Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > The Off Topic Forum
Register Forum Rules FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-22-2014, 10:48 AM   #1
Fozzie_DeBear
Wucka Wocka Wacka
 
Fozzie_DeBear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: East of the Rockies, West of the Rest
Exp:
Default How clean are electric cars

Depends upon where you plug in...

I imagine that for now, since Alberta burns coal that electric cars are comparable to the MPG of the midwest US.
__________________
"WHAT HAVE WE EVER DONE TO DESERVE THIS??? WHAT IS WRONG WITH US????" -Oiler Fan

"It was a debacle of monumental proportions." -MacT
Fozzie_DeBear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2014, 11:15 AM   #2
wireframe
Scoring Winger
 
wireframe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Calgary, AB
Exp:
Default

It also depends on how the batteries are manufactured. It is very dirty to manufacture that many lithium batteries. Manufacture has a much more significant environmental impact than the the source of electricity. Currently, an electric car is more damaging for the environment than a gasoline car when you look at their whole life cycle.

I am still in favour of electric cars. As our technology gets more efficient the cars will become more environmentally friendly. Batteries have come a very long way in the last decade (remember cell phones from ten years ago?). Electric motors are also getting a lot more efficient.

If we always compared new technology to established and efficient technology, we would all be riding around in aerodynamic horse carriages.
wireframe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2014, 11:42 AM   #3
nik-
Franchise Player
 
nik-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Exp:
Default

Once we accept that the only way to maintain our lifestyle and replace coal is go nuclear, electric cars will be significantly better.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterJoji View Post
Johnny eats garbage and isn’t 100% committed.
nik- is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to nik- For This Useful Post:
Old 10-22-2014, 12:51 PM   #4
Northendzone
Franchise Player
 
Northendzone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Exp:
Default

would it not ultimately depend on how often you wash them?
__________________
If I do not come back avenge my death
Northendzone is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Northendzone For This Useful Post:
Old 10-22-2014, 12:54 PM   #5
Bill Bumface
My face is a bum!
 
Bill Bumface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Exp:
Default

Either way, I'd rather the pollution be coming out a smoke stack in downtown Edmonton instead of right near my face as I walk down the sidewalk here.
Bill Bumface is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bill Bumface For This Useful Post:
Old 10-22-2014, 12:56 PM   #6
Peanut
First Line Centre
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fantasy Island
Exp:
Default

Do people really not know this?
__________________
comfortably numb
Peanut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2014, 01:28 PM   #7
Nage Waza
Offered up a bag of cans for a custom user title
 
Nage Waza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Westside
Exp:
Default

I have an electric car. Although there is debate as to my car being cleaner or not, at least I know it is built based on the premise that at some point, the research put into my car will certainly lead to cleaner technologies and more efficient batteries.

Doing nothing will get us nowhere.
Nage Waza is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Nage Waza For This Useful Post:
Old 10-22-2014, 01:31 PM   #8
Frequitude
Franchise Player
 
Frequitude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 555 Saddledome Rise SE
Exp:
Default

First off, I am pro-electric car. I just have a different vision for them

The concept suggested in the OP is entirely correct. They're basically coal powered cars.

My vision of the future involves solar panels on everyone's roofs and an integrated grid that cars plug into. Basically, a solar car but without the solar panels actually on the car.
Frequitude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2014, 01:54 PM   #9
terminator
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Exp:
Default

I have a vision for gas vehicles to make a revival.
terminator is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to terminator For This Useful Post:
Old 10-22-2014, 02:29 PM   #10
DoubleF
Franchise Player
 
DoubleF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frequitude View Post
First off, I am pro-electric car. I just have a different vision for them

The concept suggested in the OP is entirely correct. They're basically coal powered cars.

My vision of the future involves solar panels on everyone's roofs and an integrated grid that cars plug into. Basically, a solar car but without the solar panels actually on the car.
I forgot where I saw this... may have been a Dubai concept, but they considered turning roads into solar panels and electric cars somehow wirelessly drawing power from the road.

Personally, I'm a geothermal fan over solar. I'm also more a fan of wind over solar. The turbines near Pincher Creek are a sight to behold.
DoubleF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2014, 02:51 PM   #11
Tiger
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Tiger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Slightly right of left of center
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frequitude View Post
First off, I am pro-electric car. I just have a different vision for them

The concept suggested in the OP is entirely correct. They're basically coal powered cars.

My vision of the future involves solar panels on everyone's roofs and an integrated grid that cars plug into. Basically, a solar car but without the solar panels actually on the car.
where are you going to get enough rare earth metals and other heavy metals like cadnium for the solar panels photovoltaic cells. the strip mining for that would be horrible for the environment.
__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
- Aristotle
Tiger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2014, 03:09 PM   #12
Northendzone
Franchise Player
 
Northendzone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Exp:
Default

what fun are electric vehicles? you can't coal roll and when you rev the engine it sounds like you are turning up the speed on a personal massager......

can you mount a pair of nutz on them?
__________________
If I do not come back avenge my death
Northendzone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2014, 05:02 PM   #13
Frequitude
Franchise Player
 
Frequitude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 555 Saddledome Rise SE
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiger View Post
where are you going to get enough rare earth metals and other heavy metals like cadnium for the solar panels photovoltaic cells. the strip mining for that would be horrible for the environment.
Hey now. If it was fully fleshed out and an economic idea I'd be doing a lot more than posting "visions" on a message board!

Regarding your last point, I will say though that in general I'm fine with the idea of concentrated and relatively isolated environmental consequences in certain situations.
Frequitude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2014, 05:04 PM   #14
Caged Great
Franchise Player
 
Caged Great's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

I am hopeful that the nuclear reactors that Bill Gates has been working on actually come to fruition. Similar hopes in regards to Lockheed Martin's Fusion device.

We need to get off Oil/coal eventually, and replace it with equally good sources of energy.
__________________
Fireside Chat - The #1 Flames Fan Podcast - FiresideChat.ca
Caged Great is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Caged Great For This Useful Post:
Old 10-22-2014, 05:09 PM   #15
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

If the carbon would be captured from the coal plant they would be a lot more cleaner.

I know lots of people are NIMBY when it comes to nuclear, but you gotta wonder how much influence the coal/oil/gas industry has in terms of being anti-nuclear.
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2014, 07:45 PM   #16
GP_Matt
First Line Centre
 
GP_Matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Edmonton
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure View Post
If the carbon would be captured from the coal plant they would be a lot more cleaner.

I know lots of people are NIMBY when it comes to nuclear, but you gotta wonder how much influence the coal/oil/gas industry has in terms of being anti-nuclear.
The coal industry has a ton of influence on nuclear power in Alberta but it is far more obvious than you think. Coal is still cheaper than nuclear so unless the province wants to subsidize nuclear energy it is not going to get built.
The Bruce plant that they wanted to build in Grimshaw was looking for a guaranteed rate of 10 or 11 cents per KWH and the province wasn't going to give it to them.

I really like nuclear, but I dont think you will any politician supporting it against the local opposition coupled with the rate increase.
GP_Matt is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to GP_Matt For This Useful Post:
Old 10-22-2014, 09:14 PM   #17
Vulcan
Franchise Player
 
Vulcan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sunshine Coast
Exp:
Default

Electric cars are probably a good idea for our future, especially in cities to cut down on smog but when considering pollution causes this writer says the

Quote:
World’s 15 Biggest Ships Create More Pollution Than All The Cars In The World
http://www.industrytap.com/worlds-15...the-world/8182

Last edited by Vulcan; 10-22-2014 at 09:21 PM.
Vulcan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2014, 09:26 PM   #18
SeeGeeWhy
#1 Goaltender
 
SeeGeeWhy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

I am highly encouraged by the degree of openness to nuclear being a big part of the future mix here in this thread.

I've said it a million times before on the forum, but there are reactor technologies safer than existing plants that will produce electricity at costs lower than coal fired plants. The key resides in having liquid fuel, and salt coolant.

I am working on a project that is developing and commercializing one such design here in Canada. Check it out: http://www.terrestrialenergy.com

Being a proponent of geothermal is being a proponent of nuclear fission. Over 70% of the heat generated by our planet is done so through naturally occurring fission of uranium and thorium in the mantle.

TerraPower's traveling wave reactor will never get off paper, even they as a company are looking into molten salt variants to keep their options open and team together. Transatomic is another molten salt group gaining momentum, focusing on using waste nuclear fuel as their fuel (all MSRs can do this), they've recently received investment from Peter Theil's founders fund. China is seriously developing several variations and could probably deploy multiple styles as they continue their growth. To me these reactors are an ideal bridge technology to the very high temperature gas cooled designs (material science needs time to advance further first). Ideal because MSRs will work very well with existing grids, industrial processes, and create a blue ocean growth opportunity for the nuclear industry.

A reduction in reliance on hydrocarbon is going to have to be a very gradual one as a huge amount of people on the planet lift themselves (rightfully so) out of abject poverty. It will take decades for the mix to substantially change, and I don't think renewables will ever have more of a place than in extremely specific and limited scenarios.

As for fusion, well the details of Lockheed's work have been circulating in scientific circles for quite some time, to no big fanfare. Lawrence Livermore had a significant step as well producing net positive power, but the problem with fusion will always come down to repeating the process over and over again in a fashion that makes it useful. It is still VERY far away in it's current incarnation. Again, material and controls limitations. I am not sure why the Lockheed stuff is coming to the media now and with so little detail. It's weird.

Anyways my points stand. Renewables have proven themselves to be ineffectivat reducing emissions in practice and they do not add useful capacity to the grid in any scale. It's not a fit in practice and any northern hemisphere developed economy that is experiencing it the hard way. I suspect Ontario will be doing whatever they can to get out of the renewable projections they forecast as part of their 2013 long term energy plan after the population revolted over the forward price curves.

Yes, traditionally coal and oil interests have major stakes in being anti-nuclear and supporting anti-nuclear activities. It has been shown several times that hydrocarbon lobby will use back channels to support solar PR as a "safe and realistic" clean tech to keep misinformation high and support for nuclear low in the general population. Some oil companies are legitimate energy businesses though, and do have interests in nuclear engineering, development, generation, etc as well so it's not as black and white as one might think.

The reality is that until some major advancements can be made, we will need all of the sources we can get to maintain fair standards and access to high quality of life for everyone on earth while doing what we can to not accelerate our impact on the climate. We are already in a position where relocation, adaptation and reclamation costs are going to be huge for a massive piece of our population - likely within the next 100 years. We might as well do what we can to innovate, soften the blow, and maybe even get ahead of it by accelerating plans to colonize extraterrestrial outposts. Keep pushing the frontiers of physics and who knows what can happen in another 100 years, we do need to start to think and act more aggressively to ensure survival of our species and planet.

So yeah, electric cars. Woo!
SeeGeeWhy is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to SeeGeeWhy For This Useful Post:
Old 10-22-2014, 10:01 PM   #19
SeeGeeWhy
#1 Goaltender
 
SeeGeeWhy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peanut View Post
Do people really not know this?
"Marketing". And yeah, talk to anyone outside of the energy industry about where their electricity comes from and a HUGE majority have no clue.
SeeGeeWhy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2014, 11:42 PM   #20
evman150
#1 Goaltender
 
evman150's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Richmond, BC
Exp:
Default

60% of Canada's electricity is hydroelectric. We are a world leader in this regard (only China uses hydroelectricity more, but it's only 15% of their total). Canada and Brazil are the only major countries with >50% renewable electricity.

Can't believe Alberta still uses coal. Seems so backward. But then again, so does most of the US, so what do I know.

Stats here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_generation
__________________
"For thousands of years humans were oppressed - as some of us still are - by the notion that the universe is a marionette whose strings are pulled by a god or gods, unseen and inscrutable." - Carl Sagan
Freedom consonant with responsibility.

evman150 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:21 PM.

Calgary Flames
2024-25




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021 | See Our Privacy Policy