First off, h/t to Another Ian who pointed me at the comment thread that has been great amusement and lead directly to this set of observations.
The article at JoNovas is about electric cars and events surrounding them (i.e taxes and bans on ICE cars) in Australia. The commenters there bring up several very interesting points and details. I’ve decided to preserve a few of them here.
First up is the fact that there’s a list of countries that intend to “ban” the sale of gas and Diesel powered cars.
One or two of them make a kind of quasi-sense, from a non-CO2 perspective. None of them will do anything to change global CO2 production as that growth is all driven out of China and India at this point. Oddly, China is one of the countries doing the banning of sales. Want to bet it bans US, Japanese & European cars and not domestic China production?
China - "in the near future" Gasoline and diesel Production China 2017 2018 Gasoline and diesel 533 specific models
So “someday” they will ban production but in theory this year they will ban 533 “specific models”. Uh huh…
Now for China, they are happy to prevent personal mobility and limit the range. They are also happy to limit the approved models to those made in China. I’ll believe that are going “all EV all the time” when I see the Politburo members in EV Limos…
The UK and France both claim a 2040 target. Comfortably one generation in the future. France can run on nuclear power and avoid import costs for oil. The UK? Um… going to burn North American forests to run your EV or what? Destroying coal plants, so not coal. Aging out your nuclear, so not domestic nuclear. Gets dark and cloudy for the 1/2 a year that’s winter and fall so not solar. Windmills stop for long periods of time, so is everyone going to stay away from work when the wind doesn’t blow? Better start stringing more wires to France…
California is also in the 2040 group. They ban sales. I wonder how they expect that to work with purchases from other States? Near as I can tell it is not possible to prevent me from buying a new car in another State. Forbid registration of out of State cars? Well, guess no inbound moves to California then…
Scotland, being ahead of the curve for the UK, is going for 2032. So in 14 years. Now remember Scotland can be a bit cold. We’ll come to that down below. I guess it’s small enough that a EV can work. Just don’t try to drive to London and back… Edinburgh to London is 403 miles, so 2 charges. I could see this if there were a viable non-fossil fuel energy source in the UK, but there isn’t. On a small island you will generally have limited driving distances, and with newer more rapid charge batteries a stop for lunch after 4 hours of driving could work. Maybe. Now, just how much brand new charging capacity will be on line and ready to go by 2032?
A whole slew of Virtue Signalling Wannabees list their target as 2030. So, with luck, they can demonstrate to everyone else where the problems are.
Germany, India, Ireland, Israel, Netherlands.
Israel I get. It’s small. Surrounded by hostiles, so not a lot of driving the region. Has nearly no domestic oil. Understands nuclear power. Lots of sunshine. It could work.
Ireland? Well, also small so limited range less of an issue. But again, from where will the power to charge these things come? Not going to be nuclear (unless imported via Britain from France…)
The production of electricity for the Irish national grid (Eirgrid), by nuclear fission, is legally prohibited by Ireland/Éire under Electricity Regulation Act, 1999 (Section 18).
As of 2014, a Generation IV nuclear station was envisaged in competition with a biomass burning facility to succeed Ireland’s single largest source of greenhouse gases, the coal burning Moneypoint power station, when it retires, c. 2025.
In 2015 a National Energy Forum was founded to decide upon generation mixes to be deployed in Ireland/Éire, out to 2030. This forum has yet to be convened (Oct 2016).
In 2014 Ireland presently sources about 70% of its electricity from fossil gas. The primary source (“95%”) of this gas to Ireland is via the moffat-Isle of man-Gormanstown/”Dublin” connection and to a lesser extent, the Scotland-Northern Ireland pipeline (SNIP), both of these pipes are, in of themselves, connected to the wider British pipe-network and the European continent Dutch-British network. This great network of pipes is supplied with North Sea Gas and as that source is drying up, a greater dependence is expected on the frequently disrupted European gas network for which Russia being a primary provider.
So lets ponder this a moment… No nukes. Foggy / cloudy a lot so solar not going to cut it. Wind insufficient and unreliable. Coal scheduled for destruction in 2025 a good 5 years before the EV Bubble starts, some ill-defined “Biomass” to replace it (denuded Canada or Main perhaps?) and a need to replace the 70% of electric generation from North Sea gas that will add a huge sucking sound to the Russian Supply. Yes, those vilified horrible Russians… So what happens in 2040 when LOTS of folks are running on Russian Gas driven EVs and Ukraine has another ‘tiff’ so the Russian pipeline gets a bomb? Hmmm? Does Ireland just go dark and stay home for a year or two while it gets fixed?
Well, I guess the good news is that the generation from gas problem and the biomass problem “hit the fan” a half decade before the EV burden gets heaped on top.
The Netherlands is also dinky, so for local travel it could work. They also love their windmills. I presume they intend to suck on the French Nuclear Teat when the wind doesn’t blow also. Going to be fun watching them try to drive to other parts of Europe…
Then Germany. Germany? Really? Home of the performance BMW and Mercedes Limo? Some advice: Don’t buy their stocks after about 2025… Germany has banned nuclear and is presently running on coal. So we’re looking at a swap of Oil based cars to Coal based EV Charging? Makes sense from a self-reliance and reduction of foreign exchange spent on fuel point of view. Doesn’t do much for CO2 though. They are already experiencing grid instability from too much “unreliables” in the mix with neighbor countries (Poland) putting in devices to prevent the excess generation when the wind does blow from destabilizing the Polish grid. That means additional capacity won’t be wind.
Then India. Well, not much to say really. Since most of India is still doing the donkey cart and dinner cooked over a fire thing. Lots of their vehicles are basically rickshaws with a lawn mower motor on them, so an electric version actually would make sense. Sunny a lot, and with no money to spare for imported oil. Have a good strong nuclear power program as well. It could actually make sense for the urban core areas. Just don’t try to drive across India or deliver goods without an oil burner… I expect truck sales to increase…
Then we have the Canary of Norway. 2025. So in 7 years. They have a lot of hydroelectric power so may be able to handle the added charging load. They used to use the excess for smelting aluminum, but with China now at 42% of global capacity and growing fast, as Norway “goes out of business” on aluminum smelting it might work… Being fairly isolated I would guess not many drive to the rest of the continent anyway. So lots of stay-at-home could also work. It will be fun to watch them blaze into this brave new world future (and the rest of the EU can learn from watching – maybe…)
But even before that are the Regionals. (We’ve already mentioned California & Scotland). These remaining regionals are shown as banning “Diesel” not just “new sales”, so I presume that means the roughly 1/2 of the people living there who own a Diesel MUST buy a new car prior to these dates and all Diesel “outsiders” must stay out.
For 2025: Athens, Madrid, Mexico City, Paris. All banning “Diesel” (after the EU promoted it for so long that it’s nearly 1/2 the fleet) So expect Diesel “new car sales” there to crater about 2020, if the VW fiasco has not already killed it… Also expect tourism to drop rather a lot. My spouse can’t travel by train. Not enough barf bags in the world. So we are going to be touring Europe (on that someday trip after she retires) by car. You can’t tour Europe in an EV. Diesel is far more efficient and EU prices are crazy high anyway, so I’d planned on renting a Diesel. So we’ll not be visiting those places if after that time. Oh Well, I’ll spend my Yankee Dollars elsewhere then.
Also very unclear is what happens to all those folks all over the EU (free travel, remember?) who own a Diesel car and need to do business. Would I, as a company in say Madrid, keep my meetings scheduled there knowing 1/2 the staff can’t make it? Or just schedule them at another site where everyone can get there? Just sayin’… One of THE big things that makes a city a success is that it is a confluence of transportation systems. This kind of ban is banning one HUGE chunk of transportation system.
Then, the brave new world first explorer going there first in a flash: Rome in 2024. Telling about 1/2 the folks of the EU to not bother driving in to Rome. Well, I’ve seen it. You are not missing much. Crowded. Noisy. Typical big city. Has some interesting old buildings. The food was OK, but prices are crazy high and you might get chicken backs when the person next to you gets a nice meaty leg (happened to me…) as luck of the draw. But they can demonstrate what happens first and folks can decide.
WHEN you charge
Is a long comment that has a large quote in it. Basically points out that the cheap buy down rate for charging dead of night is almost 100% coal driven and makes more CO2, not less; while mid-day solar is priced crazy high and not used for EVs. Points to:
The data and findings presented thus far have been based on average CO2 intensity numbers. We know, however, that releases of CO2 to the atmosphere from EVs are dependent on the season of the year and the time of day EV batteries are recharged. Several studies have attempted to account for these factors.
EVs do not perform as efficiently in cold weather as they do in moderate temperatures. This effect is, in part, the direct impact of cold temperatures on battery performance and, in part, the need to provide heating for the vehicle occupants. In conventional automobiles, engine heat is used to warm the inside of the car. In EVs the battery must be used to produce heat, which it usually does through inefficient resistive heating. We would expect, therefore, that EVs in the northern US states would require more electricity than average to operate (though conventional automobiles also suffer efficiency losses in colder climes). As noted previously, since nearly half of all EVs today operate in the primarily moderate climate of California, the overall losses due to seasonal variations are not major.
The more serious temporal issue has to do with the times of day when EV owners recharge the car’s batteries. Utilities use different sources of energy during the day and night to produce the electricity that reaches consumers, and these patterns of generation are not random. To achieve maximum carbon reductions, it is important, therefore, that EV owners charge their cars at times when low-carbon electricity sources are being used. Using average emission factors does not capture this important temporal dimension.
We know, for example, that roughly 85% of all recharging takes place at home and this is usually done overnight. EV owners use as much as four times more electricity during the night than do typical Americans.
Utilities tend to encourage EV owners to charge overnight since it has capital infrastructure that is not being used then. Approximately 30 US utilities now have special nighttime rates for EV owners. For example, EV owners and other customers of Georgia Power can obtain rates as low as 1.4 cents/kWh if they charge during the nighttime; they are billed 20.3 cents/kWh for charging during peak electricity periods. Consequently, it is a win-win proposition for the consumer and the utility. The consumer takes advantage of very inexpensive electricity and the utility gains revenue from otherwise downtime operations while reducing stress on the grid system during times of peak demand.
Unfortunately, these patterns adversely affect emissions. A number of studies examining overnight recharging and marginal emission factors have concluded that this practice produces higher than average CO2 emissions and, when combined with colder temperatures, may make EV operation in the upper Midwest a net contributor to CO2 emissions. Even in relatively clean states, such as California, the difference in CO2 emissions from nighttime to daytime can be significant. The nighttime start-up of coal plants in response to the additional electricity load from EVs increases marginal emissions. And, of course, clean solar energy is not available at night.
As one study has explicitly stated, there is a “fundamental tension between electricity load management and environmental goals.”
“Fundamental tension”? That’s one way to put it. Orthogonal and antagonistic is another.
Weather News as Propaganda
Another comment pointed at this page:
Monash University’s Climate Change Communication Research Hub has developed an innovative new approach for climate change education.
Inspired by Climate Central’s program in the US, the Research Hub will partner with weather presenters to deliver easy-to-visualise infographics and stories about climate science to television audiences.
So more propaganda in my TV feed? As if ratings are not already cratering enough?
In the US, the weather presenter program started in 2008 with just one presenter and has grown to 400 weather presenters providing news on climate change in daily weather segments.
Lord Mayor’s Charitable Foundation has provided a grant of $49,524 to support this pilot project.
So 400 Climate Fools spouting propaganda instead of telling me to grab a coat vs put on sunscreen? Who knew…
Well, the good news is that I don’t watch local news anymore. (Wonder why…). I occasionally drop in on a local news broadcast from a particular spot if something extreme is happening there (like, via a Roku and NewsON app, I’m watching Hawaii local news about the volcano and lava destroying vilages); but for the bulk of my weather news I now just pull up a WeatherNation ap and get the facts I need in about 20 seconds of graphic for temp, precipitation and wind.
The main takeaway I get from that link is just this: There is a pervasive and politically driven indoctrination and propaganda campaign being driven behind the scenes and masquerading as things like weather reports and news and “events” and anything else they can hide behind. This MUST be outed and it MUST be shouted down. It is NOT helpful to the society and it is a fraud.
There’s a bit more, but it will come in other postings. For now, this was an interesting bit of mining from that particular post and comments.
I do wish that the politicians pushing this kind of crap could see the hidden costs, the “unexpected” bad consequences coming, and maybe even do a bit of math on things like total new mW-hrs of generation needed right when they are busy destroying generation capacity. If ever there was a great “poster child” for why Central Authority fails and the distributed decision making of the market works it is this. Central Authority making crap decisions without a clue about all the subsequent crap that will come from it. Failed power grids. Lost tourism dollars. Jobs lost. Huge electricity bills driving industry to low cost States and Nations.
Who will win from all this? Mostly China.
For me, I’ve got a nice old 1980 Mercedes Diesel from when they could consume just about any oily fuel. It needs paint, which it will get, but only has about 170,000 miles on it. They can go for 1/2 Million easy. (Modern Mercedes do not.) So I’m going to get it painted and detailed. I’ll give it to my grandson when I can’t drive anymore. It loves kerosene, so as long as there are jet engines in the world, I can get fuel. It also can run on vegetable oil with a bit of work, so as long as corn and soybeans grow, it can get fuel.
I’ve also got a nice Subaru that runs on gasoline. IF needed, I can make butanol that is a drop in replacement for gasoline (but with USA oil production at the highest ever, that is unlikely to be a problem…). Easy to repair, I’ll be keeping it as long as I can drive. Then it will go to my son.
The spouse has 2 nice old Station Wagons. One will become the “spare” car ( a 1989 ) and the other needs a couple of more fixes (A/C issues) and then it becomes her primary. A V6 gas wagon from 2001. Those two will also most likely be our last cars.
If figure that “fleet” will keep us going for the rest of our lives, and then some. No need to buy a new car at all, so mandate all the EVs you like, not buying one. I drive “coast to coast” a lot. Often the ‘weekend run’ is up to Nevada and back (about 400 miles) or to my Sisters house ( 2 tanks ). Trying to make those happen with a “charging stop” just would not work out. It would shift the timing into an “overnight trip”. Then the “coast to coast” is just completely a non-starter. Florida lone is about a 6 hour 460 mile drive from Pensacola to Disneyworld. Miami much further. Good luck doing that in your EV in that 6 hours…
But authoritarian “3rd Way” Progressive Socialists just love their mandates and Central Planning. “Good luck with that”. I’ll not be participating, thanks.