[theabstractmind]

Two things:

1. All the apparent benefits of an ICE Or eV car goes for toss when the companies create a 3 year life cycle and indirectly encourages a consumerist attitude. Despite all scrapping or recycling, the world will look like a scene from wall-E one day if the consumerist attitude continues. It is so easy to say that we discard ethically - but have we actually seen what actually happens? So, all the talks by corporates of sustainability etc. Is - crap.

2. Reduce, Recycle, Reuse is not always safe. The recycling of plastic has been proven to cause plastic invasion into the environment. So with recycling of paper which is not exactly environment friendly. I don't know if recycling of batteries has been researched enough to be safe, or whether we shifted the point of failure or made it more hazardous for the humankind.

Off topic: the KA road taxes and increasing prices in general have made buying a new car very expensive. So I am most likely to avoid adding to the scrap by using a "used" Car. And will stick with ICE cars until Government stops them or EV technology is irrefutably shown to be more friendly and those cars become affordable with acceptable real world range. Right now, it is an elitist market.

[Samarth 619]

I echo many a voices here that no imposition should be made for few years at least.
Right now, the world is not completely ready for either of these 2 concepts.


As for bashing Atkinson, I guess we've become a fact checking generation, we check stuff on youtube, tv, etc and then use it to shame people for facts, by the way about which you may be yourself wrong too (no sir, TV and Youtube are not accurate source of information, they're never quite peer reviewed the way some journals are).
Atkinson is not primarily a research expert, he doesn't have huge resources. As long as his article is about 80% right factually, and suggesting the right things, why object?

And his message is right.
Ten years ago, a smartphone had almost all the features we use today (waiting for some respectable brainhead to factcheck me and prove that no, we didn't have 5G and Wifi 6), and still, with a 1400 mah battery, it lasted 2 days on an average. (referring to Nokia 808 Pureview).
Today, we need more than 4000 mah batteries for the same. Biggest culprit being the operating system and its ever updating life, and to some extent huge displays. And customers don't have a decent choice with Nokia destroyed by that Elop (or who was it).

Factchecking is good, but let's not crush an idea in the right direction. When was the last time you used a vehicle for more than 15 years? But some old Mercedes has lasted half a century, right? Its definitely a situation worth pondering, right?
Statistics are welcome, but don't crush the message because two or four figures turn out wrong. Focus on the message.

[pgsagar]

Originally Posted by Mustang Sammy

Anyone remember Al Gore taking private jets and limos to the various climate conferences while showing off his notorious “hockey stick” graph?
I believe he also lives (or lived till his divorce) in a massive mansion with a reasonably sized energy consumption.
Same goes for Obama, Soros, and our own leaders. Do as I say, not as I do.

Listed out only Democratic politicians. Republican politicians walk around? You could have at least spoken about Trump's extravagant lifestyle.

[PompousKnight]

As a person who has been working on EV credits and CO2 emission in Europe for the last 5 years, it's evident that BEV (fully electric vehicles) have less lifecycle CO2 footprint vs any other alternatives (ICE is second most efficient after BEV, hybrids are the worst). This is the summary of multiple total life cycle CO2 footprint researches over the last decade. This reality has been very hard to bring to the policy makers/general publics' conscience, mainly because of the traditional automotive companies' propaganda and the public's affinity towards ICE from decades of familiarity and enjoyments from the same (I'm one of them- and I also believe EV's are nowhere close to being as fun as driving an ICE). Regardless, any research suggesting otherwise is purely directed to conceal this truth behind a flurry of artificially claimed and loosely defined facts that is untrue- mainly from industries that stand to gain from this propaganda- OEM (like Volvo) or other O&G firms.

There are 3 lifecycle stages of any car- production, usage and recycling. If we assume 10k kms running average, a life of 15 years and same recycling method for all BEV, ICE and hybrids, we would result in a total CO2 lifecycle footprint that makes BEV most efficient. BEV has higher CO2 footprint than ICE during production stage, but ICE (taking both petrol and diesel and assuming a fuel efficiency of 20km/litre on average) more than compensates for that during the usage stage (even if the usage is down to upto 4 years which is the breakeven). So if we're comparing an CO2 emission for BEV vs ICE for 4 years, then ICE will be less polluting, but all cars will definitely be used for much more years.

It's frustrating to see multiple discussions and debates around this point when the data/research is very clear. At this day and age where information overload is a way to distort reality, people with expertise at certain topics will have to voice their opinion to add to the general discourse as otherwise, we risk wasting time & efforts on debating cold hard facts

[jkrishnakj]

I did enjoy the read.

Specific to the article, what exactly was he feeling ‘cheated’ about? That piece though, wasn’t clear.

[Mustang Sammy]

Originally Posted by pgsagar

Listed out only Democratic politicians. Republican politicians walk around? You could have at least spoken about Trump's extravagant lifestyle.

It’s not about who lives a more lavish lifestyle, but about those who preach austerity to the masses while consuming vast amounts of resources themselves

I have no horse (or donkey) in the American political race, but this is the elephant in the room we cannot ignore.

[kiku007]

Good debate but I think people are barking up the wrong tree.

Originally Posted by SKC-auto

The above fact check is from a researcher who works on researching above issues everyday, he has published multiple articles, gave many lectures, spoke about these issues at many seminars.

Now whom do you believe Mr. Bean or Mr. Simon.

2 points I have highlighted regarding what you said above.

Guess what? You can point out a number of articles but it won't matter. I guess we believe in what we want to believe.

The WSJ responded to Mr.Atkinson's article with the below piece and I found it to be good.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/clima...better-choice/

The part I connected the most with was this, "My bet is most car owners who keep gasoline-powered cars in their garages in a few decades will be people like Atkinson who are passionate about motorcars. That’s fine. Most people will be driving EVs and they’ll see gasoline cars the same way we see horses today: as hobbies."

I don't want ICE cars to be killed prematurely. It'll be a travesty. Legislation should allow them to be used in a sensible way for leisure, hobby, and sporting/racing purposes, and that could involve the use of synthetic fuels.

[sach.sri]

Originally Posted by pgsagar

Listed out only Democratic politicians. Republican politicians walk around? You could have at least spoken about Trump's extravagant lifestyle.

I think the point was that politicians regardless of their leanings dont do what they preach.

Also, my 2 cents to add to the discussion

1. We are all talking about manufacturing and charging "infrastructure". What we are missing is also - the power demands required to support the charging requirements. With more and more EVs on roads - we are going to consume more and more power for charging - and guess what - that needs more resources to generate, more resources to transport and more "loss" while transporting "electricity". Also - a lot of power is generated by burning coal - we can all do the math.

2. We also need to look at the "waste" management. When the batteries die and have to be replaced, what happens to those batteries? I believe - the only safe way to dispose LI-ON batteries is to put them in lead lined containers and bury them in Ocean (but that also pollutes the oceans)


So in the current avatar - I would not want to switch to EVs - just because of the reasons cited.

[avira_tk]

Originally Posted by PompousKnight

As a person who has been working on EV credits and CO2 emission in Europe for the last 5 years, it's evident that BEV (fully electric vehicles) have less lifecycle CO2 footprint vs any other alternatives (ICE is second most efficient after BEV, hybrids are the worst). This is the summary of multiple total life cycle CO2 footprint researches over the last decade. This reality has been very hard to bring to the policy makers/general publics' conscience, mainly because of the traditional automotive companies' propaganda and the public's affinity towards ICE from decades of familiarity and enjoyments from the same (I'm one of them- and I also believe EV's are nowhere close to being as fun as driving an ICE). Regardless, any research suggesting otherwise is purely directed to conceal this truth behind a flurry of artificially claimed and loosely defined facts that is untrue- mainly from industries that stand to gain from this propaganda- OEM (like Volvo) or other O&G firms.

There are 3 lifecycle stages of any car- production, usage and recycling. If we assume 10k kms running average, a life of 15 years and same recycling method for all BEV, ICE and hybrids, we would result in a total CO2 lifecycle footprint that makes BEV most efficient. BEV has higher CO2 footprint than ICE during production stage, but ICE (taking both petrol and diesel and assuming a fuel efficiency of 20km/litre on average) more than compensates for that during the usage stage (even if the usage is down to upto 4 years which is the breakeven). So if we're comparing an CO2 emission for BEV vs ICE for 4 years, then ICE will be less polluting, but all cars will definitely be used for much more years.

It's frustrating to see multiple discussions and debates around this point when the data/research is very clear. At this day and age where information overload is a way to distort reality, people with expertise at certain topics will have to voice their opinion to add to the general discourse as otherwise, we risk wasting time & efforts on debating cold hard facts

There is no difficulty in pushing the benefits of EV, it is the official narrative, that's why you see unemployables like Gore and Greta, the latter is textbook uneducated, live off this grift, just don't bring it up that slave labour in Africa is used to get the materials and the used batteries will end up in the third world,. Any other opinion is not created to conceal this, that shows your own intolerance, the whole carbon credit trade is just another FIRE sector hustle, planting a tree will not offset your pollution from air travel. Can you tell us how to de-ice a wind turbine without a helicopter? and more importantly, how those turbine blades are recycled?

The science is not settled but the agenda is, as the West collapses, they are desperately trying to destroy our living standards with carbon mythology. An ICE car can easily run for 20 years in the EU/US, but, as finance is cheap and cars are deliberately made with planned obsolescence, they are scrapped, no amount of CO2 reduction can be achieved with destroying usable vehicles. The cash for clunkers scam that Obama ran ensured the spares, recycling and renewing of old vehicles would be stopped, we should avoid this kind of scam in India, we can't afford it.

The oceans are rising crowd still can't explain why seafront property costs extra. What keeps me awake at night is that by next Monday we will be extinct, drowning in an apocalyptic flood due to rising carbons, Greta said that in 2018, she was an expert then as she is now.

[Indraneel Bhat]

The day IC engines are banned on Indian streets, the only sections on team bhp that will be frequented by me would be the Bicycles section and probably the one where horses are reviewed.

Electric vehicles with all their eco-friendliness (ECOnomy and ECOlogy) just don't do it for me. The technology in my opinion is at least 15-20 years away from becoming as accessible as fossil fuels. By that I mean vehicles, charging speed, infrastructure and affordable end-of-life battery replacements. Until I see all this in place I don't think I would consider an electric vehicle. I would switch to a combination of a folding bicycle and public transport first (hoping for the best, I know..). Maybe a battery assisted bicycle, I LOVE those.

[electric_eel]

Originally Posted by sach.sri

I think the point was that politicians regardless of their leanings dont do what they preach.

Also, my 2 cents to add to the discussion

1. We are all talking about manufacturing and charging "infrastructure". What we are missing is also - the power demands required to support the charging requirements. With more and more EVs on roads - we are going to consume more and more power for charging - and guess what - that needs more resources to generate, more resources to transport and more "loss" while transporting "electricity". Also - a lot of power is generated by burning coal - we can all do the math.

Manufacturing

Let us do the math. What exactly is the additional carbon cost in an EV as opposed to
an ICE ? Except for the battery pack there is nothing in the EV that is not present in a
comparable ICE (EVs have significantly lesser parts and does not need consumables like engine oil etc). So the additional carbon foot print environment in an EV manufacturing is more or less that of the battery pack. But then you need to also account for the Fuel of the ICEs -- they too have to be mined, transported. Their refinement actually is quite energy intense. You cannot discount all that and count only
the environmental cost of Battery.

Regarding the additional electricity need. Yes we need to work at that. Surely we need to also scale up our renewable energy production and this we need to do irrespective of
the BEVs.

Applications like BEV charging can however improve the grid stabilisation and can be
easily programmed to charge based on the load on the grid (assuming we move to
a smart grid). This way power that is otherwise wasted due to demand supply differentials can be utilised efficiently.

2. We also need to look at the "waste" management. When the batteries die and have to be replaced, what happens to those batteries? I believe - the only safe way to dispose LI-ON batteries is to put them in lead lined containers and bury them in Ocean (but that also pollutes the oceans)

The battery pack consists of a lot of individual cells. Many of them can be reused. Also
LFP batteries are not some "radio active waste" that it needs to be put in lead lined containers.

I say this again. EV might not be practical to your use case but

a) It is practical to a lot of people

b) It is significantly better for the environment than the ICEs. Cycling is much better than either of course and walking is even better.

c) It is technologically superior to ICEs in almost any aspect that I can think of except for
the "fun" part of it but then horse riding is "funner" than driving a stick shift and can
take you to places no car can take.

[ferrarirules]

Another article on the topic that are EVs environment friendly?? The topic which has been beaten to death on this forum. Myths have been busted multiple times but still the nay sayers will say "No". The only thing i find logical in the article is that extend your car life as much as possible. But that is true for all types of vehicles.

A recap for people who think EVs are not environment friendly

1. India's power installed capacity split up is 57% and 43% (fossil fuels and non fossil fuels respectively). The plant load factor for coal power plants is 65%. Ministry of power data (updated on April 2023) - link

I took the US govt data on how much CO2 emissions are produced per KWH of electricity production - link. I arrived at the Indian CO2 emission per KWH of electricity produced based on the plant load factor provided on the ministry of power link. The number comes to 360 gm per KWH. Now an EV car runs 6.5 kms per KWH. The net emission for EV car is 55 gms per km which when compared to ICE car is 100-105 gms per km. Hence this is 50 percent reduction in carbon emissions. And if a country (Example - Norway) has achieved 100% renewable power, electric vehicles doesn't produce any emissions

2. Battery disposal - Li Ion batteries have a life cycle of near about 10 yrs or 5 lakh kms of car usage. And post that as well they can be used for Battery Energy Storage Systems. MG recently inked a pact with India partner for the same - link. After BESS use also batteries can be recycled to reuse the lithium and other rare minerals.

3. Mineral Mining - Lithium and other rare metals are mined not only for electric vehicles. Lithium and battery related rare metals are not the only minerals being mined in this world. All mining has its labour challenges, ever heard of blood diamonds. If one is so impacted with labour conditions due to mining, try telling the missus that we should not buy diamonds as they are not mined the right way. Diamond mining related article - link

[electric_eel]

I think it address a lot of noise and smoke generated by the ICE lobby

https://youtu.be/Qrs6zfi_x7Q

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by electric_eel

I think it address a lot of noise and smoke generated by the ICE lobby

https://Youtu.be/Qrs6zfi_x7Q

No it doesn’t. Rowan is a great comedian but knows next to nothing about the environment!

Jeroen