Much Electric Car interest out there? - Here's one that might give Elon Musk a few bad dreams . . .

[King Cotton]

Whilst I'm as happy as Larry with our Ford Fiesta, which after 7 years is running as sweet as a nut, I couldn't help dipping into this piece, about Honda and Sony's joint plans to have their Electric car on the road by 2025.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/sony-honda-plan-to-form-a-new-electric-car-company/

Whilst the technology and EV's potential to help reduce Global Warming are both intriguing concepts, I cannot help but doubt this country's ability to design and install an adequate battery-charging infrastructure, even if the potential demand for EVs was to excite Elan and Messrs Honda and Sony.

Any views out there?

[KaptainRob]

Thailand's PTT Company and other major retailers such as Central Retail and DoHome are already leading the way with EV charging stations and many more will follow, including the likes of BigC, Lotus, Makro and other fuel retailers.

Uptake of EV's for rural use is still a long way off due to range limitations; lack of home-charging; and load carrying vehicles not currently available.

Thailand EV's will be seen mainly in the cities as taxi's, buses, and local resident commuter vehicles.  The humble pick-up, diesel or petrol, will be with us for a while yet.

[Guest1]

4 hours ago, KaptainRob said:

Thailand EV's will be seen mainly in the cities as taxi's, buses, and local resident commuter vehicles. 

And Bangkok (and other urban areas) could get better air out of that. The question really will be, if they are be able to keep the power prices low enough

[Mamachigawa]

An also Apple is getting ready to field a vehicle lineup.

 

https://appleinsider.com/inside/apple-car

[Marble-eye]

So Honda and Sony are planning to form an electric car company, a great name would be Honey, they could always claim to be the bee's knees.

Can we afford to go green, do we really need to go green, is this another made up problem care of the bloody* Greta Thurnberg and the crackpot wokists that have taken over our lives and everyone seems to be letting them. Crikey, the weather people cannot forecast what the weather is going to be like next week never mind 30 years from now. 10 years ago they were predicting an ice age now it's turned into global warming, next week it will be global not getting warmer nor colder warning.

Anyway rant over and great topic KC and I hope I can make some more positive comments later on.

*Bloody* came from the Pete and Did sketch about bloody Greta Garbo.

[NotFrank]

15 hours ago, Marble-eye said:

Can we afford to go green, do we really need to go green, is this another made up problem care of the bloody* Greta Thurnberg and the crackpot wokists that have taken over our lives and everyone seems to be letting them. Crikey, the weather people cannot forecast what the weather is going to be like next week never mind 30 years from now. 10 years ago they were predicting an ice age now it's turned into global warming, next week it will be global not getting warmer nor colder warning.

 

We can't afford to NOT go green. Solar and wind are already cheaper and getting cheaper yet: the cost of electric vehicles once they're produced at scale will be lower than that of fossil-fueled cars; and the reduced (though not eliminated) pollution will improve health and reduce healthcare costs significantly.

And that's regardless of global warming. Of course, those who've never ever been wrong about anything in life, who never made a single mistake and predicted everything – and of course the planet is full of people like that – those people will dismiss that the planet is getting warmer because of the greenhouse effect. But say the risk is only one in a thousand that the outcome will be catastrophic: would you get on a flight if more than 52 flights globally crashed every day? Only in war do people do that.

Climate science, by the way, is a lot more reliable than meteorology. A lot.

The ice age prediction was a thing in the 70s, almost 50 years ago. Global warming was first predicted in 1896. A 50-year old prediction has turned out to be largely accurate.

[longwood50]

54 minutes ago, NotFrank said:

Climate science, by the way, is a lot more reliable than meteorology. A lot.

I guess I am old enough to remember all the "chicken littles" over the years that have screamed the sky is falling to be skeptical. 

Given the undisputed fact that the VAST MAJORITY of electricity generated comes from coal, natural gas, oil, and nuclear I have to admit to not seeing how electric cars do anything more than change where the polution is generated.  Additionally, I can think of nothing more polluting that the mining, manufacturing, and disposal of spent batteries.  Now those who would benefit the most from electric cars would be those living in crowded urban areas.  These are exactly the same people who live in tall apartment buildings making a home charging station an impossibility

Perhaps I am wrong and given my age I may not see the headlines in the future that pronounce the serious health hazzards created by ground water contamination caused by spillage from electric car batteries containing lithium.  

Here are just a few of the "climate scientist" predictions I have already witnessed and somehow have lived through. 


 

[Pinetree]

At my age, 95 octain will see me out. I leave the electric revolution to my kids and Grandkids. 

[Marble-eye]

54 minutes ago, NotFrank said:

Climate science, by the way, is a lot more reliable than meteorology. A lot.

Serious question, why don't they have scientists presenting the weather forecast.

[Pinetree]

13 minutes ago, Marble-eye said:

Serious question, why don't they have scientists presenting the weather forecast.

My old RAF boss used to say that Met people are the only group he knows that can be wrong for most of their professional lives and still get promoted.  

[ExpatPattaya]

2 hours ago, longwood50 said:

Given the undisputed fact that the VAST MAJORITY of electricity generated comes from coal, natural gas, oil, and nuclear I have to admit to not seeing how electric cars do anything more than change where the polution is generated.

Seventy-five percent of carbon monoxide emissions come from automobiles. In urban areas, harmful automotive emissions are responsible for anywhere between 50 and 90 percent of air pollution. All told, that's quite a lot of air pollution coming from our vehicles.

Asthma rates in children and teens have risin dramatically in the last 40 years in America.  Most medical professionals consider air pollution as the cause

Yes coal is the major culprit for air pollution in Easter Europe, China, India and several other countries.

Burning natural gas for energy results in fewer emissions of nearly all types of air pollutants and carbon dioxide (CO2) than burning coal or petroleum products to produce an equal amount of energy. 

Thailand produces 65% of its electricity with natural gas. 

I understand the love affair with the personal automobile, but in reality we all need to move forward towards EV's in public transport, trains, songthaews, scooters, and the like.  It is simply astonishing to me that with all the technological advancements in the last 50-100 years, we are still reliant on the gas pump and hense accept that we are under the control of huge Oil conglomerates and Automobile manufacturing companies.  It should make everyone rise up and revolt IMO.  

The percentage of household income spent on personal automobiles/fuel to get from work and home, or to the market and home has tripled since the 1960's.  That alone should make people and governments seek change as soon as possible.  

[Marble-eye]

6 hours ago, ExpatPattaya said:

Seventy-five percent of carbon monoxide emissions come from automobiles. In urban areas, harmful automotive emissions are responsible for anywhere between 50 and 90 percent of air pollution. All told, that's quite a lot of air pollution coming from our vehicles.

Asthma rates in children and teens have risin dramatically in the last 40 years in America.  Most medical professionals consider air pollution as the cause

Yes coal is the major culprit for air pollution in Easter Europe, China, India and several other countries.

Burning natural gas for energy results in fewer emissions of nearly all types of air pollutants and carbon dioxide (CO2) than burning coal or petroleum products to produce an equal amount of energy. 

Thailand produces 65% of its electricity with natural gas. 

I understand the love affair with the personal automobile, but in reality we all need to move forward towards EV's in public transport, trains, songthaews, scooters, and the like.  It is simply astonishing to me that with all the technological advancements in the last 50-100 years, we are still reliant on the gas pump and hense accept that we are under the control of huge Oil conglomerates and Automobile manufacturing companies.  It should make everyone rise up and revolt IMO.  

The percentage of household income spent on personal automobiles/fuel to get from work and home, or to the market and home has tripled since the 1960's.  That alone should make people and governments seek change as soon as possible.  

And which countries are responsible for the majority of carbon emissions, China, USA, India and Russia and are responsible for 58% of all carbon emissions, whilst the UK is responsible for just 1%, which is so negligible it won't make a blind bit of difference to the 'global warming', if you believe there is such a thing. But Boris Johnson is determined to get down to net zero emissions he has turned his party into the Green Party and has adopted the same skin tone as the Incredible Hulk. Till the top 4 countries start to take responsibility for their emissions why the hell should the rest of the world.

So, global warming now is it, in 1975 the myth was global cooling, didn't take long for the planet to repair itself and veer off into another trajectory called global warming did it, ever think sometimes we are being had. 

Could it be that some people like to make things up just to irritate us and to keep themselves amused. A bit like the 'insulate Britain protesters' who like glueing themselves to anything that can be a surface to be glued to. Some of these protesters had 5 or 6 cars and when asked, none had any insulation in their houses. It takes hypocrisy to a level we've never seen before.

As Dr David Bellamy said "global warming is part of a natural cycle and there is nothing we can do to stop these cycles. The world is spending vast amounts of money in tax to solve a problem that doesn't actually exist." 

But we are not even ready for electric vehicles, again nobody has thought this through, but will save this for a future post.

 

 

[longwood50]

6 hours ago, ExpatPattaya said:

The percentage of household income spent on personal automobiles/fuel to get from work and home, or to the market and home has tripled since the 1960's.  That alone should make people and governments seek change as soon as possible.

First off you assume that the cost of an electric car is "cheaper" than a gas powered vehicle.  As mentioned the ones that would benefit the most are the urban population but they are the least able to put in their own charger given the high rise apartments.   So at best they have to rely on commerical chargers which tend to charge more per kilowatt than the home electric cost. 

Second, even if the person spends less on electricity than on gas to go the equivalent kilometers that does not take into account the more expensive vehicle, the additional cost of installing a charging station and the potential cost of having the replace the batteries as they end their life.  Even if a person sells the vehicle before the batteries need to be replaced, I suggest that the value of the electric car as the need for a replacement battery approaches will rapidly decline.  The cost of a Tesla S Battery replacement can be as high as $20,000 and the typical replacement is between $12,000 and $15,000.  So that amount will be factored into the used price of an aging Tesla. 

You have the largest and fastest EV market being China and it produces 65% of its electric with coal.  So you have the clean EV but the very dirty power plant. Even the USA still produces 20% of its electric from coal. 


Now with respect to the lithium.  First it is a rare earth element.  As more electric battery powered cars are produced the demand for it will grow exponentially.  That will raise its price and further add to the cost of an electric car going forward.  Also, while driving an electric car may help congested areas like Bangkok or Los Angeles the lithium mining pollutes the areas where it is mined. 

The lithium extraction process uses a lot of water—approximately 500,000 gallons per metric ton of lithium. To extract lithium, miners drill a hole in salt flats and pump salty, mineral-rich brine to the surface. After several months the water evaporates, leaving a mixture of manganese, potassium, borax and lithium salts which is then filtered and placed into another evaporation pool. After between 12 and 18 months of this process, the mixture is filtered sufficiently that lithium carbonate can be extracted.

South America’s Lithium Triangle, which covers parts of Argentina, Bolivia and Chile, holds more than half the world’s supply of the metal beneath its salt flats. But it is also one of the driest places on earth. In Chile’s Salar de Atacama, mining activities consumed 65 percent of the region’s water, which is having a large impact on local farmers to the point that some communities have to get water elsewhere.

So this notion that electric cars are an end all solution is hardly true.  We are likely trading one form of pollution for another and/or transferring pollution from big cities and cars to pollution from power plants and mining. 

Also why do you think that you can't bring Lithium Batteries on an airplane?  They can malfunction and cause a fire.  Now when you have a car accident with a EV the lithium is dispersed into the ground.  Gasoline is quickly evaporated not so with lithium.  And here is just one case of what occured in Houston when an EV was involved in an accident. 

 

[Guphz]

On 3/5/2022 at 11:00 AM, King Cotton said:

Whilst I'm as happy as Larry with our Ford Fiesta, which after 7 years is running as sweet as a nut, I couldn't help dipping into this piece, about Honda and Sony's joint plans to have their Electric car on the road by 2025.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/sony-honda-plan-to-form-a-new-electric-car-company/

Whilst the technology and EV's potential to help reduce Global Warming are both intriguing concepts, I cannot help but doubt this country's ability to design and install an adequate battery-charging infrastructure, even if the potential demand for EVs was to excite Elan and Messrs Honda and Sony.

Any views out there?

It can safely be ignored until they are actually able to mass-produce it. Despite having decades of experience, traditional automakers have failed to ramp production of their EVs to the level Tesla has achieved.

[Guphz]

On 3/7/2022 at 4:40 AM, longwood50 said:

Here are just a few of the "climate scientist" predictions I have already witnessed and somehow have lived through.

Those screenshots do not represent the actual scientific consensus. Nice try, though.

[Guphz]

On 3/7/2022 at 4:53 AM, Marble-eye said:

Serious question, why don't they have scientists presenting the weather forecast.

It is a lot harder to predict short-term variations than long-term trends.

[Guphz]

On 3/7/2022 at 2:53 PM, longwood50 said:

You have the largest and fastest EV market being China and it produces 65% of its electric with coal.  So you have the clean EV but the very dirty power plant. Even the USA still produces 20% of its electric from coal. 

Even when running on electricity from coal, EVs are far cleaner than ICE vehicles.

 

Quote

Now with respect to the lithium.  First it is a rare earth element.  As more electric battery powered cars are produced the demand for it will grow exponentially.  That will raise its price and further add to the cost of an electric car going forward.  Also, while driving an electric car may help congested areas like Bangkok or Los Angeles the lithium mining pollutes the areas where it is mined. 

Lithium isn't particularly rare.

Lithium mining pollutes far less than oil extraction.

Quote

So this notion that electric cars are an end all solution is hardly true.  We are likely trading one form of pollution for another and/or transferring pollution from big cities and cars to pollution from power plants and mining. 

No one claimed that EVs are an "end all solution". Why is it that you are constantly relying on straw man arguments (see your "scientist predictions" above as well). EVs are an important part of the solution, but it's not the only thing that needs to be done.

Quote

Also why do you think that you can't bring Lithium Batteries on an airplane?  They can malfunction and cause a fire.  Now when you have a car accident with a EV the lithium is dispersed into the ground.  Gasoline is quickly evaporated not so with lithium.  And here is just one case of what occured in Houston when an EV was involved in an accident. 

You are comparing a phone battery to a vehicle battery, which is pretty crazy in itself. And the fact is that EVs catch fire at a much lower rate than ICE vehicles.

Lithium into the ground? Huh?

 

[longwood50]

10 hours ago, Guphz said:

 

Lithium mining pollutes far less than oil extraction.

I am not sure where this comparison comes from but to mine a single ton of lithium takes 500,000 gallons of water plus the heavy machinery used to mine expends a significant amount of conventional hyrdrocarbons

In terms of fire risk EV vehicles are a greater risk than conventional gas power cars.  They are particularly vulnerable if damaged during a crash and the photo below was what was described as an "internal battery failure"   National Transportation Safety Board Youtube Video 
 

 

[TWS60]

We, as a species, tend to see and correct injustices in hindsight, but are often blind to them as they happen again, in the present. Such as a black slave(s) in early America suing, unsuccessfully at the time, for the right to be a free man - effectively to be recognized as a human being rather than property. 

Or how the adults in my childhood scoffed at the ridiculous assertion that (nearly) every home would eventually have in it, a personal computer, and before that a radio and television.  Still in my very early 20s, how cool it was when I retired my rotary dial telephone for one of those new cordless ones, sat on the kitchen counter next to the standard electric toaster oven, because unlike my grandparents who had a bit of extra dosh to spend, I wasn't in a position to splash out on one of those new microwaves that somehow worked by invisible space magic.   

As to EVs, this isn't the first time we've had a surge of interest and development.  This time feels like the ball has been carried further down the pitch, and capitalism is driving competition forward,  particularly in the battery space.  Happy to watch it play out whilst amusing myself with things people were saying a long time ago about gasoline and motorcars, relative to the current older generation's cynical grumbling about EVs. 

A quote from the US Congressional Record from 1875:

The dangers are obvious. Stores of gasoline in the hands of people interested primarily in profit would constitute a fire and explosive hazard of the first rank. Horseless carriages propelled by gasoline might attain speeds of 14 or even 20 miles per hour. The menace to our people of vehicles of this type hurtling through our streets and along our roads and poisoning the atmosphere would call for prompt legislative action even if the military and economic implications were not so overwhelming… [T]he cost of producing [gasoline] is far beyond the financial capacity of private industry… In addition the development of this new power may displace the use of horses, which would wreck our agriculture.