• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Zero-emission vehicles, their batteries & subsidies/rebates for them.- No politics regarding the subsidies!

blueone

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
May 11, 2019
Messages
848
Likes
1,144
Location
USA
Timbeeeeeer!
I'll pretend to be the devil's advocate, with some fresher data from the prince(?) of climate-deniers: The WallStreetJournal.
(Both are the headlines of the WSJ articles and maybe found w/o subscription)
"Greenland’s Melting Ice Is No Cause for Climate-Change Panic" (2022/02/17)
"Don’t Believe the Hype About Antarctica’s Melting Glaciers" (2022/09/17)
I read those opinion pieces. We subscribe to the WSJ. I get a lot of value from their news articles, but their commentary is just that. Did you actually read the article I linked to? It was based on a peer-reviewed paper in Nature Climate Change. I find Koonin's commentary often thought-provoking, but in the case of Greenland his piece isn't persuasive.

I am old enough, however, to remember when some scientists in the 1970s were worried we might have a new ice age. They look pretty silly now, but that wasn't a pervasive theory, though the popular press was fascinated by it.
 

pseudoid

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
2,515
Likes
1,508
Location
33.6, -117.9
...All that California hate and over regulation sure is having a negative affect...
Here in the land of nothing but sun, sea, and sand; the price of gas has gone UP for 11 straight days, while the price of oil went down 10%.
I think it went up 25 cents just over this weekend... w/regular averaging $5.84/gallon in SoCal/OC.
I think it had something to do with the dog eating the d*mn homework or the noose getting even tighter in the remaining refineries in the region.:rolleyes:
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,238
Likes
3,182
I gave you examples showing that they already are. Just keep in mind that corporate executives have a legal fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders. The primary responsibility of a public company in the US is profitability. I agree with that objective. What you seem to be proposing are social justice objectives. As a shareholder in public companies I'd be against that.
Actually you are ignoring ESG mandates, which many companies now have. Voted on by shareholders.
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,238
Likes
3,182
Timbeeeeeer!
I'll pretend to be the devil's advocate, with some fresher data from the prince(?) of climate-deniers: The WallStreetJournal.
(Both are the headlines of the WSJ articles and maybe found w/o subscription)
"Greenland’s Melting Ice Is No Cause for Climate-Change Panic" (2022/02/17)
"Don’t Believe the Hype About Antarctica’s Melting Glaciers" (2022/09/17)
At least you're only pretending. As long as this is the current reality:

co2-graph-083122_scaled_scrunched.jpg

https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
https://climate.nasa.gov/


We can ignore just about any contrarian articles.
 

blueone

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
May 11, 2019
Messages
848
Likes
1,144
Location
USA
Actually you are ignoring ESG mandates, which many companies now have. Voted on by shareholders.
Not true. Most of the ESG votes have been dictated by the people who manage index funds, like Larry Fink of Blackrock. And ESG funds have under-performed, so they’re losing popularity. Per Bloomberg.
 

pseudoid

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
2,515
Likes
1,508
Location
33.6, -117.9
Have we already discussed how much negative social impact this is causing to middle-American family of 4?
Not political at all.
ESG driven markets lack any substantive ROI for the common citizens who are trying to provide (shelter/food/education) for their families and/or themselves.
Newsom just (today) vetoed the bill for mandatory kindergarten education in CA.
Reason? Again, it had something to do with the dog eating the d*mn homework or the fact that there just is not enough funds for educating our youth but dole out billions if anything even smells like ESG.
How much of those ESG trillions spent on EV-tech that could have helped elevate the welfare of the youth in America?
Forget the substandard education (US=#32 or something)! Forget for trying to provide for the 'unaccounted' youth in America.
It used to be that 1 in 11 children were considered malnourished in the U.S. BEFORE the pandemic.
I don't even want to know how bad it has gotten because of our energy/inflation woes but it cannot be baby tears.
Not political at all, even after 100pages! (I never once used that last word in the heading of this thread.):facepalm:
 

blueone

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
May 11, 2019
Messages
848
Likes
1,144
Location
USA
Agree. The Newsome veto was disappointing.
 

pseudoid

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
2,515
Likes
1,508
Location
33.6, -117.9
Agree. The Newsome veto was disappointing.
I would go as far as calling it a shameless scam!
What he did not say is that 'children are unaffordable' because ESG and [ummmm....] CA 'educators and their administrators' who have a major [im]PACt that is more lucrative than tenure-ship in some hip university.
Someone is in someone else's pocket, trading votes for kids' sake.
Despicable!
 
Last edited:

blueone

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
May 11, 2019
Messages
848
Likes
1,144
Location
USA
What ESG funds are you referring to?
As a group.

As for ESG votes, the index fund managers are the biggest factor imposing their biases on every company in the indices. I divested from every Blackrock fund after reading Fink's views on "stakeholder capitalism". I also vote against every ESG proxy item, because I've never seen a useful one to growing the business. I can't remember ever voting for one. Every proxy item I see is just a waste of shareholder dollars on things like useless studies on the carbon emissions of their entire supply chain, or some biased social agenda I don't support. My vote is no, always no. I despise waste and welfare programs funded by shareholders, proposed by people who want to impose their agenda on the rest of us, and make us pay for it, because of the lax rules of US corporate governance.
 

pseudoid

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
2,515
Likes
1,508
Location
33.6, -117.9
Great example of the eV craze is that of the ongoing Toyota-bashing because they had said (few years ago) "Woah, to an all-eV future" [well... probably in Japanese and w/more choice wordage]. Remembering that Toyota probably sold more "hybrids" compare to all others; such attacks and accusations start with the common name callings, social media shaming and goes deep into the boardrooms. Yes?
One is not supposed to get emotional about their investments (tsk, tsk @blueone).
Would Ford, GM, VW, (et al) needlessly follow a trail to some money-tree, while the money-tree is not productive? You definitely are not going to get an answer from that money-tree if you ask if it was ethically productive...;)
At least you're only pretending. As long as this is the current reality:
Shouldn't your graphical CO2 attachment be showing a reduction of equal amount since it is possible that there is a 6-9% (1 in 3 cars in China) eV market penetration?
Hmmmmmm... new math?
 
Last edited:

blueone

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
May 11, 2019
Messages
848
Likes
1,144
Location
USA
Would Ford, GM, VW, (et al) needlessly follow a trail to some money-tree, while the money-tree is not productive? You definitely are not going to get an answer from that money-tree if you ask if it was ethically productive...;)
As far as I can tell, every automaker except Toyota loves EVs. It's a chance to shrink their union workforces, because EVs need fewer mechanical assemblies, and EVs are simpler to assemble. Their parts inventories can be smaller. And EVs often provide a more attractive driving experience, since electric motors have maximum torque at zero RPM, and the combination of small/lighter motors and low-mounted heavy batteries lower the center of gravity and improve weight distribution. Remember, most ICE cars these days are FWD with transverse engines, and they handle poorly, comparatively speaking, and the majority of the population hasn't driven a car with EV performance. Warranty costs are lower for EVs. (Skeptics should not bring up the Chevy Bolt recall, since LG reimbursed GM $1.9B for that fiasco.)

And then there's the automakers' plans to follow Tesla and attempt direct sales for EVs. Dealers and the buying process are easily the number one dissatisfier in auto purchases and repairs. Tesla is kicking everyones' butt, in the US at least, with buying process and service satisfaction. I'm not familiar with non-US dealers.

EVs are an automaker's friends. And many governments at various levels subsidize them. I think EVs are an automaker's dream come true.
 
Last edited:

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,238
Likes
3,182
Shouldn't your graphical CO2 attachment be showing a reduction of equal amount since it is possible that there is a 6-9% (1 in 3 cars in China) eV market penetration?
Hmmmmmm... new math?
Huh? It's the atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration over the last 800,000 years. We have not recorded any recent decreases (at least not lasting ones, so not counting seasonal variability or pandemic effects). Not even on a much more granular scale. Click the links I provided to review the data.
 

Attachments

  • CO2.png
    CO2.png
    56.7 KB · Views: 10

blueone

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
May 11, 2019
Messages
848
Likes
1,144
Location
USA
Great example of the eV craze is that of the ongoing Toyota-bashing because they had said (few years ago) "Woah, to an all-eV future" [well... probably in Japanese and w/more choice wordage]. Remembering that Toyota probably sold more "hybrids" compare to all others; such attacks and accusations start with the common name callings, social media shaming and goes deep into the boardrooms. Yes?
One is not supposed to get emotional about their investments (tsk, tsk @blueone).
Would Ford, GM, VW, (et al) needlessly follow a trail to some money-tree, while the money-tree is not productive? You definitely are not going to get an answer from that money-tree if you ask if it was ethically productive...;)

Shouldn't your graphical CO2 attachment be showing a reduction of equal amount since it is possible that there is a 6-9% (1 in 3 cars in China) eV market penetration?
Hmmmmmm... new math?
As a percentage of the total vehicle population worldwide, EVs are a small fraction. And the GHG emissions resulting from their production are relatively high, so the win in CO2 reduction is naturally back-ended.
 
Last edited:

Suffolkhifinut

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Dec 8, 2021
Messages
872
Likes
554
I appload anyone who buys it as its the future. Still, as an investment it's not that interesting to me yet. I do buy only energy generated by green sources, though. Am planning to get solar panels, EV and probably a home battery in a few years.
How can it be possible to claim anyone only uses energy only from green sources? Assuming you are connected to the Netherland’s national grid? Unless they only transmit and distribute energy solely from green sources it isn’t possible. We get energy companies in the UK making the same untrue claim.
While we are on the subject of green energy why are they protected by an inflated unified price structure? Can only speak about the UK here the Wind Farm generating companies are charging us excessively, basing their charges on the price of gas. Yet when the price of gas is lower they don’t lower their prices.
 

Marc v E

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Mar 9, 2021
Messages
593
Likes
618
Location
The Netherlands (Holland)
$US75M (?) is a ridiculous cost to store only 30MW of power for three hours of consumption. If that's the new tech, it sucks, isn't practical for large grids, and is for promotional purposes only.

How can it be possible to claim anyone only uses energy only from green sources? Assuming you are connected to the Netherland’s national grid? Unless they only transmit and distribute energy solely from green sources it isn’t possible. We get energy companies in the UK making the same untrue claim.
While we are on the subject of green energy why are they protected by an inflated unified price structure? Can only speak about the UK here the Wind Farm generating companies are charging us excessively, basing their charges on the price of gas. Yet when the price of gas is lower they don’t lower their prices.
I'm taking energy from wind sources in the Netherlands. This is guaranteed by my energy provider and government. How much of it is true is a question I cannot answer. However, assuming they speak the truth, the way it works is: I pay for elektricity that's produced by windmills in my country. In that way it directly benefits the owner and thus stimulates the market to become more green.

There's no denying that I take the same elektricity mix as anybody else. But I directly contribute to wind mill projects in my countries, which seems like a solid long term investment.

The inflated elektricity price in the EU is due to the way it's calculated: the highest price during a certain period. This is always peaker plants that happen to run on gas...an onfortunate situation indeed. Better would be to differentiate on elektricity source or just take a median or average price imo.

Edit: a cheap substitute for a peaker plant is the battery farm I mentioned earlier. Its costs after 2 years are nearly zero.
 
Last edited:

blueone

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
May 11, 2019
Messages
848
Likes
1,144
Location
USA
Edit: a cheap substitute for a peaker plant is the battery farm I mentioned earlier. It's costs after 2 years is nearly zero.
Except that it's a toy. 150MW is enough to power only about 60,000-80,000 homes, and that's not assuming EVs.
 

Marc v E

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Mar 9, 2021
Messages
593
Likes
618
Location
The Netherlands (Holland)
Except that it's a toy. 150MW is enough to power only about 60,000-80,000 homes, and that's not assuming EVs.
I am by no means an expert, but please tell me why you think bigger peaker plants are necessary?

My reasoning goes something like this:
Build peaker plants from batteries to build the equivelant of a sports car. Replacing high performance high cost as an easy entrance to the market.

Build ev cars to scale until battery prices drop so far that house batteries become an investvent with a quick roi.

Install autobidder software on home batteries in order to stabelise the grid in a coordinated manner.

If home batteries don't come soon enough, then install the same software in evs and make sure that charging during day time peak hours is cheap as chips.

 

blueone

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
May 11, 2019
Messages
848
Likes
1,144
Location
USA
I am by no means an expert, but please tell me why you think bigger peaker plants are necessary?
Because HVAC units and EV charging have large peaks in demand. 150MW is insufficient for large metropolitan areas in very warm or cold climates. You would need a lot of them. Worse yet, current battery technology has a relatively limited lifespan at full storage capability, in the context of power grid equipment.
My reasoning goes something like this:
Build peaker plants from batteries to build the equivelant of a sports car. Replacing high performance high cost as an easy entrance to the market.
We don't need the equivalent of sports cars. We need the equivalent of double and triple tailer trucks. Electrical use is on the cusp of skyrocketing due to electrical conversion mandates for homes and vehicles. Aiming at current consumption models is like calculating your computing needs based on DOS applications.
Build ev cars to scale until battery prices drop so far that house batteries become an investment with a quick roi.
Home batteries are for the rich for a long time. The majority of people can't afford them. Also, I wouldn't want my home dependent on such new technology for awhile. For example, tankless hot water heaters are well known to be much less reliable than tank heaters. I just replaced my hot water last year, and after talking to several people decided that tankless was too immature and unreliable for my taste. Complicating up my home electrical system and roofing with solar panels is also not happening for me. I can afford all of this crap, but I despise home maintenance headaches.
Install autobidder software on home batteries in order to stabelise the grid in a coordinated manner.

If home batteries don't come soon enough, then install the same software in evs and make sure that charging during day time peak hours is cheap as chips.

I've had this complexity dream recounted to me. I have trouble seeing local electric utilities in the US managing this level of complexity with the equivalent of modern reliability.
My reasoning goes something like this:
Build peaker plants from batteries to build the equivelant of a sports car. Replacing high performance high cost as an easy entrance to the market.

Build ev cars to scale until battery prices drop so far that house batteries become an investvent with a quick roi.

Install autobidder software on home batteries in order to stabelise the grid in a coordinated manner.

If home batteries don't come soon enough, then install the same software in evs and make sure that charging during day time peak hours is cheap as chips.

Broad-based deployment in the US would cost trillions, and I can't imagine the environmental disaster of mining lithium, rare earth minerals, and whatever on a scale required to make this dream happen. I like scalable nuclear power better than this huge complexity dream.
 

Timcognito

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 28, 2021
Messages
1,188
Likes
5,037
Location
NorCal
Build ev cars to scale until battery prices drop so far that house batteries become an investvent with a quick roi.
I do not have an EV yet just an HEV. But my Testla solar panels and whole house battery is on track for a 6 1/2 year payoff with data from two years of service. Is that a quick ROI on a system that has a 10 year warranty.
 
Top Bottom