Kuuuurija
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2012 2:46 am

Re: Environmental Question

Mon Nov 04, 2013 2:58 pm

Zelenec wrote:I can't imagine you have to pay almost 100% of renewables tax on electricity bill.

In my bill ca 33% is price for power, ca 40% is grid service and the rest is taxes.

Zelenec wrote:That's why you have to pay such abnormal ren. tax ;)

Renewable tax has very high rate (per kWh) if to compare with the oil shale energy. There was time, when ren. tax had more than 10 times higher rate. Today the difference is not so high anymore, but renewable is still several times higher. The reason is that we have to pay abnormally high subsidies to producers of renewable labelled energy.

Zelenec wrote:You really don't understand the meaning of city car. Every vehicle has it's purpose. Once again: I didn't and wouldn't buy an EV to make 300km daily. I dont usualy need to charge but nights at home. That is what EV is made for. But wait for few years. You might be surprised about progress of EV technology. Like you never dreamed of smart phones back in early 90's carrying awkward heavy mobiles, you can't imagine the range and charging times of future EVs.

I understand the concept very well, do not worry. I know, that most of EV owners have several cars, including ICE cars for longer runs. But I can not understand how keeping two cars instead of one is more environmentally friendly, than only one and universal.

Zelenec wrote:I don't understand how you can not calculate. If I charge 16 kWh and I pay 5€, it comes out 0,31€/kWh. But nobody is forcing you to charge at public stations unless you can't charge at home.

Of course you can calculate, if you measure each amount of energy charged. But in this video those kilowatt hours were not published. Therefore calculating cost per kWh was bluff.

Zelenec wrote:Hmm, why would anybody buy Volume package, if he doesn't need it?

Maybe this package is for EV taxis? Regular EV owner should not usually need to use public fast chargers. This journalist took one time test trip to Tartu, for such occasional charging is Flexible package with the rate 5€ per charging, what I was talking about.

Zelenec wrote:Do you really have power usage peaks at night in Estonia? That's unicum in EU.

Our night time peaks happen to be on frosty winter nights when households and offices use electric heating for additional warmth. If at the same time there were 300 000 EV-s charging, then the consumption exceeds every present peak.

Zelenec wrote:Yes I drive slowly on local streets. It's kind of normal. No frozen windows last winter. We don't have so harsh winters in Mediterranean. So no danger to others at all.

Lucky you!

carnut1100
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2013 11:29 pm
Location: Tasmania, Australia

Re: Environmental Question

Mon Nov 04, 2013 5:42 pm

If your second car is an older car then yes it is environmentally responsible.
In my case I have a 1978 Volvo 244.
The energy used to make it has long since been accounted for and by keeping it on the road I am saving the energy of recycling it.
By using an older car I am saving the energy of making a new car.
By using this older car only for trips my EV cannot make I am in effect taking an older ICE car off the road because when it is in my yard somebody else is not burning petrol in it.
Since buying the iMiev I have only used it a couple of times and the only trips it makes are when the iMiev cannot cope ;
when I need five seats (very unusual)
When I need to tow a trailer (iMiev has no hitch and I think it would fit almost inside my trailer...)
When I need to make a long trip (less than half a dozen times a year)
If I ever have electricity blackout for several days and cannot charge (has happened once in the five years I have lived here)

So my old Volvo has done less than one hundred km since I bought the iMiEV but the EV has done almost 1,500.

My trip to work is 12km each way so round trip of say 25km to allow for side trip to visit supermarket or library etc
A trip to the supermarket is 10km each way so 20km round trip.
A trip to the nearest city centre is 30km each way for 60km round trip.
I can go to work, into the city to play sports, and return home on one charge.
Even with the big hills where I live I can go 100km on a charge.
On a frosty day I can crank the heater on the way to work and back without running low.

For me the iMiev can do more than 90% of all my driving easily. My second car is over 30 years old so I can get half Price registration that limits me to 52 driving days per year, which I will never use all of.
If I still lived in my last house I could not have an EV, 75km each way of highway driving would mean without a charge at work I would not get home so they are not for everybody, but for me it is a cheap, quiet and convenient way to travel and with solar panels on my roof and hydro from the grid it is also environmentally sound.
Also I just plain enjoy the electric driving experience, smoothness, quiet, flat torque curve....I'd still drive an EV if it was worse than ICE for the environment!

EVs will NOT work for everybody.
Just for 90% of us....

PV1
Site Moderator
Posts: 3055
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 4:22 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Environmental Question

Mon Nov 04, 2013 7:29 pm

Kuuuurija wrote:In cold climate up to 50% of electricity from batteries goes for heating of the EV. Only fool compares ICE cars fuel to traction with efficiency of EV-s electical engine.

I drove to work today in sub-freezing temperatures with the heater going full tilt at 47 mph. The heater only increased usage by 25%. Normally, I use 2,000 watts to drive 11 miles, and regenerate 5%. Today, I used almost 3,000 watts, and regenerated 7%.

Just for fun, I jumped on the highway on the way home. If you want to make a real dent in efficiency, fight to lower the speed limits.

My figures of energy usage in the EV are not hypermiling, these are real-world driving figures.
"Bear" - 2012 Diamond White Pearl ES with QC - 2/21/2013
"Koorz" - 2012 Cool Silver Metallic ES with QC - 1/5/2015
"Photon" - 2017 Bolt EV LT in Orange with QC - 7/31/2017

Solar-powered since 10/10/2013

Don
Site Moderator
Posts: 2982
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 3:55 pm
Location: Biloxi MS

Re: Environmental Question

Mon Nov 04, 2013 7:42 pm

Kuuuurija wrote:I know, that most of EV owners have several cars, including ICE cars for longer runs. But I can not understand how keeping two cars instead of one is more environmentally friendly, than only one and universal.
LOTS of people have several cars . . . . not just EV owners

Before we bought the EV, we had 3 ICE cars, one truck and 3 motorcycles. When I bought the EV, I sold the ICE that we used the most (it had 125,000 miles on it) and the EV replaced that car.

Since we bought the EV, the other 2 ICE cars are driven much less than before, so for us the EV is proving very environmentally friendly, since it has reduced our gasoline consumption by at least 80% if not more

There are forum members here who have their iMiEV as their only car - It's not that hard to do if you have a friend or neighbor who will swap cars with you for those rare times you need to make a longer trip

Don
2012 iMiEV SE Premium, White
2012 iMiEV SE Premium, Raspberry Metallic
2012 iMiEV SE, White
2017 Chevy Volt Premier
2014 Ford Transit Connect XLT SWB wagon
2006 Itasca Navion Sprinter Motor Home

NeilBlanchard
Posts: 356
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 11:26 am
Location: Maynard, MA Eaarth
Contact: Website

Re: Environmental Question

Mon Nov 04, 2013 8:23 pm

When you wake up from your fantasy, and rejoin reality, we'll continue the conversation. Renewable energy will last as long as the sun does - about another 5 billion years.

Good luck with that oil well.
Sincerely, Neil

http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/

Kuuuurija
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2012 2:46 am

Re: Environmental Question

Tue Nov 05, 2013 2:02 am

NeilBlanchard wrote:When you wake up from your fantasy, and rejoin reality, we'll continue the conversation. Renewable energy will last as long as the sun does - about another 5 billion years.

Good luck with that oil well.

Only limited number of watts of solar power per area are available and only limited number of hectares of the Earth surface are available. So do not waste the resource!

PV1
Site Moderator
Posts: 3055
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 4:22 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Environmental Question

Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:31 am

Just covering the roads in the US with solar would be enough to power our country's electrical needs 3 times over. I'm sure many others are in the same boat.

Also, putting solar on every suitable roof, battery backups scattered throughout, with everything attached to a DC electrical grid, you could very well run an entire town, no problem.

Even if solar is not so good in your country, it's still worth something, especially combined with wind and hydro. You say that the wind blows mostly during the day. Combined with solar, use the EVs to soak up excess and feed it when supply is tight.

Shale oil to produce electricity with electric heat in the homes? Sounds like your country needs renewable energy more than others. The more commonplace renewables are, the less incentives they'll receive. If you're annoyed by paying a renewables tax, then put some up yourself and don't accept the incentives.

I would have purchased solar and the i-MiEV without any incentives. They only expedited the process.
"Bear" - 2012 Diamond White Pearl ES with QC - 2/21/2013
"Koorz" - 2012 Cool Silver Metallic ES with QC - 1/5/2015
"Photon" - 2017 Bolt EV LT in Orange with QC - 7/31/2017

Solar-powered since 10/10/2013

Don
Site Moderator
Posts: 2982
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 3:55 pm
Location: Biloxi MS

Re: Environmental Question

Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:39 am

Kuuuurija wrote:I think, that cars price describes quite well, how much energy and resources are used for building a car. EV-s have almost twice the price of ICE cars of the same size. Therefore I think they are consuming more energy and resources.
It's hard to have an intelligent argument with you because your logic is so flawed

Yes, you need 'energy and resources' to build most anything, and if you build it with new technology much of your cost involves engineering and tooling expenses, because you're still developing the technology and learning how to effectively build it

Consider that a flat panel television which sold for $2,000 only a few years ago now sells for $200 and it's a much better TV to boot. Once the engineering, development and production costs are amortized over the first 10 or 15 million objects, the true cost of what 'energy and resources' it actually takes to build the item becomes more obvious. Prior to that, much of what you pay is the company charging you extra to recoup their development costs

As you can plainly see, it's obviously impossible to make any comparison between EV's and ICE's using price because ICE technology has been pretty well perfected over the past 50 or 100 years (and about 500 billion ICE powered cars) . . . . we know how to make those kinds of cars about as cheaply as the newest flat panel televisions, while EV's are still carrying much of their engineering and development cost 'baggage' and they will continue to be 'artificially expensive' until they have sold a few million units of each design

Don
2012 iMiEV SE Premium, White
2012 iMiEV SE Premium, Raspberry Metallic
2012 iMiEV SE, White
2017 Chevy Volt Premier
2014 Ford Transit Connect XLT SWB wagon
2006 Itasca Navion Sprinter Motor Home

NeilBlanchard
Posts: 356
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 11:26 am
Location: Maynard, MA Eaarth
Contact: Website

Re: Environmental Question

Tue Nov 05, 2013 11:05 am

The energy in the sunlight that hits the earth IN ONE HOUR is enough to meet the needs OF ALL THE PEOPLE ON EARTH FOR ONE YEAR.

So, given that we cannot (and indeed do not want to) get all the energy that hits the earth, and given typical efficiencies of solar PV and heat systems - we can get all the energy that we need for ONE YEAR - IN A SINGLE MONTH!

We can get way more energy than we need from just solar energy. And also we can get much more energy than we need from wind turbines on land, and even more from water based wind turbines. South Dakota alone could power about 1/3rd of the entire lower 48 states in the US.

We can also get lots of energy from wave systems, and tidal systems, and geothermal, and biomass, and small scale hydro power, too. In total, we could get 16-30X as much energy as we need for all people on the entire earth.
Sincerely, Neil

http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/

Kuuuurija
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2012 2:46 am

Re: Environmental Question

Tue Nov 05, 2013 1:02 pm

NeilBlanchard wrote:The energy in the sunlight that hits the earth IN ONE HOUR is enough to meet the needs OF ALL THE PEOPLE ON EARTH FOR ONE YEAR.

So, given that we cannot (and indeed do not want to) get all the energy that hits the earth, and given typical efficiencies of solar PV and heat systems - we can get all the energy that we need for ONE YEAR - IN A SINGLE MONTH!

We can get way more energy than we need from just solar energy. And also we can get much more energy than we need from wind turbines on land, and even more from water based wind turbines. South Dakota alone could power about 1/3rd of the entire lower 48 states in the US.

We can also get lots of energy from wave systems, and tidal systems, and geothermal, and biomass, and small scale hydro power, too. In total, we could get 16-30X as much energy as we need for all people on the entire earth.

Please, put your money where your mouth is! Cover your land with solar panels and provide everyone with endless energy!
Otherwise this is just another BS story, that has nothing to do with reality!

Return to “Off Topic”