258
Electric Cars Are Pushing the Age of Oil to Extinction in China (www.bloomberg.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
92 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 39 points 2 years ago (6 children)

It's worth noting that this is not being done for environmental reasons (more half of all coal pollution comes from China), but for strategic reasons as China has limited access to oil near it's borders.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 63 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I mean, that's a pretty good reason. I'm not too concerned why they do a good thing, as long as it's done.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Not to mention that they are the world's biggest manufacturing power, so whatever they make for themselves will likely also benefit the rest of the world.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -67 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    Electric cars aren't a "good thing" though.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 78 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    You might get up votes if you accompanied a controversial opinion with a reasoned argument. However, making only broad, unsubstantiated statements is a waste of bandwidth and everyone's time.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    You might get up votes if you accompanied a controversial opinion with a reasoned argument.

    Ultimately I agree that they should include the argument, but adding a reasoned argument has very little affect on the use of the vote buttons as "agree/disagree."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago

    Why not? This has been researched many times, and the results are consistently that it is a good thing already, and getting better, in regards to overall co2 produced

    They're also far more efficient than fuel cell too

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    When coupled with electric buses and high speed trains, they’re plenty fine. We’re not going to reach a level of infrastructure anytime soon where all travel can be accomplished through public infrastructure, even in China where they have ten times the public transport infrastructure of the US.

    Electric cars by themselves aren’t a good thing, as in, the USian belief in “an electric car for every person” is insane and if they convince even half the world of it we’re going to destroy the other half mining minerals, but using electric cars to supplement sustainable infrastructure and support areas yet without access to public transit is a necessary step on the path towards sustainability.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    An EV running on a coal fired grid still has less emissions that a prius. Facts dont care about your feelings.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Could you please run us through your maths? I'm legit curious.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    An ICE is only, at most, 35% efficient. In contrast to lithium batteries and electric motors, which is more like 90% efficient. Electricity produced from the dirtiest coal plants that exist, used in an EV, is more efficient and, thus, more environmentally conscious, than burning gasoline in an ICE.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Coal power plant efficiency is less than 40%. You'd also not get 90% of the outlet on the wheels. There is also a lot of loss on the grid, but there is also on the production of fuel. The two pollute almost the same.

    Burning coal however is a lot worse for the air quality.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago*

    It's the put the pollution somewhere else policy so that cities are more liveable. It was hurting China's reputation and too many rich Chinese were going overseas and siphoning away the economy (and still are).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago*

    I'd like to prefix this all by pointing out that coal is absolutely terrible to use in several ways.

    However: most thermal plants get about 45% efficiency, based on using very high steam temperatures. We all know that the theoretical max efficiency for a thermal process is limited by the Carnot cycle, which explicitly depends on the difference in temperature between the working fluid and the surroundings.

    I'd also like to point out an important point: carbon plants are not constricted by the need to keep the engine lightweight, we can capture most fly ash and other process exhaust.

    I again, do not care to bring such an arcane tech back online, it's terrible to mine, process and use. Just remember there's a bit more to all of this that engineers have indeed thought of.

    E: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0196890415007657

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The coal plants are not 100% efficient though. In fact they're probably in the realm of 40%

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    Yup, and that's ignoring the loss in transforming and transporting the energy across the grid, and in the chemistry of the battery itself through charges and discharges. Energy density of batteries is also a fraction of that of petrol, so every EV is also carrying around a lot of extra weight.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    What about the billions of cells that must be produced and replaced as the scale grown unto millions and millions of cars? And all the mining of rare earth elements it requires?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    It turns out that the lithium is very recyclable. The process of disassembly is what's tricky, but one of Tesla's pre-musk founders is working specifically on this problem.

    We can already do it. Mining is (for now) cheaper. Something legislation, applied carefully, can resolve.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago*

    My guess would be the efficiency of coal power plants (35%) and electricity transmission (90%) + battery charging of an EV (80%) would be more than efficiency of transporting oil in ships (50%) , then in an ICE truck (40%) to fuel pumps and then finally the efficiency of the ICE car (40%).

    I picked the numbers from internet, but they seem plausible.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

    A Prius will definitely pollute less than the typical SUV electric cars on a coal grid.

    Cause:

    • Efficiency of coal power plant and all losses are as bad as ICE cars. The EVs do thermal->mechanical->electrical->grid->battery->wheels and if you count them all up, is not better than an EV

    • Prius is designed for low drag unlike an SUV

    • Prius had regenerative braking like an EV

    But just the numbers:

    • Prius is rated at 94g/kg

    • Coal 950g/kwh

    • Volvo c40 0.2kwh/km or 190g/km even without losses

    I took Volvo cause they published a report with a good compare ev and ICE https://www.volvocars.com/images/v/-/media/market-assets/intl/applications/dotcom/pdf/c40/volvo-c40-recharge-lca-report.pdf

    Even with the current EU energy mix, it takes 77'000 km to be better than ICE, so arguably better. On coal electricity, they are worse. And this is comparing equally sized cars, a Prius will do better.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Regardless of the accuracy of your numbers - If you fix the ICE cars as they wear out, replacing them with BEV as the energy grid retires coal plants or goes to a higher percentage of renewables, they get cleaner. ICE cars will be as dirty tomorrow as they are today.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    That is true. I do think we should retire pure ICE cars as soon as possible. If you need to do long distances, a hybrid that could be converted might be a good intermediate solution. If you only need a car sporadically, a car sharing platform with electric cars is a good solution. These already exist in big eu cities. Ofc good and adorable public transport is nr 1.

    Decreasing the amount of cars would decrease emissions short and long term more than the current shift to EV and would make shifting easier as there are just fewer to replace.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Sorry sorry. Where are you getting the "all losses are equivalent to ice engine inefficiency"?

    I don't expect you to be an ME/EE, but there's a lot of variables in that calculation, I'd just like to clarify for everyone here what you mean.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago*

    I put very minimal calculation which at least puts it around the same order and linked a report by Volvo where they try to count the whole cycle of a car with the emissions of the production and transport of used parts and fuels.

    On current electricity mix, an electric car is only slightly better on a CO2 emissions. With only renewables, it can be 2x better.

    But the statement that in China it's at least better than a Prius is just wrong. Until renewables take a serious share of the grid, a smaller well engineered hybrid is not worse.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago

    What a ridiculous distinction. Do you really think this narrative difference in motivation is noteworthy? What is scarcity if not an environmental consideration? What is lack of sustainability if not an environmental consideration?

    It's being done because it leads to a sustainable equilibrium of their social system. Whether that meets your standards of rhetorical "intentionality" to meet the criteria for "environmentalism" is meaningless.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Is it worth mentioning? Why?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -14 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Just wanted to add some perspective. There's a narrative lately that China is a champion of the green movement, which is absurd

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •