to be on a par with the xc40, and national average electricity source, 70,000mls. These are not 'my' figures, they are those of a company boss that manufactures ev's.

Realistically, how many miles does the average electric car do a year? Given that it takes around 6 hrs to complete a journey in an electric car that would take a petrol/diesel car 2 to 3 hrs.

I agree with the comment about cleaner cities and no emissions coming out of the exhaust pipe, but the simple fact is an electric car needs to be kept for a longer period than people think for it to be truly cleaner than ice powered vehicles.

 

The listed XC40 ICE produces 157-165 grams per kilometre CO2

Being kind choosing the lower figure

0.157 x 16,000km (10,000miles) = 2512 kg ~ 2.5 metric tonnes. Plus ~ 1000kg NOX per year

4 years @ 10k miles is 10 metric tonnes

2 years @ 20k miles is 10 metric tonnes

That equals the difference of your quoted numbers. in the ballpark of the 'head honchos' figures

Realistically, how many miles does the average electric car do a year? Given that it takes around 6 hrs to complete a journey in an electric car that would take a petrol/diesel car 2 to 3 hrs

That patently is from an ignorant point of view

2-3 hour journey is about 120-180 miles(UK) well within the range of the Polestar, so it would be the same.

regarding average yearly mileage. That depends on the user.

Our Nissan Leaf does 25,000 miles per year, my wife's Tesla does 10,000 miles. Some drivers will drive alot more and others less.

We source our energy from renewable resources only Our Nissan has easily offset any manufacturer cost of CO2, our Tesla's are long term ownership 8-10 years

Its far more about the emissions than comparing CO2, where the offset is cancelled out, so owning an EV is a win win.

 

Then shall we talk about fuel savings, literally thousands of pounds over the life of the vehicle to use an EV. But get in quick, governments like to charge for fuel- however its made. Get some solar/wind generation, use a Zappi charger which take electric from Solar first before grid.

 

Thanks. Wouldn't say from an ignorant point of view, more inquisitive hence the question mark at the end of the sentence.
Thing is at the moment most ev's that have a decent range are priced well out of the equation for a lot of people.

I dont really know a massive amount about ev's as I am not that enthusiastic about them, although a friend of mine was on the Dyson project. I am going by recent programs I've watched where people driving more affordable ev's with less range attempt long journeys.
They are getting better but still far from ideal.

 

Not a problem. Just ot give you a bit more. our Nissan Leaf averages 150 miles per charge. It would only take 45mins on a Chademo 50kWatt charger to replenish 80-85% charge. So 45 mins extra. Most new EVs will do early to mid hundred miles range for commuters.

The vast majority (95%) daily drivers in the western world drives only 35miles per day. yes 35miles

 

Still pretending your electricity is different from everyone else's then?

 

yes agree real world commute is generally well within range, but problems faced with long distance runs are charges that maybe out of use, people queuing for charging points, having to rely on apps to charge an ev at a charge point when not everyone owns a mobile phone, or one that's up to date enough to have the app.

Another thing to consider that may not be taken into account, but affects more your start up ev producer as opposed to current mass producers going into ev versions of current ice vehicles, is where they draw the line at the carbon footprint calculations. As above and my friend at Dyson, do they include the CO2 of the mclaren, or the Range Rover, or the Tesla and so on that they buy to bench test against. The emissions from the aircraft an employee may get on to go tyre testing, and the CO2 produced in the manufacture of vehicle specific tyres, and the knock on effect of other components. Yes all vehicles have this to a degree, but a start up company will have more.

 

The real danger is the focus on EVs as being a solution to global warming. The simple fact is that personal vehicle usage (35miles a day!) accounts for quite an insignificant amount of human produced CO2 and the CO2 saving of an EV is also very small over the life of the vehicle, so EV's simply cannot make any significant contribution to saving the planet.

The problem is people are quite lazy and don't really think about the whole picture and are unwilling to make major disruptive changes to their lifestyles. The government and the media are blasting them with the idea that buying an EV will fix everything and it simple won't. The governments focus is more on the economy than the environment, so they only get behind green incentives that have economic benefits

The three biggest areas of human activity contributing to rising CO2 are deforestation, global shipping and electrical power generation and currently only electrical power generation is the only area being tackled seriously and then only by a handful of countries. There is pretty much nothing being done about shipping because its off shore and doesn't count to a countries CO2 figures and countries with illegal deforestation turn a blind eye because it brings economic benefits or the governments are corrupt.

If we focused on improving just these three areas, we could easily save so much CO2 that replacing all the cars with EVs would be irrelevant! As long as nothing is being done to tackle deforestation and global shipping, swapping to EVs is fruitless and just where is all the electricity going to come from to charge the damned things?

 

There is a push to use contact less payment without apps. I have noticed this when experimenting with non Tesla chargers recently.

I don't think you can say Tesla is a car startup now with cars 6-7 years old now.

 

well no, but I didn't mention Tesla merely start up companies.
My point still stands, that there is no point buying a new Tesla, or whatever ev, and replacing it every three years and believing that you are saving the planet.

 

Average ownership for me is about 10 years, I doubt I'll be buying anything for a good while. Maybe selling some vehicles as time goes by

 

It will be interesting to see how long your batteries last (hold reasonable charge), and what happens to the vehicle once they are no longer suitable. I wonder if there will be a Tesla recycling scheme? How do you feel about the depreciation and sudden loss in value once the batteries give out?

Oh and hypercar performance is a little different to making a few upgrades on your Scooby! But I'm sure you knew that! the point being BEVs could instantly become a lot more attractive with a 50-100 mile increase in range.

 

If you missed the recent battery announcement from Tesla. They have increased capacity better heat management and assembly method for longer life. They are talking of range 500 miles and maybe 600 miles Currently the big top line Model S has over 400 miles of range. This will filter down to the other models in the near future.

 

Bad news for electric

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.b...iness-54345882

 

Why, best electric car manufacturer by a country mile is Tesla, USA?

That's probably why UK not signing upto non state support clause the EU wants. UK government could if desired discount the tariff in some from of support

 

going to have to suck up to the yanks instead