to think that electric cars, electric radiators, hydrogen fuel cell cars are not zero emission?

[chomalungma]

First things first - I am totally for reducing a carbon footprint. I do things myself that are bad for the environment. Even starting this thread is using some energy that doesn't need to be used. I also think that electric cars, hydrogen power etc are a really good idea.

BUT

I was looking last night at getting electric radiators in the house. Inspired by the Government Green Grant. Even though this doesn't cover them.

There was a bit about a good reason to replace the traditional hot water radiators with electric radiators is that they have zero emissions of CO2 and so are 'infinitely' better for the environment.

Well - yes, in the house, there would be zero emissions. You aren't burning gas. And they are much more efficient than other radiators. But the electricity still has to be generated and we still have a lot of our electricity generated by gas turbines. We are getting better though

gridwatch.co.uk/

The same applies to electric vehicles - with the added issue that the energy costs in producing them - especially in mining the metals used for the batteries is high. And takes place in countries where they haven't got as much renewable energy sources.

Hydrogen - it's the future. Boris was in Teesside talking about the hydrogen economy. Hydrogen fuel cells. Great. Non polluting in cars - and that's a great thing for the local environment.

But you need to get hydrogen.

Most hydrogen is made by reacting methane with steam. This makes hydrogen and also leads to making CO2.

You can also make hydrogen by electrolysis of water. Which needs energy from electricity.

It's all so complicated. It's such a great idea to reduce pollution in cities. So important.

But at the moment, it seems that the CO2 is being made elsewhere - unless we move to more renewables to produce electricity (and even moving to more renewables has energy costs in that)

Really, we want to be finding ways to reduce our energy use, make things more energy efficient, reuse things that have cost energy to make.

And to be aware of all the energy costs and the ultimate life cycle in energy costs, CO2 production of everything we do.

I wonder how much energy this thread used?

@WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll

Apparently, there was a chap called Stan Meyer who patented a method of running cars from water - presumably by separating and harnessing the hydrogen. He died suddenly and mysteriously, so nothing further happened with it.

It would be interesting to see the details of his patent (well, for somebody who would understand all of the technical details; I wouldn't have a clue) and to work out if he was on to something massive, had a few good ideas that could be tested and possily developed or was just a completely deluded crackpot.

Not complete crackpot. When I was at university, in the early 90s, one of my lecturers was working on that fuel cell technology with water as a starting point. It is theoretically possible but there are a lot of barriers to it being done on a large scale.

@CatherinedeBourgh you are absolutely right, the oil companies are not innocent at all but we shouldn’t all rush into believing that electric cars are the solution.

The greater the demand for these will increase the militias in places like Democratic republic of the Congo driving up the human misery for the people in these areas so we shouldn’t just blithely ignore this.

If governments want to pursue the drive for electric cars and indeed for any product which uses minerals from unstable areas then we we must push them to ensure that supply chains are crystal clear and that children are not being raped so that our children can have clean air.

We don’t want to jump out of the frying pan and into the fire.

An interesting thing to note on batteries, even the most sophisticated have a very low energy density compared with petrol.

The Tesla model 3 battery weighs 550kg or so and gives range of 250 miles

550kg of petrol equates to about 750 liters which would give you 7500 miles or more.
Quite a difference

Hydrogen via ammonia is the way things could go will but it only really works if it can be made with renewable energy.

The reduction in particulate emissions alone makes it worth ditching diesel cars. EVs and electric heating will benefit tremendously over the next few years when the grid is decarbonised. The sensible thing is to change when you would normally be doing a replacement anyway

@Otterhound

An interesting thing to note on batteries, even the most sophisticated have a very low energy density compared with petrol.

The Tesla model 3 battery weighs 550kg or so and gives range of 250 miles

550kg of petrol equates to about 750 liters which would give you 7500 miles or more.
Quite a difference

Hydrogen via ammonia is the way things could go will but it only really works if it can be made with renewable energy.

The energy density comparison is a fair point, but the Tesla battery can be re-used - the petrol is burned, gone.

@WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll

Apparently, there was a chap called Stan Meyer who patented a method of running cars from water - presumably by separating and harnessing the hydrogen. He died suddenly and mysteriously, so nothing further happened with it.

It would be interesting to see the details of his patent (well, for somebody who would understand all of the technical details; I wouldn't have a clue) and to work out if he was on to something massive, had a few good ideas that could be tested and possily developed or was just a completely deluded crackpot.

A quick Google suggests his claims were fraud.

Apparently his patents have expired so anyone is free to make use of them. Given that means they are free I am surprised no-one has taken them up if they have any merit.

Well the other thing of course is efficiency OP- a gas turbine steam generator is about 98-99% efficient at converting calorific energy into electricity, compared to the 30-35% efficiency of an internal combustion engine converting calorific value to motive force (thus why car engines get so hot- that's the wasted energy, whereas power stations capture all the heat by making it steam).

So electric cars are better for the environment on the order of 3* simply because it is extremely efficiency to make electricity on a huge scale (and it's also extremely efficient to distribute it around the country because of the extraordinarily high voltages used).

So yes, electric cars are not "zero emission", but they're significantly less emission than any ICE. Not to mention the particulate emissions.

Not to mention the particulate emissions.
On a minor point of pedantry, Electric cars have particulate emissions from tyres and brakes - but obviously not from exhaust.

Electric cars have particulate emissions from tyres and brakes - but obviously not from exhaust.

So do ICE cars.

Well the other thing of course is efficiency OP- a gas turbine steam generator is about 98-99% efficient at converting calorific energy into electricity, compared to the 30-35% efficiency of an internal combustion engine converting calorific value to motive force (thus why car engines get so hot- that's the wasted energy, whereas power stations capture all the heat by making it steam

True - ICE engines aren't very efficient at converting energy to useful energy.

A quick Google suggests his claims were fraud.

Apparently his patents have expired so anyone is free to make use of them. Given that means they are free I am surprised no-one has taken them up if they have any merit.

Maybe people haven't heard of them - or they think the same: that they would already have been taken up if they were any good!

Whatever the truth behind his death, I can imagine the big oil/petrol companies not being very happy at his threatening their position - even if there was no merit in it whatsoever, it would have made people suspicious of them and possibly start questioning the status quo rather than just dutifully continuing to buy petrol from them as before, without thinking that there might just be another way.

The huge tobacco companies reacted extremely aggressively against people suggesting that their products were dangerous and tried to ridicule/silence them until the tide became too great and the truth could no longer be suppressed.

On a minor point of pedantry, Electric cars have particulate emissions from tyres and brakes - but obviously not from exhaust

Particulate emissions from brakes are much reduced as they don't have to work so hard.

Tyres have to work harder though as the cars are heavier though?

@Sewsosew

Tyres have to work harder though as the cars are heavier though?

That's something else to think about.

The energy used to make the 'motive force' for an electric car may be made more efficiently than for an ICE car - but does an electric car have to do more 'work' as it's heavier due to the engine and battery compared to an ICE car with its engine and fuel?

Fascinating physics

Modern marine diesels are working at around 50-51% efficiency.

For personal transport battery is the way to go but for commercial applications it doesn't work view energy density.

Solutions will be found but it takes time.
Lets not forget infrastructure. How do you charge your car if you live in a block of flats? Eventually there will be enough charging points but right now unless i can guarantee to park my car right outside my house I cant charge it. The only people i know who have e cars have a drive - and none of them live in London

And here is another conundrum - fuel duty is 57.95p per litre. So the average person pays say £500-800 pa in fuel tax. Govts are going to want this back!

Fascinating physics

It really is! I understand that the weight issue is mostly due to the batteries. Electric motors tend to be lighter, then you can also factor in the much lower number of moving parts for EVs, so less servicing, maintenance etc.

The batteries, at the moment at least, are the weakest link.

And here is another conundrum - fuel duty is 57.95p per litre. So the average person pays say £500-800 pa in fuel tax. Govts are going to want this back!

I've read that this is one of the ideas of smart motorways - to monitor and charge for miles driven. I suppose they could easily extend the scheme to other trunk roads (at least) with cameras and other tracking technology.

There's also the suggestion that wireless charging (doubtless not free) could be another function performed with smart motorway technology - which would at least solve one problem.

Logically, one could assume that the much-reduced/free vehicle tax rates for cars causing little or no at-the-scene pollution was dishonest by design in its stated aims from the start (wouldn't be the first government scheme guilty of that).

Zero-rated/£20-a-year road tax was specifically offered to encourage people towards electric cars, along with increased tax for the highest polluters; but the fact that the government relies on the same tax revenues - and thus once everybody has electric, everybody will on average pay pretty much the same amount of tax as they do now - strongly implies that the original justifications were an apparently deceitful means to an end.

Either that, or there'll just be an across-the-board big tax hike on electricity - and likely all electricity used by households and not just that used to charge cars.

I think that the idea with smart meters is that they could in theory charge more / less depending on the time of day - as they know exactly when you are using it and charge accordingly.

Or 'ration' your daily power...

Transport Eonomosts have been arguing for a per mile tax for decades. The current VED and fuel tax is too blunt an instrument and ineffective in what it is supposed to do. It's only a matter of of time....

I suppose they could easily extend the scheme to other trunk roads (at least) with cameras and other tracking technology.

All it needs is a sat nav that stores where you have been and when, then communicates that to HMRC.

Speeding fines could be automated too.

Or 'ration' your daily power..

They will have to something. Several million cars all being plugged in when their owners get home from work will bring the supply infrastructure to its knees. Smart chargers could prevent that by staggering when cars charge.

A daily power allowance would be interesting.

DS might have to sacrifice his computer time so I can go on MN

A daily power allowance would have to factor in where people live and work, though. A tradesperson in London might cover a few square miles but up north might be working in a 20 mile or more radius, depending on how specialised they are.

The only people i know who have e cars have a drive - and none of them live in London

The only place I've seen quite a few electric cars and what seemed like pretty good public charging point coverage was the Outer Hebrides, and I've read that Orkney is the place in the U.K. with the most per head. Presumably because apart from having space for charging, the other factor at the moment is that they are only practical for quite short journeys.

Loads of electric cars round my part of London. They charge them at the many charging points or occasionally out through their letterboxes and over the pavement (covered in cable ramps so they don’t trip anyone up).