[Bluebottle]

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.

 

[Bluebottle]

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?

 

[Bluebottle]

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.

 

[Bluebottle]

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.

 

[Bluebottle]

Yes, he did say that. You have missed my point.

 

[Bluebottle]

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.

 

[Bluebottle]

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.

 

[Bluebottle]

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.

 

[Bluebottle]

... 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.

 

[Bluebottle]

All this stuff has been brought up and debated long ago.
Some of the disinformation I haven’t already covered is in this vid

 

[Bluebottle]

You refused to address what “my” experts said when I posted some actual science.

Waste of time to do that again - Yet even my clueless YouTube random knows the solar panel area claim was untrue and can easily show it was. That’s how bad the original video is.
Imagine how it looks to people who actually know what an LCA is or a genuine EV BEP

 

[Bluebottle]

Name an expert or a scientist who said the earth was flat (seeing as it was known to be round by 5th century BC and Eratosthenes calculated the circumference in something like 200 BC, before science existed)
It’s irrelevant but I’d quite like to hear how that works.

Not sure why you keep saying the science is never settled, as it isn’t a phrase I’ve used - but it might be worth teaming that with the flat earth idea.
ie Why won’t scientists debate a flat earth with you or question it if science is never settled?
- because it’s so blatantly obvious that it’s no longer a question.

None of which negates the false claims in the original 2 videos.

 

[Bluebottle]

Yeah, flat earth was the anti-science lot, kind of the exact opposite of scientists.

You mentioned logical fallacy several times - those are both the “guilt by association“ fallacy.

The mining issue was a good one. There are some interesting developments around that, but hey ho.

Edit: ships are outside my area but Naval Architects come under “engineer” as far as I know, there were 3.

 

[Bluebottle]

once the batteries for EVs have reached their service life, how recyclable are they? I don't hear/read anything about this.

what happened to 'reduce, repair, recycle'?

Recycled cathodes work better than freshly mined.
Recycling couldn’t get going until batteries started becoming available.

North Volt already produced a 100% recycled battery and are talking about scaling up to 150,000 tons a year.

Li-Cycle have recycle plants in:
Arizona (10,000 tons per year)
New York (10,000 tons)
Alabama (10,000 tons)

Ohio (15,000 tons) coming on line next yr
Rochester plant about to expand to 90,000 tons

Battery Resources in Georgia (30,000 tons)

Cant remember where Redwood and others are up to.

 

[Bluebottle]

I stand with Toyota....

You might want to come back to that in 6-12 months time.

Industry rumour has it they recognise they‘ve miscalculated and are getting left behind. They have launched a review of their EV strategy, leading to a 180 on what Toyoda said on stage and boosting EV output with a new, more competitive platform.

The review isn’t public yet but lots of chatter, even in the motoring press:
Toyota is pulling a 180 on it’s weak EV strategy

 

[Bluebottle]

Old style Nissan Leaf batteries had serious problems (they couldn’t source batteries and tried to do it in-house), but that didn’t produce anywhere near enough dead batteries to make commercial recycling viable.

A lot of those batteries were reused in factory robots and are still running about.

Some of the pouch batteries went to research facilities to play with, like Faraday in UK. where ultrasonic leaching was developed to strip lithium and cobalt from the aluminium and copper support foils.
This gives a very pure product ready for reuse and takes seconds instead of up to an hour.
It is far more energy efficient than “black mass” hydrometallurgical recycling that Li-cycle use.

There is also pyrometallurgy but it’s more energy again. The thing that makes lithium so useful is the spare electron that like to go walk about around other materials and that also causes complications if you are going to turn them into hot soup.

Main problem is that it’s labour intensive to dismantle the battery units. There is pressure on manufacturers to make this easier, (nissan’s were actually quite handy for that) but a lot depends on whether it’s a cylindrical, prismatic or pouch form factor.

 

[Bluebottle]

Vacuums play an important role when mixing the slurry of lithium metal oxides and binders it stops any gas bubbles that would reduce performance.

Its also important for degassing during assembly so that lithium ions can move freely when charging/discharging.

(there is work being done using Dihydrogen Monoxide as the electrolyte instead of the flammable electrolytes used now, but that’s another story)

 

[Bluebottle]

The H2O needs....

One team worked on a Water In Salt battery that significantly cuts down the energy required in manufacture. It uses a lithium salt and an ionic liquid combo that isolates the water as individual molecules. That way it doesn’t behave the way a bubble of water would.

Aqueous lithium ion batteries aren’t quite there yet. They have been relatively low voltage and not as long lived but it’s an interesting field.

Trouble is there a bazillion non lithium chemistries that might make it all redundantso it’s hard to know which possibilities are worth pursuing.

 

[Bluebottle]

Members have been asked to stop including personal digs in their posts.
It is annoying for others to read and drags the site down.

 

[Bluebottle]

Anybody that has owned or even priced an EV should be able to see the numbers are bogus.
Not like with like, where are Service costs? Etc
No, most Tesla owners do not opt for FSD at $12,000, take up is only 11% ...and so on.

Plenty if models come in EV and ICE at same trim level. These models were selected
ted to show an outcome and still falsified.

The cost of my EV, charging and servicing paid for itself in under 3 yrs just through savings on fuel and servicing.

Did you check that claim about the VW battery being custom built to the vin?
The ones I’ve seen were modular units. There was just a software edit to the motors controller after it was fitted to tell it what vehicle/application it was in so that it used the right input/output values.