Suzuki Burgman USA Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 88 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,502 Posts
He is cherry picking information and relying on the confirmation bias and lack of knowledge/familiarity in his audience.

VW did not “admit” the CO2 BEP figures, it’s a standard part of manufacturing to do an LCA cointaing CO2 data.

Its also incorrect - it’s different for each vehicle. For a VW Up it’s around 15,000, not 60,000 (lie by omission)
The figure is also reducing year on year as fossil fuels are being phased out of electricity generation.

Motorcycles generally have lower CO2 emissions during manufacturer so they “break even” before they leave the factory. (small battery, more machining required for ICE than a motor etc).

The physics professor isn’t a professor at all and has no qualification in any relevant field, he is a lobbyist paid by industry.
No Genuine experts referred to at any point, or asked if they do know these things (they do).

The reduction in oil usage should be pretty easy to look up for yourself to see if it’s true, more importantly it’s a strawman argument that tries to conflate “oil use” with “polluting” in order to fool the unwary viewer.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,104 Posts
When big groups of people from around the world suddenly start singing the same song and doing the same dance it reminds me of the
Mock-Arena Phenomenon.


“Los del Río's “Macarena” became the second longest-running number one in Billboard history, shifted 14 million copies, and sparked a dance craze that spread everywhere from the Olympics to the Democratic National Convention. There are one-hit wonders and then there are .
In the summer of 1996, the party anthem was impossible to escape, no matter how hard you tried.”
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,502 Posts
The part 2 video starts with sleight of hand.
energy density of petrol is more like 100 times a Li ion battery.

Batteries won’t improve because ...iron man? because laws of physics?
Iron man isn’t real. Which laws of physics say batteries won’t improve or get lighter?
what’s the limit on Sodium ion or alluminium ion batteries. Magnesium/vanadium pentoxide batteries?

Batteries have already been produced that are ludicrously more powerful and more energy dense. The problem has been large scale production techniques don’t exist to create them in commercial quantities yet, not the laws of physics.

400 years required to make batteries? Nope, other forms of storage exist, doesn’t have to be chemical (friend of mine worked on several including pressurising old mine workings, for example).

Why doesn’t this journalist interview an actual, real physicist?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
The part 2 video starts with sleight of hand.
energy density of petrol is more like 100 times a Li ion battery.
No actually it doesn’t. Listen again. He said 5,000%. 5,000%= 50x (times), which agrees with Lithium Ion vs diesel/gasoline density values I come up with. He actually credited the batteries with double the power density you just listed.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,502 Posts
You are getting several things confused and your units mixed up.

Energy density is per unit volume, by weight would be gravimetric energy density.

It’s also misdirection to compare fuel with energy storage in the first place. Batteries are recharged, spent fuel isn’t.

So we have a claimed advantage of efficiency- but totally ignore that ICE engines are extremely inefficient compared to motors - so most of that energy is unavailable/wasted (roughly 18% v 90%), yet more is lost through clutches and gears and drivers not using the most efficient gear.
It’s a trick.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
Bull…..

Energy density of batteries and liquid fuels are defined a million times over, as energy per mass.
Sure, You can also define energy density per volume , and now write that here, to further your argument but it’s irrelevant to me here.
The guy in the video clearly stated “pounds “ , being a weight equivalent of mass on earth.
You simply mistook him as saying 5,000x instead of 5,000%. Nice try though….
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,502 Posts
The SI unit for energy density is Joules per cubic meter (ie volume).

Though many people outside physics confuse the two - energy per unit mass would be specific energy or gravimetric energy density,


The point was, here’s a bigger number - energy density is widely generalised as 100 times greater, it’s a thing; but even with this higher numeric value, so what?
The argument is merely poisoning the well.
It uses quasi-science double talk and omission to suggest something is important when it’s irrelevant and/or untrue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
“Oil has about 5,000 percent more energy per pound “

That’s word for word what the guy in the video actually said, which is totally true, one more time….

“Oil has about 5,000 percent more energy per pound “

Blubottle.. you have to fabricate better straw man arguments, than the lame one you’re attempting here
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
Speaking of weight, which is a real sore subject for battery vehicle advocates ( not volume bluebottle 😂), yes weight…mass … is a serious drawback for battery vehicles. One recent technical study concluded that if transportation vehicles, such as semi-tractor trailers that run 24/7 were to be battery instead of diesel.. the road wear damage would 20-30% greater, requiring more frequent rebuilding of roads. We all know how environmentally friendly a steaming pile of asphalt is when roads are rebuilt.
Other studies are also emerging showing how battery cars are emitting much more unhealthy fine particles from roads, and tires into the air we breathe, because of all the extra weight ( yes weight, not volume 😂).
Even car transports have to make extra trips because all the extra weight of the battery cars put them over existing safe road weight limits ( not volume 😂).
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,502 Posts
Weight and volume are both genuine concerns, so is balance.
Hence dynamicists spend a lot of time with EV designers/manufacturers and getting to know stuff about them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,553 Posts
discuss the science all you like, however in the real world it all comes down to the ROI for the vehicle owner/operator. in general, at this time in history, the ROI of an ev/hv/phev does not work for every individual.

what can be done in the research lab is not the real world. the real world has infinite variables that cannot absolutely be accounted for in the research lab. that's not to say do not push/advance the technology, rather let it earn its place in the world without being forced upon people by disingenuous activism and economic damaging political policy. when a new technology is truly better, for both individual ROI and for the environment, it will replace the old technology.

do ev's make sense? yes in certain use cases and no in certain use cases. as I can only illustrate 'my use case', I am not 100% against nor 100% for ev's/fuel cell/hv/bev/....non pure ICE vehicles. I own an 11 year old honda civic (pure ICE) with 163k miles and a 5 year old toyota prius prime with 111k miles. for the life of these 2 vehicles average mpg has been 34.5 for the civic and 60.1 for the prius. the civic was operated during a time period when gasoline was on average more expensive, during this time the average $/gal was $3.04 ($14,362 fuel cost), in contrast the prius operating time period gas averaged $2.78/gal ($5,134 fuel cost). note, that at this time, to replace the battery in the prius would cost $10k, so how much have I saved in the long run? what stat I do not have is what it has cost me to charge the prius over the past 5 years. which vehicle is/was better? that's subjective.

the same can be said of my current 2 wheeled vehicles, 07 B400, average mpg 60.5. 17 r1200 tractor, average mpg 46. which is better? (we all know piglet the fourhunert is better, it can carry a lot more refreshing beverages without adding external storage).
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,502 Posts
There are lots of basic practical issues - not everybody has practical parking for home charging for example.
Those things need to be addressed.

To discuss science you need to either know some or be listening to someone who does.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,502 Posts
Other studies are also emerging showing how battery cars are emitting much more unhealthy fine particles from roads, and tires into the air we breathe, because of all the extra weight
As ever, check the numbers in these claims.

Brakes pads on battery cars are lasting 80,000 - 100,000 miles in real world use, mainly because of regenerative braking.
So EVs produce far less, not more brake dust.

If a car were actually losing 9.28g per mile from its (roughly) 35 Kg of tyres as claimed by a govt. figure - they would have been bald in 1300 miles and completely disappeared in under 4,000 miles.

So it’s clearly a disinformation lie that relies on people reading the headline and not doing the maths.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
I am no expert, nor do I own an electric vehicle or plan to buy one in the near future. I know people who buy $40,000 hybrid vehicles to "save" money on fuel consumption of their "paid-off" used ICE vehicle. This is no crazier to me than the misleading and overly optimistic support of electric cars over ICE vehicles. Electric cars also have their share of environmental drawbacks in their present form. Electric cars are still a relatively "young" industry and countries are still a long way from the infrastructure needed to support them as a full replacement of ICE vehicles. If you compare the ICE industry in the 60's vs. now, fuel consumption and emissions generated are significantly lower now. I suspect we will see similar improvements in the electric cars in a fraction of the time. I don't see the drive toward electric as a conspiracy, but I do recognize that the government and the media is misleading/overselling their present benefits .

There are roughly 8 billion people on earth now and scientists forecast a peak of around 10 billion within the next 80yrs. The supply of oil is NOT endless. It took a lot longer for Mother Nature to generate it than it takes for us to consume it. Some of the raw materials of modern batteries are even more scarce than oil. This means that we will be required to develop even more solutions to our energy needs and likely combine the various technologies synergistically to support our long-term power consumption.

P.S. Although oil is the usual suspect as the main driving force behind global warning, some studies point to deforestation and modern agricultural techniques as greater drivers of global warming.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
18,086 Posts
There are different types of Lithium isotopes. The MOON is full of Lithium 6, not cheese.

It is one of 2 isotopes used in modern Lithium batteries, Li-6 and Li-7.

The "Fat Man" H-bomb at the Bikini Atol was overloaded with 3 times the amount of Lithium 6/Graphite by mistake in calculations and that blast was so massive that the observation stations were damaged and injuries to staff and crew.
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: DarisPakar

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
The physics professor isn’t a professor at all and has no qualification in any relevant field, he is a lobbyist paid by industry.
Where do you come with this stuff, you fabricate?


“Mills was an experimental physicist and development engineer at Bell Northern Research (Canada’s Bell Labs) and at the RCA David Sarnoff Research Center on microprocessors, fiber optics, missile guidance, earning several patents for his work. He holds a degree in physics”

His resume to give his opinion, looks adequate to me ..

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
As ever, check the numbers in these claims.

Brakes pads on battery cars are lasting 80,000 - 100,000 miles in real world use, mainly because of regenerative braking.
So EVs produce far less, not more brake dust.

If a car were actually losing 9.28g per mile from its (roughly) 35 Kg of tyres as claimed by a govt. figure - they would have been bald in 1300 miles and completely disappeared in under 4,000 miles.

So it’s clearly a disinformation lie that relies on people reading the headline and not doing the maths.
That post has two straw man arguments in it. What would you do if you didn’t have those to rely on?

I won’t take the bait.

Go put 600-1,000 lbs of extra weight in your car, to simulate the added weight of a battery vehicle, and get back to us in a couple years on how environmentally, and tire friendly, it is.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,502 Posts
... simulate the added weight of a battery vehicle, and get back to us in a couple years on how environmentally, and tire friendly, it is.
Why? I’m the one that’s already done it with real vehicles.

Some EVs got better tyre life.
Mostly because weight isn’t the only factor (ie traction control etc). Torque is tightly monitored and can be controlled more finely and immediately. EV specific tyre’s are also different to standard.

However, there is a link between weight and wear. Large SUV/trucks and all motorcycles suffer this same issue of weight v tyre wear. If you are going to campaign against them where you are I think you are going to face some stiff opposition.
 
1 - 20 of 88 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top