Carlton Supporters Club

Yep, for me it looks like we want to be selective with our learnings from recent history, we've completely discounted the farce that is the EU Energy grid and we are barrelling head long into crazy high energy prices.

The last time I was in the EU, I had a trip covering towns in France, Belgium, Germany and Austria. There were places where you could stand in one town and stare across a valley at another town paying 1800% more for it's energy.

I think when the subsidies go, the real subsidies not the ones called a subsidy, things are really going to hit the fan.

Climate change is real, but there is no need to cut your own legs off to make things better!

Force it into the publics face and miracles will happen.

This is exactly what happened in places like Germany and Japan, but why must we repeat the same mistakes, can't we learn without experiencing the pain?

Worse still, the pain gave rise to a new generation of political radicals, the toll from that will potentially end up costing far more than any thing we can debate about energy! There is a rising level of apathy and anarchy in these countries, with more and more of the population under fiscal duress, the disaffected are going to be the next generation of politicians.

Its human nature.....but more so, its aussie culture.

'She'll be right'.......until its not.

Jeremy Clarkson has been banging on about that for over a decade.

None of that takes into account the emmisions from shipping it from all parts of the world as well.
Lithium mines to manufacturing to production to end user.

All to make people feel better about themselves.

Jeremy Clarkson has been banging on about that for over a decade.

None of that takes into account the emmisions from shipping it from all parts of the world as well.
Lithium mines to manufacturing to production to end user.

All to make people feel better about themselves.

Now come on, K, tell me you didn't write this with a wry grin, tongue in cheek and a wink of the eye. Quoting Clarkson, a self-confessed boofhead, as an environmental guru is a stretch.

And to top it off, it's relatively wealthy types buying Tesla's, and they are scrapping relatively new cars made from tonnes of recently mined resources that could have run for another decade or two more. Many of the same people update their car every 3 to 5 years, while the break-even figures assume you buy the Tesla and drive it to destruction.

I've even had someone arrogantly argue the aged Teslas will be passed down the economic chain benefitting those who can't initially afford them, but doesn't that mean the new car buyer never breaks even? I suspect unless they end with decades of invalid care they probably pass in deficit!

That's the feel good green for you, perhaps it's pseudogreen!

With all that being said, (and I am no EV booster, just pointing out the logical fallousies that exist) does manufacturing ICE cars, and pulling oil out of the ground not require similar amounts of effort and the odd disaster from an oil slick cause similar issues?

Is it possible that the manufacturing processes and cost are as probelematic and costly as each other, and ergo, the running of an EV vs an ICE car, actually yield some ecological benefit?

That being said, im not convinced either way, but many of these arguments are one sided which makes it really difficult.  Its possible that once manufactured, the ecological impact of the EV decrease to a point to offset any issues in manufacturing and you need good data for that, including how the electricity is produced to power the EV.  If you charge off solar, and then run it for 10 years, vs a petrol powered car, you have additional ongoing environmental impacts in the car industry to also consider even if the manufacturing process is initially in deficit. 

I think there is likely a better solution out there, but we will find out in due course.

Now come on, K, tell me you didn't write this with a wry grin, tongue in cheek and a wink of the eye. Quoting Clarkson, a self-confessed boofhead, as an environmental guru is a stretch.

And I don't think you can blanket everyone who goes EV in their vehicle choice as wanting to feel better about themselves. There are a variety of motives, some altruistic, some egocentric, some just wanting to check it out and some wanting to appease some deep seated, unconscious guilt... etc.

The moment huge bucks from big hitting individuals and businesses started being invested in alternative energy sources, it ceased to be about environmentalism and started being about making copious amounts of loot; discovering a new healthy revenue source. Economics/loot rule.

A Facebook post is probably a tad less one-sided than anything that comes out of Jeremy Clarkson's mouth 

A fairly independent appraisal of some of the myths about EVs can be found here: https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths

For example:

FACT: The greenhouse gas emissions associated with an electric vehicle over its lifetime are typically lower than those from an average gasoline-powered vehicle, even when accounting for manufacturing.

Some studies have shown that making a typical EV can create more carbon pollution than making a gasoline car. This is because of the additional energy required to manufacture an EV’s battery. Still, over the lifetime of the vehicle, total GHG emissions associated with manufacturing, charging, and driving an EV are typically lower than the total GHGs associated with a gasoline car. That’s because EVs have zero tailpipe emissions and are typically responsible for significantly fewer GHGs during operation (see Myth 1 above).

For example, researchers at Argonne National Laboratory estimated emissions for both a gasoline car and an EV with a 300-mile electric range. In their estimates, while GHG emissions from EV manufacturing and end-of-life are higher, total GHGs for the EV are still lower than those for the gasoline car.

That's pretty close to your logic Thry.

It's claimed that 98% of each EV is now being recycled, but I haven't verified that.  I imagine that a similar percentage would apply to ICE vehicles, but then there's the energy required to recycle both.

I'm still not convinced that EVs, in their current form, are the future but I have no doubt that they are preferable to ICE vehicles in terms of GHG emissions.