Talking cars T-day, hybrid or EV?
Usually someone posts about cars on Thursday, but Tuesday begins with T. Close enough.
Many automotive connections in these parts, so I suspect someone has done some actual real research.
I have a Ford Fusion hybrid that I drive mostly in the city, and I am coaxing 49mpg out of it (mostly due to minimal use of HVAC). To me, that seems a fairly responsible use of fossil fuels. But said car is getting long in the tooth, and I am pondering what to buy next. In Toledo, where coal/nuclear are our sources, what are my best choices environmentally? Obviously, EVs have no direct emissions, but I know the transmission and step-down in voltages by the time electricity gets to my garage throws away a bunch of energy.
Which is more environmentally responsible here in the Midwest?
Future battery technologies are being looked at to get away from the Cobalt that has environmental mining and humanitarian rights issues. Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries use iron and graphite and most car manufacturers are looking at switching at least a base model to them (see Tesla). And as others have stated, there are plenty of issues with extracting oil that have just as many environmental issues.
I’d like to have an EV, but need a big family vehicle. I know technologies that are close to getting the 600-700 range with about 60% of that as usable at speed and cold temperatures, which is where I want to be in a family vehicle. That technology is about 5 years away though, so hoping my ICE vehicles make it as long as possible.
Future battery technologies are being looked at to get away from the Cobalt that has environmental mining and humanitarian rights issues. Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries use iron and graphite and most car manufacturers are looking at switching at least a base model to them (see Tesla). And as others have stated, there are plenty of issues with extracting oil that have just as many environmental issues.
I’d like to have an EV, but need a big family vehicle. I know technologies that are close to getting the 600-700 range with about 60% of that as usable at speed and cold temperatures, which is where I want to be in a family vehicle. That technology is about 5 years away though, so hoping my ICE vehicles make it as long as possible.
My old GF's automatic Jetta TDI could get 40 mpg (like 10 years ago). Yes diesel has NOx and particulate issues, but in terms of CO2, hybrid isn't all that much better. And with EV, it of course depends on how the energy is generated, but on the whole, sure it is more enviromentally friendly. I imagine in <10 years more EVs will be sold than gasoline. I don't think there is a big future for PHEV.
I had a Jetta TDI wagon and loved it. It got rear ended and was never the same, hatch didn't close well, etc...so I got rid of it, and then the whole VW diesel controversy happened, which was too bad.
April 26th, 2023 at 12:15 AM ^
In the 90s, you could get a gas powered Chevy/Geo Metro that would outperform a 2000s Jetta TDI with fewer emissions.
Alas, Americans like big vehicles. All of the pint sized, fuel sipping, economy cars didn't make beer drinking country boys feel like men.
Depends on your driving! what do you do often? if you mostly take city trips, a PHEV could be a great answer.
If you're highway cruising, a full battery electric with enough range could make more sense.
In general, a new ICE will also burn a lot cleaner than an old one too.
To me the answer varies on where/how you live. If I lived in a real city I would consider a pure electric, especially if I didn't travel much, or had another family vehicle that could pick up the slack here and there.
But I don't. I live 45 minutes from the nearest fast charger and frequently travel cross country. A plug in hybrid would work perfectly. 80% of the time it would run on the charge, but can also cover road trips.
Now, if only you could buy one of those mythical beasts near sticker price.
I guess it's a mindset thing, but if your 80% use case can be accomplished with something that has 35 miles of electric range, then consider that a regular EV with 200 miles or so of range will capture even more of your use case. And, is that good enough? Or do you really need to buy based on something like a road trip, you are going to do 20% or less of the time? And is a road trip in an EV even that bad? I've done them, and so have lots of other people.
Not you specifically, but I think people should start asking themselves these questions more often. In my opinion, 2 car households should be looking at at least one EV to do all the around town driving and work commuting. Is it worth it to buy a car based on the 1 time a year we drive across the country on vacation?
I think this is a very practical way of looking at it. We drove cross country this year and it was an anomaly for us. Our driving is mostly in town errands, the perfect situation for an EV.
From what I've seen, non-Tesla road trips can be a time consuming hassle to find a working charger, and when you find one, good luck on it being a fast charger. Things are getting better for non-Tesla EVs, but I wouldn't buy one at this point if I was planning a road trip anytime soon.
April 26th, 2023 at 12:24 AM ^
- Is it worth it to buy a car based on the 1 time a year we drive across the country on vacation?
Actually, yes. I don't pay $50k for something that only works 80% of the time I need it, that's stupid.
That would be stupid if it only worked 80% of the time. But since you aren't limited to 80% (excluding obvious outliers), what are you talking about?
It sure seems like PHEV is the right answer for the U.S., but the California and potentially Europe/parts of Asia not allowing them, nobody outside of stellantis is investing significantly in the technology. I loved the Pacifica hybrid I rented on vacation last summer. I would have leased a Grand Cherokee hybrid last October if I could get my hands on one.
I live near Madison, WI. My grid-supplied electricity is 100% solar and wind, so our next around town vehicle will definitely be an EV. We've driven a hybrid for the past 13 years and love it, but I think we'll go full EV on the next one.
My personal hope is that hybrids stick around for awhile. I make frequent trips to Wisconsin's northwoods and the U.P. I just can't swing those trips with a full-on EV, especially if I'm towing something behind me. The charging infrastructure is still largely non-existent in many rural areas. So I will hang on to my ICE vehicle as the family distance runner until a proven alternative that fits my needs arrives on the scene.
Relatedly, I have many friends and family members that live in rural Michigan. Let's just say they're not happy about adopting EV's in the near future. The rural vs. urban divide will continue to grow based on transportation inequities moving forward. Let's hope battery technology keeps accelerating and reliable and fast charging capabilities become ubiquitous in the next decade.
It's very difficult to make pure EVs work in rural areas. That's just a fact. It would take massive investment in infrastructure -- an investment highly unlikely to be profitable -- to make them feasible.
Even in non-rural areas there are challenges. Neither my home nor my office have or realistically could have charging infrastructure - parking is too far from the building. If I can't charge while I'm at home or at work it's a no sale. Would be a solid case for a PHEV, though, since many days I drive less than 30 miles and if it's more than that it's probably highway and relatively efficient.
I have a Hyundai Kona EV it was several thousands less than its cooler counterparts so it was a no brainer. 240ish miles per full charge unless you are cranking AC. I look at vehicles as retirement stoppers so if I could drive a cardboard box I would. I charge at electrify america stations and I am yet to spend a penny of my initial $10 a year later. They have some deal with Hyundai but I dont think im supposed to have free charging forever. Please beware Electrify America can be a real shit show sometimes. I slow charge Fri-Sun at home as I dont drive those days for work. Its a few bucks a month.
My wife has a Kia Niro hybrid that gets 50mpg that I swap on my 4 hour plus driving work days. We bought it after leasing for 14k and its basically a new car.
I live in California so our monthly gas station bill has gone from $300+ a month to maybe $40. Our electricity is maybe $15 more.
We are probably approaching the home solar point soon as these monthly bills for electric are soaring. I know its going to be a huge pain in the ass though.
Thanks for joining my TED TALK.
The Niro and the Kona are the ones I'm looking at. They don't sell them in my state so taking a test drive is nearly impossible. How do you like their drives?
Both quality vehicle but smaller of course.
EV Kona - looks, nicer model, nicer interior and dash display, full ev, rides amazingly well and the pick up in sport mode is top notch. ($40k new)
Basic hybrid Niro - Very low price, meh interior, meh tech, 50 mpg if you are a lightfoot, more room to put stuff in from the back (Kona rear opening is smaller) ($14k used 3 years that we leased)
My wife is VERY frugal and she is 100% ok with the Niro. I like the Kona much more. $26k more im not sure.
Fisker is making a nice looking all-electric small SUV for $50K with 340 mile range & 540 horsepower. They are made in Austria, so no tax credit. Even with the credit, is there any similarly sized electrics with better price, range, & hp?
Rivian is building a multi billion dollar plant here in Georgia to manufacture a more affordable line (the R2 i think). It may be a couple of years out though before they start rolling off an assembly line. They haven't opened up any kind of reservation system for it yet, so may be worth watching out for that when the time comes just to get first in line.
The Scout name is being brought back as well (not under international harvester though) and they may be putting something out in the next couple of years that would be a small suv likely with good offroading capabilites.
Tesla Model Y?
I'm about to go all in on an EV, likely a Lyriq. The Chicago area has a good mix of standard/renewable energy sources. My biggest gripe for EVs in the past was that they were so expensive, but now they are becoming more affordable.
The current EV isnt more environmentally responsible vs ICE for it takes far more carbon to make one, and the net benefit isn't surpassed until it goes over 100k, plus you have battery disposal issue.
I still have a 30 year old Honda delsol gets 42mpg.
I have a Fisker One EV on order, due in July, but am not one of these virtue signaling people who act like they are morally superior saving the planet, because I know better, that its all a farce, and the comical part of it is the local moronic Detroiters who are pushing the EV save planet crap, which shooting themselves in foot.
That first statement is so completely wrong I have to wonder what your source for it is.
12 tons of CO2 to produce the battery alone and a much more environmentally deleterious process to do so. slave and/or child labor to mine the minerals (see video someone posted below) and much of that controlled by china who is truly becoming the world's enemy and seeking to build an empire.
Not build...control.
I responded to brutus already but just to reiterate because you brought up child labor, no one talks about how oil has funded terrorism and has bankrolled a bunch of atrocities in the middle east.
Also, cobalt is on its way out as a battery component, manufacturers are starting to use different battery chemistries.
Chile has more lithium than China. But either way, being dependant on a Chinese supply chain is not a fact that is unique to EVs.
I'm also not sure it's much more environmentally deleterious process. As I say elsewhere in the thread, it's just different. It's like comparing getting stabbed (mining) to getting cancer (climate change).
i found the EV salesman's account
and boy, can he kill strawmen by truckload.
Of all the countries that I couldn't care less if they destroy their environment, it's China. If we end up with a bunch of recyclable lithium in our country over the next couple of decades at china's expense and ultimately keep them from having it, fine with me.
Yes, the CO2 to produce an EV is greater than that to produce a comparable ICE vehicle, but pretty much every study out there says that over the lifetime the EV will have significantly lower CO2 emissions.
Yes - lithium is nasty stuff to mine. That is why there is significant effort to move away from lithium batteries. Also, oil production and processing also has significant environmental liabilities.
Finally, IC engines emit many other pollutants (including toxics). EV engines have zero direct emissions.
There is no perfect answer, but from an environmental perspective, EVs have lower lifecycle CO2 emissions and zero local emissions when driving. The upstream environmental impacts of electric production compare favorably to the upstream impacts of gasoline production (and electricity production is getting cleaner much faster than petroleum production). The only place from an environmental perspective that IC engines are a clear winner is on the battery production side and there are alternative technologies under development that will hopefully significantly reduce that impact.
No, EV is more environmentally responsible and will only continue to be more so with battery recycling and stationary power generation shifts toward renewables. For the record, I have an ICE. Just got it less than two years ago.
https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths#Myth2
Weird how in that link they don't account for the fact that many charging stations are powered by coal power plants, nor do they mention the stripping and poisoning of fertile land and water in 3rd world countries to harvest the minerals.
Coal makes up 20% of the grid and that number only keeps decreasing. Every honest analysis that accounts for coal produced electricity still comes to the same conclusion that EVs are much better for the environment.
Also how many of the analysis of ICE cars includes the contribution of oil to global terrorism and despotic regimes that exploit slave labor in the middle east?
Every production of a commodity has issues, people hold EVs to an impossible standard that they wouldn't do for anything else.
So, why aren't we harvesting our own oil domestically, and why aren't we switching over to 100% nuclear power grid? And why don't we demand that suppliers honor UN human rights standards? All of these things could be done and they'd all dramatically improve/lessen the impact on the environment.
EV, cell phones and all battery powered industries rely heavily on slave labor in 3rd world countries as well.
Well this is what is normally referred to as a non-sequitur, but sure I'll play.
The US does harvest our own oil. Not sure what your point is there. Coal, gas, oil, nuclear, these are all power options in the US. Why aren't we switching to 100% nuclear? Well, a lot of reasons, for starters nuclear power plants take a long as time and a lot of capital to build. We have a lot of safety regulations in place to try to prevent something like Chernobyl or Fukishima from happening. The last company that tried to build a power plant in 2017 ended up going bankrupt. Oil companies have billions though, they are free to pursue building a plant. They don't want to. Oil companies fund the whole "nuclear is the only answer" propaganda mostly because they know it will never happen and in the meantime they are free to keep doing what they do while keeping people distracted with a solution that is nowhere near short term.
As for your final sentence, that was my point. You bring up battery mining, trying to discredit EVs, but you can bring up the supply chain of basically any product. Yes we should raise awareness and try to improve the way materials are sourced, but that isn't unique to EVs. Cobalt mining is decreasing, Tesla has stopped using cobalt.
April 25th, 2023 at 10:50 PM ^
A lot of what you said is factually inaccurate but that's okay. This conversation needs to be had. I am open to being wrong and I'd prefer to not have an agenda against any specific thing. But I know I can come across as a snarky ass so I am willing to take a beating. I think there's a way to take care of our environment and have battery powered vehicles and tools without resorting to slave labor. I'm not against these I just want to have an honest conversation. I appreciate your perspective.
Coal plants are still more efficient than an internal combustion engine. Lesser of two evils and all that.
I'm sure it's just a big government conspiracy and the scientists at Argonne didn't possibly consider power generation sources or cobalt and lithium mining. You cracked the case!
Not to mention even stationary coal fired power plants have substantially higher efficiencies than gasoline ICE.
You really think it takes a conspiracy for the government to be misguided?
The guy who thinks that it would make sense today to switch to nuclear is calling other people misguided? Ask the folks in South Carolina how well the VC Summer nuclear project went. $9 billion down the drain before they gave up. Or the Vogtle Plant in Georgia, 7 years behind schedule and cost over runs of over $16 billion.
April 25th, 2023 at 10:40 PM ^
+1 because I truly like what you say and I think the world needs more blue in dc types. I really mean that. I have zero doubt I have some terrible ideas and I am certainly a dumbass in many areas. I also have zero doubt that the government really sucks at a lot of things. If someone thinks nuclear energy is bad then that person is an incredibly stupid person who also could be very intelligent at the same time. I have seen enough of your posts to know you're a really smart guy. Honestly. I'll leave it there. Namaste.
If you read my post, you would see that I think nuclear energy is expensive, I never said it was bad. The nuclear energy constantly overpromises on price and constantly under delivers. The next generation of nuclear technology, small reactors (SMRs) is pretty interesting. They hope to take on the cost and time over runs that have plagued the industry since its inception by building smaller standardized units.
There are a plethora of fascinating energy technologies on the very near term horizon and SMRs are just one. There are several big buyers lined up behind SMRs like PacifiCorp, who plans to replace multiple plants with them and Dow, who is looking at using them on industrial sites. But there are also companies going all in on carbon capture, hydrogen and renewables/energy storage. There are also lots if companies hedging their bets.
Anyone who thinks with certainty that they know what directions the power sector is going to go in the next ten to twenty years, doesn’t know what they don’t know.
A lot of people don't realize that the "carbon footprint" includes manufacturing, maintenance, and end-of-life disposal.
I continue to drive my ICE vehicles becuase I work from home and put extremely low mileage on them. While not very fuel-efficient, I feel comfortable with that because my footprint is low.
If I was forced right now to buy, my personal situation would probably be a plug-in hybrid. My short mileage would keep me almost exclusively on EV, but I take occasional long trips where EV is inconvenient.
It comes down to personal situation.
Some people just buy EVs because it works out better for them financially. If you are tooling around all day in a vehicle by yourself NOBODY should be patting themselves on their back about saving the environment. These virtue signalers are no less annoying then the guy that posts "you know my ICE car is better for the environment"! Or the guy that posts a video about mines and the atrocities associated with them. That is absolutely horrible but that is a capitalism not giving a fuck issue more than anything. Of course a special twist is that of all the people Big Oil Execs are very vested on you showing this to your wife.
A nuclear powered car will generate the least emissions with realistic range while using the evils of air conditioning at hwy speeds on a time limited quest to Wallyworld...duh. Propose mandating them by 2030. Problem solved.
That was easy.
I drive a 2021 BMW X3 30e PHEV. It’s a very efficient car, especially for the size. I’m averaging over 45 mpg in the first 2 years of ownership. It gets anywhere between 15-24 miles on a full charge before going hybrid mode. 15 is when it’s really really cold out. Which is more than enough to get me to work, where I recharge as a perk, to the gym and home without using gasoline. It is great to have the gas option though for longer trips. I get 33 mpg on the highway.
My Bugatti Veyron can go 51 miles - about the same as a first generation plug in EV.
That's 26.4 gallons of premium in 12 minutes, just under 2 mpg at 255 mph.
Of course, if I drive it at posted highway speeds, I can eke out nearly 400 miles on a full tank at a whopping 15 mpg. Half that for city driving.
I looked at those but after sitting in one realized my manhood interfered with steering so I had to look elsewhere.
I've heard good things about a Hummer. WTF mode may be too quick. Sometimes it's the journey.
Fun Fact. Back in 1991 when I interviewed U of M Auto engineering prof for a Sci and Tech class I had and he said Hydrogen vehicles were a decade away.
Mazda is doing some great work on high compression gas engines to mimic diesel. Renewable oil's death is greatly exaggerated.
And f@ck VW for destorying diesel. Diesel hybrids would have been great.