OT Question for the Engineers
- Thread starter Dawg1969
- Start date
On a related topic, here is an interesting video to watch if you have 30 minutes to spare. It’s about exactly how, on a detailed level, lithium-ion batteries work, how long they last, and how to extend their useful life. Not exactly what you were asking but interesting nonetheless.
https://youtu.be/IHz-Kx5h_Tw
https://youtu.be/IHz-Kx5h_Tw
There are companies starting up whose sole initial purpose is to recycle the components of lithium batteries.
There isn't enough information available to answer the question. Over time, as new technologies come online, recycling methods will improve, new deposits will be found, blah blah blah.
My momma taught me, if you can't say something nice about somebody, don't say anything at all
.
.
.
.
.
..
Paindonthurt, well bless your heart
.
.
.
.
.
..
Paindonthurt, well bless your heart
I will tell you that if everyone started driving an electrical car tomorrow the electric grid could not handle it. Thing is this has happened before. When Air Conditioning became thing, the electrical grid had to go through a huge expansion to accommodate the demand. This change to electric cars won't happen over night but over a couple decades. Several countries and car companies have set a target date to be 100% electric but those are just targets. Who knows what will actually happen? I don't.
There will be road blocks to electric cars for sure and we may hit a wall with them but if it helps us get away from depending on oil, then lets give it a legit shot at working.
I think electric cars are where we will end up. But they just do not fit a lot of needs currently. Interesting that the two biggest sellers of pickup trucks, Ford and Toyota, have not set a 100% electric target for that reason.
I am good for a couple long road trips a year. Going to an EV would take a 12 hour day and turn it into two days, plus the cost of a hotel, if you made me spend 2 or more extra hours sitting and twiddling my thumbs, at a charger. And that is only IF there is one when and where I need it.
I am good for a couple long road trips a year. Going to an EV would take a 12 hour day and turn it into two days, plus the cost of a hotel, if you made me spend 2 or more extra hours sitting and twiddling my thumbs, at a charger. And that is only IF there is one when and where I need it.
This is not a pro or con EV statement but we will not get to a point where we will not need petroleum. This graphic is a couple of years old but shows the use of petroleum in making EVs.
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/how-much-oil-electric-vehicle/
I think EVs have their place but the biggest mistake that can be made is rushing the process.
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/how-much-oil-electric-vehicle/
I think EVs have their place but the biggest mistake that can be made is rushing the process.
Passenger vehicles account for around a quarter of the hydrocarbon liquids fuels consumption in the world. And not all of those can feasibly be electric. If there’s a crisis today, there’ll still be one after a ‘complete’ transition to EVs in the light duty transportation segment.
I am going to regret saying this, but I used to have a different username, and I was young and immature, and I used to be a troll, and I came up with multiple things that have cemented themselves in Sixpack lore, and the 24 on the English section of the ACT is one of them. Felt it was time to come clean.
Did a ton of research a little maybe two years ago. Had no particular agenda in mind, just curious. Was actually considering buying a small EV. To the best of my recollection, I found that:
•Lithium can be found all over the world, but much of the larger and easier deposits to access were in Australia and Africa.
•Most of the raw lithium was sent to China to be processed and refined, likely due to non-existent environmental policies. Making lithium batteries is nasty business.
•The refined lithium “packs” are then shipped worldwide for individual companies to finish building their battery to specs
•Recycling the batteries was, at the time, difficult, created a lot of waste, and not cost effective. I doubt the technology is there even today. The batteries were essentially ground up and very little of the raw lithium could be reclaimed. A startup company somewhere in the southwest was working hard on solutions to this problem, but they were facing some serious technical problems with this task. They had a whole lot of gutted EV's piling up, and not much progress to show for it.
•Best I can remember, most experts at the time estimated that there is only enough lithium currently accessible to make enough EV's to replace roughly half the passenger ICE vehicles currently in use.
•Lithium can be found all over the world, but much of the larger and easier deposits to access were in Australia and Africa.
•Most of the raw lithium was sent to China to be processed and refined, likely due to non-existent environmental policies. Making lithium batteries is nasty business.
•The refined lithium “packs” are then shipped worldwide for individual companies to finish building their battery to specs
•Recycling the batteries was, at the time, difficult, created a lot of waste, and not cost effective. I doubt the technology is there even today. The batteries were essentially ground up and very little of the raw lithium could be reclaimed. A startup company somewhere in the southwest was working hard on solutions to this problem, but they were facing some serious technical problems with this task. They had a whole lot of gutted EV's piling up, and not much progress to show for it.
•Best I can remember, most experts at the time estimated that there is only enough lithium currently accessible to make enough EV's to replace roughly half the passenger ICE vehicles currently in use.
Why is it an all or nothing proposition? If you could up electric car use to say 50% of the vehicles, there would be way less demand on gasoline where there would be no dependence on foreign oil. CO2 emissions would decrease a bunch. Why is less than 100% a failure?
Also If there was no or very little cost involved with having extra vehicles, I would be willing to have a daily driver that is an EV or gets much better mileage. I can't afford to have insurance on 5 or six cars, pay tags for each of them, etc. If the government actually gave a ****, insurance would be on the driver and priced based on the most costly vehicle. The tag could be duplicated or be an A,B,C options that would allow 3 vehicles per driver as long as one is a truck or SUV, one is an EV or Hybrid, and a third can be an RV. Make it easier for a person to have a commuter vehicle but they can also have something to tow something and take long roadtrips with.
Also If there was no or very little cost involved with having extra vehicles, I would be willing to have a daily driver that is an EV or gets much better mileage. I can't afford to have insurance on 5 or six cars, pay tags for each of them, etc. If the government actually gave a ****, insurance would be on the driver and priced based on the most costly vehicle. The tag could be duplicated or be an A,B,C options that would allow 3 vehicles per driver as long as one is a truck or SUV, one is an EV or Hybrid, and a third can be an RV. Make it easier for a person to have a commuter vehicle but they can also have something to tow something and take long roadtrips with.
Because politicians have a hard time finding middle ground. They have an even harder time finding or even looking for win/win. And the two aren’t the same.
To other posters points and really to yours, is there an option for gas/electric? If I’m on a road trip, I use gas during the day and charge at night. Obviously there are probably some design restrictions but I’m sure they can overcome them.
To other posters points and really to yours, is there an option for gas/electric? If I’m on a road trip, I use gas during the day and charge at night. Obviously there are probably some design restrictions but I’m sure they can overcome them.
They don’t want to promote middle ground because people HATE change and won’t even go 25 percent of the way in that situation.
So they go with audacity, more audacity, and even more audacity — like Patton and Napoleon (or Danton)— to get as many people as possible.
And this time, corporations are playing along & we’ll see what happens.
So they go with audacity, more audacity, and even more audacity — like Patton and Napoleon (or Danton)— to get as many people as possible.
And this time, corporations are playing along & we’ll see what happens.
The company I referred to is building a commercial-scale plant that is designed to recover up to 95% of all battery materials.
Whether you agree with their philosophy or reasons, Patton and Napoleon got results. Most politicians don’t.
1) Which country has been obtaining the mineral rights world wide for those minerals? China.
2) Do we have the electricity generation capacity to support everyone buying electric? No, see California requesting electric car owners to charge in off peak hours this past summer when they had rolling brownouts.
3) Which government officials, elected members and their families, sit on boards or own stock in green companies? You just might be surprised.
4) How clean is green energy? Take a look at the mining operations and what’s required to recycle green lithium batteries which are considered hazardous waste.
5) Ask yourself what does it cost to recycle those batteries and what a replacement set cost and if those in the low to middle class segment can afford them? No.
2) Do we have the electricity generation capacity to support everyone buying electric? No, see California requesting electric car owners to charge in off peak hours this past summer when they had rolling brownouts.
3) Which government officials, elected members and their families, sit on boards or own stock in green companies? You just might be surprised.
4) How clean is green energy? Take a look at the mining operations and what’s required to recycle green lithium batteries which are considered hazardous waste.
5) Ask yourself what does it cost to recycle those batteries and what a replacement set cost and if those in the low to middle class segment can afford them? No.
Last edited:
Here's a good video of a guy who took a 2k mile trip in a Tesla and his experience. A lot of good information:
https://youtu.be/uC95WACQhCY
Also, there is a YouTube channel named Engineering Explained that has a lot of Tesla and EV videos about different subjects.
https://youtu.be/uC95WACQhCY
Also, there is a YouTube channel named Engineering Explained that has a lot of Tesla and EV videos about different subjects.
Agreed on all accounts.
With the corporations being on their side now, they’ve got a much better shot than before.
Even Tater Tot is playing along— praising the continued Nissan investment in the Canton plant with its recently announced plans to produce electric vehicles.
With the corporations being on their side now, they’ve got a much better shot than before.
Even Tater Tot is playing along— praising the continued Nissan investment in the Canton plant with its recently announced plans to produce electric vehicles.
To get a vehicle from point A to point B requires energy.
To get electric production requires energy.
There is no such thing as clean energy.
To get electric production requires energy.
There is no such thing as clean energy.
Actually, no.
It's potentially a very smart play given the California political climate and how it relates nationally-- especially since both of us agree that there should be a middle ground.
Here's a Forbes article on EV plans: Link.
And then with the news about the Nissan electric trucks being produced in Canton, you know a lot of them are going to be sold in California.
Since California is solidly blue & very populous, the better long-term play is to root for this California executive order because that'll make more gas available for states in the US for the next few years.
It's potentially a very smart play given the California political climate and how it relates nationally-- especially since both of us agree that there should be a middle ground.
Here's a Forbes article on EV plans: Link.
And then with the news about the Nissan electric trucks being produced in Canton, you know a lot of them are going to be sold in California.
Since California is solidly blue & very populous, the better long-term play is to root for this California executive order because that'll make more gas available for states in the US for the next few years.
That makes sense, but the problem is that California's market is so big it drives a lot of stupidity. Our washing machines are much less efficient in part because of California (and some other nearby states) were concerned about water usage, when most of the country geographically should be worried about energy usage.
There used to be a guy that basically modeled the amount of solar energy hitting the earth each year, made some unrealistically generous assumptions showing improvement in Solar panel and wind turbine efficiencies, and showed that we couldn't meet our energy needs with solar and wind (which is really mostly solar one step removed). Not sure if it didn't get traction because it was debunked or because people didn't want to hear it.
Assuming he's correct, we have a couple hundred years probably to figure it out, but really ought to be looking at nuclear, geothermal, hydro, solar, wind, and fossil fuels and trying to maximize our options.
Yeah, that's true.
To be fair though, many areas of California don't get much rainfall so water usage has at times been a major concern.
When I worked at Stanford in the early 90s, the university's fountains were turned off.
To be fair though, many areas of California don't get much rainfall so water usage has at times been a major concern.
When I worked at Stanford in the early 90s, the university's fountains were turned off.
Oh no doubt, it makes sense for them to care about it. What doesn't make sense is for the federal government to make national energy star standards that focus on water consumption. It is unreal that we have made washing machines and dishwasher more expensive and largely worse. My old workplace had a dishwasher where the "express" cycle lasted a ridiculous amount of time (I think almost four hours although it's been a while) and the normal cycle was I think over 7 hours. Didn't do a good job, but hey, didn't use much water. No clue what the energy requirements were to use a little water for 7 hours instead of a lot of water for 3 hours.
I also miss when a normal wash cycle would get clothes clean. I have to pretty much use manual settings for my washing machine and do an extra rinse cycle and claim it's a "large" load, because if not, it will end up using too little water.
I've still got an old school washer that I've had to fix a few times over the last 20 years. My wife wanted to get a new one when we moved a few years ago, and I convinced her it was going to suck. Plan to keep it long as I can get parts for it. There's literally nothing on it I can't fix so why would I buy a new one?
Latest posts
Get unlimited access today.