400 mile electric RV

Fusion is currently viable and among the lowest cost. Put out your solar panels to collect the energy.

pianotuna wrote:
Fusion might not be ten years away any more!

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/08/fusion-gets-closer-with-successful-test-of-new-kind-of-magnet.html

Fusion has been a decade away for my entire life. I still remember when "cold fusion" was going to put a fusion reactor in everyone's car.

Fusion might not be ten years away any more!

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/08/fusion-gets-closer-with-successful-test-of-new-kind-of-magnet.html

Lake Powell is in trouble, too.

https://www.nbcnews.com/science/environment/lake-powell-water-level-dips-historic-low-rcna1620

“ Yep, in order for BEVs to be GREEN the vehicle must be charged using clean electricity. As we can see, oil, coal and natural gas are not winners.”

Oops, Be forewarned, your social credit score might be in jeopardy - that kinda suggestion is an excursion into ‘wrong-think’, meaning a glitch in the matrix…

BTW, Heretofore, the only dependable source of so-called ‘green energy’ is nuclear and earthen dams, but note that due to drought Calif was recently forced to shut down Oroville Dam…..

On another note regarding claims surrounding ‘net’ decarbonization, consider too that the carbon produced from the manufacture and costly construction of wind mills and PV panels is never mentioned, and curiously Calif exempts from it calculations all carbon that results from their seasonal wildfires - the greatest source of CA’s carbon production, one that goes under the States famous Cap and Trade carbon credit system, yet another malignancy run by the tenured Bureaucratic fantasy world….”Follow the Science”, except (furnish exemptions) where Science really matters…”The Greatest (fraud) Show on Earth”, P T. Barnum would be ‘green’ with envy ($$) lol…

With soooo much high-profile paradigm nonsense present at nearly every turn, who is it that’s driven to look out for our progeny??


3 tons

Yep, in order for BEVs to be GREEN the vehicle must be charged using clean electricity. As we can see, oil, coal and natural gas are not winners.



And the breakeven point must be reasonable; 84,000km = 52,200 miles; 146,000km = 90,720 miles.



If my BEV is on the EU28 grid, then the ICE version is GREENER for the first 52,200 miles; on the Global grid the ICE version is GREENER for the first 90,720 miles. In other words, BEVs are NOT GREEN until they reach the breakeven point.

time2roll wrote:
So the graph shows lower carbon footprint for a Volvo EV regardless of energy source and about half if wind powered electric energy is used.

The one that represents real world is close enough that minor changes in assumptions could shift the winner.
- Wind powered is almost purely theoretical. No major grid is running 100% on wind power or anything close and there are no realistic plans to do so.
- EU-28 isn't clearly defined. Does it include Germany importing coal power from Eastern Europe when solar/wind fail and then claiming zero emissions within Germany?
- How was Frances heavy reliance on Nuclear taken into account? Or the impacts of dams used in Norway? It may be lower carbon but it comes with other environmental costs.
- It's interesting that they have moved away from Diesel which gets 20-30% better MPG...and would easily be the winner, if carbon emissions is the priority.

There may be specific situations where an EV wins out but certainly not a blanket win for EVs.

There is also no cost considerations. EV's cost upwards of 1/3 more to buy and electricity in Europe is 2-3 times the price to support green energy.

I believe there are places where EVs make sense and places where plug in hybrids make sense...but there are still a great many places where ICE makes sense.

What is this "end of life" thing? Is that when the price of the battery causes the vehicle to be junked?

Today I will be replacing my $14 radiator hose that reached its end of life on my 42 year old Chevy van.

So the graph shows lower carbon footprint for a Volvo EV regardless of energy source and about half if wind powered electric energy is used.

Well, that appears to be a fairly solid indictment, and at least an independent salvo into the direction of truth, so just take a moment to consider how many other false man made premises (assumptions minus objective examination) we are routinely exposed to and expected to embrace as beyond critical scrutiny (often to gain a passing grade!)…The phrase ”Follow the Science” has become adulterated to now mean, “Grant Zone, please move along, there’s nothing here to see”…Thus, what’s become a formalized, State sanctioned retreat to ‘tenured mysticism’…JMHO

3 tons