[Puffer Fish]

Electric vehicle battery factory will require so much energy it needs a coal plant to power it!

Electric vehicle battery factory breathes new life into coal plant - TheBlaze, Paul Sacca, October 01, 2023

A new electric vehicle battery factory in Kansas will require so much energy that a coal plant that was slated for closure will now not only remain open, but will be expanded. Panasonic is building a $4 billion battery factory for Electric Vehicles in De Soto, Kansas.

This is yet another example of the stupidity going on with electric vehicle policy pushed by government.

[BeesKnee5]

The story says it will be converted to gas.

Not only will those batteries reduce the amount of oil burnt, they will also become greener over time as more renewables are added and the utilisation rate of the plant falls.

[B0ycey]

I think the whole electric car plan needs reviewing actually. And it isn't so much to do with the contradictions it has in regards to 'being green', but that we don't have the power plants for everyone to charge electric cars right now. Can you imagine the grid during charging time today if we all scrapped our petrol cars and went electric! It's like we are moving ahead investing in these cars, but forgetting that actually, there is more to this than the car itself. There is the infrastructure behind the car.

[BeesKnee5]

I think the whole electric car plan needs reviewing actually. And it isn't so much to do with the contradictions it has in regards to 'being green', but that we don't have the power plants for everyone to charge electric cars right now. Can you imagine the grid during charging time today if we all scrapped our petrol cars and went electric! It's like we are moving ahead investing in these cars, but forgetting that actually, there is more to this than the car itself. There is the infrastructure behind the car.

Adding / removing power plants based on changes in demand happen all the time, most grids plan 5-10 years in advance to ensure sufficient generation capacity is in place.

The UK grid provides 20% less domestic power today than it did 20 years ago because everyone switched to low energy bulbs and appliances, so in terms of the capacity of the grid to carry the power there is plenty of spare providing we continue to see the roll out of smart TOU tarifs.

Everyone isn't going to go 100% electric right now, even if new sales are 100% you are still looking at a decade before the majority on the road are electric.

[B0ycey]

Adding / removing power plants based on changes in demand happen all the time, most grids plan 5-10 years in advance to ensure sufficient generation capacity is in place.

The UK grid provides 20% less domestic power today than it did 20 years ago because everyone switched to low energy bulbs and appliances, so in terms of the capacity of the grid to carry the power there is plenty of spare providing we continue to see the roll out of smart TOU tarifs.

Everyone isn't going to go 100% electric right now, even if new sales are 100% you are still looking at a decade before the majority on the road are electric.

It doesn't matter if it is today, 2030 or 2035. The same issue will still apply. There are over 40 million cars on the road, most of which will be charged at night and all is like running four houses at once. The grid simply will not be able to handle it. A single charge costs around £17 and the average household a day is around £4. You think changing our lightbulbs is going to make this obvious truth just disappear? To pretend that electric cars are nothing more than a virtual signal that 'you are doing something for the environment' to the populous is insane. The government knows it sounds good to the electorate so will basically push the can down the road every 5 years or so. Sunak clearly has some understanding of this problem which is why he moved the can 5 years down the road. And the next PM will do the same for another 5 years and so on. Why? Because it isn't possible to go full electric without the infrastructure in first. And the infrastructure isn't profitable until the cars are in place. And that is a paradox.

[BeesKnee5]

It doesn't matter if it is today, 2030 or 2035. The same issue will still apply. There are over 40 million cars on the road, most of which will be charged at night and all is like running four houses at once. The grid simply will not be able to handle it. A single charge costs around £17 and the average household a day is around £4. You think changing our lightbulbs is going to make this obvious truth just disappear? To pretend that electric cars are nothing more than a virtual signal that 'you are doing something for the environment' to the populous is insane. The government knows it sounds good to the electorate so will basically push the can down the road every 5 years or so. Sunak clearly has some understanding of this problem which is why he moved the can 5 years down the road. And the next PM will do the same for another 5 years and so on. Why? Because it isn't possible to go full electric without the infrastructure in first. And the infrastructure isn't profitable until the cars are in place. And that is a paradox.

ICE cars use 3-4 times the energy of an electric car so you are actually reducing the amount of energy needed.

The average car in the UK travels 20 miles per day ( 5kWh or 40 minutes of home charging). For 40,000,000 cars that equates to an increase of 8GW on existing demand.

A single charge at home for me (empty to full) costs £4.35 for 58kWh, not even close to your £17.

The highest historic UK peak demand was around 70GW, today it's 50GW. This gives us a benchmark of the maximum demand the grid can handle without additional generation.

Our overnight demand is currently 18-25GW. In other words, even if everyone charged overnight then the total demand would be less than the 50GW the grid can already handle.

Sunak didn't move anything, he made a political statement and then kept the fines in place for manufacturers who fail to hit the 2030 target.

[B0ycey]

OK,let me rephrase this. The cost of the average battery from empty to full is £17. But even if I accept that your charge is around £4 a night and I play devils advocate in saying that is also going to be the average usage for everyone (it won't, but let's pretend), that is still accepting that the average electric bill and usage for every household is going to be doubling in a few decades. It is not sustainable. And may I add, that is one issue. Another is the lack of essential minerals. Another is this will only work if globally we adopt this policy and not just have this as a policy in the West. Another issue is that if you don't have 100% renewable energy, you are relying on fossil fuels anyway via the power plant. And another issue is the electric cars themselves, from getting the minerals, manufacturing, running costs, disposal costs etc. This is far from us going green. And isn't that the biggest problem? Electric cars are the biggest misnomer that is going on right now?

As for Sunak, he has delayed the sale of Petrol cars by five years, that is just a fact. And the next PM will do the same. I have already explained why. Because most people don't have cars below 10 years old and the infrastructure will not be in place by 2030 or even 2035. And I am not just talking about power plants either. Charging is also an issue. And so is manufacturing and minerals.

[BeesKnee5]

OK,let me rephrase this. The cost of the average battery from empty to full is £17. But even if I accept that your charge is around £4 a night and I play devils advocate in saying that is also going to be the average usage for everyone (it won't, but let's pretend), that is still accepting that the average electric bill and usage for every household is going to be doubling in a few decades. It is not sustainable.

My charge isn't £4 a night and the cost of an average battery from empty to full isn't £17.

That £4 provides enough charge for the average car to run for 10 days.

The point here is that when you switch to an EV you will also ( if you have any sense) switch to a smart tarif. Mine sets the charge time automatically based on the cheapest period of electricity before I next need the car.

And may I add, that is one issue. Another is the lack of essential minerals.

Which essential minerals do you believe are lacking?

Another is this will only work if globally we adopt this policy and not just have this as a policy in the West.

The largest adoption for cars and buses is China, for two wheelers it's india

Another issue is that if you don't have 100% renewable energy, you are relying on fossil fuels anyway via the power plant. And another issue is the electric cars themselves, from getting the minerals, manufacturing, running costs, disposal costs etc. This is far from us going green. And isn't that the biggest problem? Electric cars are the biggest misnomer that is going on right now?

They are still electric vehicles.
Green or not they are far more efficient and cheaper to run, requiring far less energy to run over their lifespan. Even if the electricity is solely provided by gas (coal is almost gone in UK ) they produce less CO2 emissions and have zero tailpipe emissions around town.


Actions speak louder than words, the fines remain and over 80% will be EV by 2030. Sunaks statement barely moves the needle.


https://www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/manufa ... -carmakers

[noemon]

EV's are a huge con for all the reasons Boycey mentioned.

They require far more energy during their lifespan than the equivalent ICE car as per the study conducted by Volvo, comparing its own models.

This thread below contains very accurate information on EV energy consumption, on grid consumption, on the environmental catastrophe caused by the mines digging for the rare-earth materials required, for the extra tyres required due to the added weight and all that:

viewtopic.php?f=45&t=183233&p=15262715

EV's is all about taking 10 environmental steps backwards. They are far more polluting than ICE cars and nobody knows what to do with all the failed batteries still that will eventually end up in the soil and the seas.

It is huge energy con, to drive electricity prices 100fold in the next 10 years and lock us all into this electricity monopoly cartel produced by mainly coal. Already, electricity prices are 5-10 fold from a mere 2 years ago.

[BeesKnee5]

As soon as I saw the link to the telegraph it was pretty obvious that factual and accurate weren't what was going to be presented.

The research is clear,

https://www.transportenvironment.org/di ... tric-cars/

[noemon]

As soon as I saw the link to the telegraph it was pretty obvious that factual and accurate weren't what was going to be presented.

The research is clear,

https://www.transportenvironment.org/di ... tric-cars/

This is boring, but quite telling of the arrogance of EV drivers. We dismiss anything and anybody we dislike and we just close our ears, eyes and simply spout nonsense from our echo-chamber.

To put your link simply out of commission and as obvious propaganda, your link does not compute emission at the manufacturing stage. It only reports on emissions at use of the car and even that by using lofty and non-existant grid-mix benchmarks.

Hiding this information of emissions at the manufacturing stage is a factual fraud. Ignoring this information proves that the virtue-signal is more important than reality.

[B0ycey]

My charge isn't £4 a night and the cost of an average battery from empty to full isn't £17.

Right. This is the last time I respond because CLEARLY you have no idea what you are talking about. As it turns out it is £19 when I just got a link. It was £17 once though

https://pod-point.com/guides/driver/cos ... ectric-car

That £4 provides enough charge for the average car to run for 10 days.

If you are a housewive or work from home. You haven't got a clue. I have been aware of the issues I have explained for years. You must get all your info from Green Peace.

The point here is that when you switch to an EV you will also ( if you have any sense) switch to a smart tarif. Mine sets the charge time automatically based on the cheapest period of electricity before I next need the car.

I can tell you now, if everyone charges their car at night, all these cheap tariffs with not using electric during peak times will change. But that doesn't addres the infrastructure problem anyway.

Which essential minerals do you believe are lacking?

Cobalt and Lithium mainly.

https://apnews.com/article/china-ev-lit ... ast%20year.

The largest adoption for cars and buses is China, for two wheelers it's india

Both of whom are building Coal plants like it is going out of fashion.

They are still electric vehicles.
Green or not they are far more efficient and cheaper to run, requiring far less energy to run over their lifespan. Even if the electricity is solely provided by gas (coal is almost gone in UK ) they produce less CO2 emissions and have zero tailpipe emissions around town.

Yeah, but the UK would have to restart all these coal plants up like we would have had to do if we had a cold winter this year. Also, I question that Electric cars are greener anyway given the environmental impact of disposing batteries.

Actions speak louder than words, the fines remain and over 80% will be EV by 2030. Sunaks statement barely moves the needle.


https://www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/manufa ... -carmakers

It moves the needle in the sense people will still be buying petrol cars. And isn't that the whole point of the movement.

Anyway, as I said. You do not know what you are talking about in regards of infrastructure. I am not going to repeat myself so any reply you do, I will not respond unless it actually addresses my argument with facts, not what you think from your own charge costs.

[BeesKnee5]

[quote="B0ycey]
Right. This is the last time I respond because CLEARLY you have no idea what you are talking about. As it turns out it is £19 when I just got a link. It was £17 once though

https://pod-point.com/guides/driver/cos ... ectric-car. [/quote]

It is you that hasn't a clue. Charger installers do not set your electricity rate.

Here is my electricity tarif
https://octopus.energy/smart/intelligent-octopus/

The cost for charging the car is 7.5p/kWh

My battery is a fairly typical 58kWh

7.5p * 58 = £4.35

Taking your link the quoted battery is 60kWh so within 2kWh of mine, on this tariff it adds 15 pence.

Cobalt and Lithium mainly.

Cobalt is already being phased out of the current batteries, with most now being LFP and cobalt free.

Lithium isn't rare and lower end cars are starting to use sodium batteries.

Yeah, but the UK would have to restart all these coal plants up like we would have had to do if we had a cold winter this year.

Those standby coal stations barely run and cannot be restarted because they are already being dismantled. We have one left at Radcliffe on soar.

The only needle Sunak moved is a political one to pander to a section of his party. If manufacturers are fined for selling you an ICE they will add that fine to the price you pay.

The irony of someone with clearly no first hand experience telling someone who drives 15,000 miles a year in an EV is just amusing and sad.

[BeesKnee5]

To put your link simply out of commission and as obvious propaganda, your link does not compute emission at the manufacturing stage. It only reports on emissions at use of the car and even that by using lofty and non-existant grid-mix benchmarks.

Hiding this information of emissions at the manufacturing stage is a factual fraud. Ignoring this information proves that the virtue-signal is more important than reality.

The link included manufacturing emissions. It's why the graph shows EV have a higher footprint when new

[noemon]

It takes 110,000 km for a Volvo ICE car to reach the polluting emissions of the same Volvo electric car at 110,000 kilometers.

Only after the 110,000 km mark is the ICE car more polluting than the electric car, before 110k the ICE car is on aggregate less polluting than the same Electric car.



However, the average lease in the UK is 3 years long with 30k miles(50k km) as an allowance before another EV is produced to replace it.

https://www.volvocars.com/images/v/-/me ... report.pdf

The link included manufacturing emissions. It's why the graph shows EV have a higher footprint when new

No, the calculator in your page you linked does not include manufacturing emissions. Further down the page it makes a claim about manufacturing without any sources or information and in fact the entire page you linked contains very little actual information on the metrics it is actually using.

And life-cycle is taken by Volvo to be 200,000 km, your page does not even say how much that life-cycle is, but the life-cycle of a car that matters is how long it takes before it is replaced by a new one and that is 50k km and not 200k km. This means that they are underreporting by a factor of 4 at the very best case scenario.

[BeesKnee5]

It takes 110,000 km for a Volvo ICE car to reach the emissions of the same Volvo electric car at 110,000 kilometres.

Only after the 110,000 km mark is the ICE car more polluting than the electric car.



However, the average lease in the UK is 3 years long with 30k miles(50k km) as an allowance before another EV is produced to replace it.

https://www.volvocars.com/images/v/-/me ... report.pdf

Then don't buy a Volvo.

Or alternatively get an expert to look at the underlying assumptions

[B0ycey]

The irony of someone with clearly no first hand experience telling someone who drives 15,000 miles a year in an EV is just amusing and sad.

Look at me, I drive an EV, I must be an expert.

Whatever virtue signaller. I have provided links, you have gave us your electric provider. I'll let the lurkers decide who to trust.

[noemon]

Then don't buy a Volvo.

Or alternatively get an expert to look at the underlying assumptions

Right again, just information served out of an oven with no data on the recipe, just to undermine Volvo's benchmarks.



"Break even" should be a haunting phrase for EV drivers as they are trying to catch up to ICE cars by driving their cars more. What a wonderful proposition. Drive more, spend more energy so you can virtue-signal several years after you have given the car back.

[BeesKnee5]

Look at me, I drive an EV, I must be an expert.

Whatever virtue signaller. I have provided links, you have gave us your electric provider. I'll let the lurkers decide who to trust.

That's the first sensible thing you've said.

Trust someone who actually charges an EV at home and can provide a link to the tarif that supports their claim

[noemon]

That's the first sensible thing you've said.

Trust someone who actually charges an EV at home and can provide a link to the tarif that supports their claim

What is that non-visible image supposed to prove?