Tell me why didn't trump ban electric cars yet?

tell me why didn't trump ban electric cars yet?

Other urls found in this thread:

google.com/search?q=How much are ev batteries actually degrading
waste-management-world.com/a/1-the-lithium-battery-recycling-challenge
gas2.org/2015/02/20/tesla-loss-battery-range-less-feared/
electrek.co/2016/11/01/tesla-battery-degradation/
teslacentral.com/worried-about-tesla-battery-degradation-its-23-miles-every-100000-driven
venturebeat.com/2015/02/18/tesla-model-s-battery-life-how-much-does-range-decrease-over-time/
steinbuch.wordpress.com/2015/01/24/tesla-model-s-battery-degradation-data/
youtube.com/watch?v=50rXYrFCQMw
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Fuck nature u fag u can just plant trees or wait for the singularity to solve everything

Its like u dont want self driving cars u r scum you fucking bozo

12 year old autistic screecher detected

His Jew overlords haven't told him to.

>Smaller plants means it's better for the environment
Sure is yummy all that lead in the water

>make a lithium battery
>can be recharged thousands of times

>dig for oil
>use it to fuel a car
>gone permanently

Calgaryfag here.

The only faggots I see driving these electric shitpiles are the cheap ass cab drivers around the city.

Guess where this mine is. Exactly, in some God-forsaken place nobody cares about. Meanwhile oil powered cars end up causing cancer and cardiovascular problems in every Western city.

>What are local vs global effects?

>bozo

you fucking retard.

That one on the top is copper mine and oil sands doesn't look like that.

>>make a lithium battery
>>can be recharged thousands of times

Try a couple hundred times before the battery only holds ~60% of the original charge.

>Petroleum is only used for gas meme

>the only cells out there are cellphone ones
is being dumb a british thing?

Because that mine is in some third world country that doesn't produce the raw materials for Pumpkin Spice Lotte, so no one gives a shit.

I grew up in Ft Mc Murray, 25 years, the hub of all Oil Sands extraction. Ask me anything.

>God-forsaken place nobody cares about

which is usually some country full of brown people.

That pic is taken during low light in autumn to intentionally make it look like Mordor. In the summer during the day it's more green than brown. Remediated sites are cleaner that before extraction (because the fucking oil is removed from the sand - duh)

How does it feel that an oil company burned half your town down for insurance money during potential bankruptcy?

not during production, but when recycling those fucking batteries is where the real shit is going down.
same shit with solar panels.
people who claim those to be "green" have no fucking clue.
as long as we don't find a viable medium to store as much energy as petrol or something that is as easy to handle
oil based energy is still the superior choice.

all those laws to "get rid of petrol/diesel cars by 2020" or similar, it's wishful thinking at best, more likely delusional politic faggots who should stick to their doctor in how to talk with children.

On paper, but if you google the results people are actually getting, it's much better than that. A combination of very good battery management, liquid cooling and only permitting the cells to be charged to 80% is resulting in the battery packs for mass market EVs drastically outlasting estimates.

Leafs and Volts from 2011 show an average of 7% range loss for example, and loss for Teslas is negligible despite them using the lithium chemistry with the shortest cycle life (if charged fully)

Moving dirt from one place to another place doesn't hurt anything.

Moving oil from underground to in the air does.

how much dip do you do per day?

The top picture you can see the damage.
The bottom picture you can't.
PS You're a fucking idiot.

There's supposed to be better materials to hold charge and to last longer

Where can I get those fancy materials bundled into a convenient cell phone battery package?

>bozo

>people who claim those to be "green" have no fucking clue.

As measured by atmospheric emissions.

>oil based energy is still the superior choice.

Can't use oil in an electric motor, which is 6 times as efficient as gas engines. Superior efficiency, superior torque, superior reliability (only 1 moving part).

The energy density of oil on paper does not translate to much difference in practice because so much is thrown away as waste heat by the engine. This is why top tier electric cars can do ~300 miles on a charge, which is comparable to a gas sedan.

...

This

I'm not talking about cellphones you daft cunt.
Got a source?

google.com/search?q=How much are ev batteries actually degrading

Pick whichever you like

Lithium mines are aesthetic though.

Have you gotten any usual diseases that correlate with growing up around such an area?

afganistan vs canada
why even comparing
desert vs forest
kill yourself OP

I need more context than just that.

As far as I am concerned, the fire started out by where the new landfill was. Through no action of the government, the fire quickly grew and encompassed a large portion of land that was to be developed for future homes/businesses. That area was behind what we call, Abasand. It quickly grew from there, getting into Beacon Hill and onto the other side of the area before jumping the Athabasca river. Having lived in that area, Abasand, for as long as I can remember. I have also been part of the people that go into the backwoods to ride motocross and mud my truck. To the point, at the time before the fire began, there were numerous people driving back there in the area of the new dump. So it was either man made through vehicle, starting camping fires or something in the landfill itself created the fire when two substances mixed together. So out of all possible three explanations, you only have to say that it was a oil company facing bankruptcy?

Which oil company? There have been many throughout the years that have owned the two major ones and the newly arrived companies all leased land father out of the oil patch in hopes of striking it rich. If you're implying that an oil company did it, why would they start at the city landfill?

I don't understand why we can't just make diesel out of plants we grow instead of this battery shit. Will it take a lot of land? Yes, but we have the land available to grow this. That shit is more efficient than the batteries and the net greenhouse emissions are zero, because all the carbon for the plants comes from the atmosphere.

There, we don't have to switch out cars and we are not fucking over the planet. Yet in every country this kind of plant farming for diesel is limited or banned.

>>make a lithium battery
>>can be recharged thousands of times from the power station that burns fossil fuels or "renewable" energy that requires even more toxic heavy metals to be mined
>Whoops, looks like it is designed only to last several hundred charges over 5-6 years
>Now have to mine and massively pollute planet for more lithium to replace expensive batteries or buy a completely new car every 5 years, no resale value on old car

Progress!

Back to thedonald retard

It consumes a lot of arable land that could be used for food, and diesel can't be used in electric motors which are desirable over gas engines on their own merits.

>That shit is more efficient than the batteries

No it isn't. Electric cars are 6 times more efficient. Did you mean "energy dense"? Because energy density on paper does not equal energy density in practice, you have to take the tremendous losses of combustion engines into account

It's not economical
You need a LOT of biomass

That's why oil is popular, it's literally the same thing except it's had MILLIONS of years to accumulate

This.

See

...

everyday, t_d is a monument to stupidity

Not a lithium mine, copper mine, chile.

God damn, how can someone be such a dumb fuck?

Lithium is reusable. Oil is not.

0

Considering the health question in regards to living near a heavily industrialized area, no. No I do not suffer from any ailment outside of the typical things children get growing up.
>Chicken pox
>Tonsillitis
>Fevers/flu's

I consider myself to be at peak health for my age and have no difficulty breathing or being active for extended periods of time. If there is anything that will afflict me, it will come in a later date in old age and it will be very hard to correlate the two, living in the industrialized area and getting diseases. I will say my father in his aging years is failing at health but that is because of his weight and choice of drugs when he was young.

>No it isn't. Electric cars are 6 times more efficient. Did you mean "energy dense"? Because energy density on paper does not equal energy density in practice, you have to take the tremendous losses of combustion engines into account
I meant efficient in terms of pollution. Batteries pollute more than that shit does.

>It's not economical
>You need a LOT of biomass
>It consumes a lot of arable land that could be used for food, and diesel can't be used in electric motors which are desirable over gas engines on their own merits.
And we have a ton of land available. Hell, most countries subsidize farmers because the prices would otherwise be so cheap that the farmers couldn't manage. We're not lacking food.

World hunger is not a production problem but a distribution problem.

assuming the power plants are away from populated areas electric cars are better with regards to pollution

Way to not commit to your argument and let fucking journalists do it for you.
Top result is fucking garbage and doesn't have any actual data, it's a goddamn marketing pitch.

I accept that good battery management habits/systems can prolong the effective lifespan of a battery, but you're still stuck with 300-450 charges before you only get 70%, and saying that "if you only charge the battery to 80% it will last longer!" means it's disingenuous to advertise the battery lifespan on 80% charges but the battery mileage on 100% charges.

We're still nowhere close to the "thousands of recharges" that the faggot I originally replied to claimed, and you're still going to see your battery degrade massively within a couple of years if you actually get a lot of mileage from your car.

>I meant efficient in terms of pollution.

That isn't what efficiency means

>Batteries pollute more than that shit does.

Not atmospheric pollution, the only kind relevant to AGW.

>And we have a ton of land available.

Only some of which is suitable for farming

>lithium mine
>for electric car batteries
Mobile phones alone use several thousand times the total amount of batteries used for electric cars.

Lithium can and is recycled due to the fact that mining new lithium for cells is incredibly expensive, even less expensive than recycling than recycling lead acid batteries at this point.
The vast majority of the bandwaggoners on Sup Forums are all underagefags with no understanding of electronic engineering, so none of your dumb shit surprises me.

>Germany
Kys please. I'm begging you.
Germans are the fucking worst.

>Top result is fucking garbage and doesn't have any actual data, it's a goddamn marketing pitch.

Then move on to another one.

>but you're still stuck with 300-450 charges before you only get 70%

That's not true. Teslas for example lose 23 miles of range for every 100,000 miles driven.

>and saying that "if you only charge the battery to 80% it will last longer!" means it's disingenuous to advertise the battery lifespan on 80% charges but the battery mileage on 100% charges.

Most EVs don't allow you to charge pase 80% unless you manually select the option. Teslas don't, period.

>and you're still going to see your battery degrade massively within a couple of years if you actually get a lot of mileage from your car.

Depends how you quantify "massively". 23 miles lost per 100,000 driven seems good to me.

We will soon switch to the blue battery

>Lithium can and is recycled due to the fact that mining new lithium for cells is incredibly expensive, even less expensive than recycling than recycling lead acid batteries at this point.
>The vast majority of the bandwaggoners on Sup Forums are all underagefags with no understanding of electronic engineering, so none of your dumb shit surprises me.

waste-management-world.com/a/1-the-lithium-battery-recycling-challenge

>Recycled lithium is as much as five times the cost of lithium produced from the least costly brine based process. It is not competitive for recycling companies to extract lithium from slag, or competitive for the OEMs to buy at higher price points from recycling companies.

>That isn't what efficiency means
Efficiency means how effective something is compared to something else. In this case it was clearly about how much it would pollute.

>Not atmospheric pollution, the only kind relevant to AGW.
It absolutely does.

>Only some of which is suitable for farming
We can grow all kinds of plants in conditions we normally wouldn't if we're going for biomass rather than something a human is going to consume.

No country is willing to even try that, which leads me to believe that there's significant pushback against it. Just like the electric cars were killed by oil companies in the past once.

The emission from fossil fuels you idiot.

>That's not true. Teslas for example lose 23 miles of range for every 100,000 miles driven.

Link me some data to back up your claim then, because every expert source claims otherwise.
If you're only discharging your battery to 50% before recharging, and you're never recharging it above 80%, then I say again that it is disingenuous to advertise the mileage of a 100% charge.
And Tesla is not the only EV in the world.

syncrude and suncor are really the only ones still strip mining and all the land is reclaimed after they're done. Most of the oil sands is going to SAGD and looks like this

And unrecycled lithium batteries can be a danger to the environment. Only 5% of lithium batteries get recycled in the EU.

>Efficiency means how effective something is compared to something else

No it doesn't. The dictionary definition is "the ratio of the useful work performed by a machine or in a process to the total energy expended or heat taken in." It refers specifically to how wasteful (or not) something is.

>It absolutely does.

The waste products from lithium mining for the most part are easy to physically isolate. The atmospheric pollution is negligible compared to oil extraction and refinement.

>We can grow all kinds of plants in conditions we normally wouldn't if we're going for biomass rather than something a human is going to consume.

I can give you this argument just to be done with it, and you can have the satisfaction of winning, but the future is still going to play out the same way. Electric transport is taking over, words on the internet won't stop it.

this is just retarded

only one of those causes earthquakes- actually creates fucking natural disasters for profit

That's not what I'm getting. I'm getting people complaining that their battery died quickly over the weekend (rather than fairly gradually like they are used to), then going ballistic when I tell them a replacement battery would cost thousands. People don't seem to realise that an electric car puts a lot more strain on the battery which is why they never last as long as they would in a proper car. It's one of the reason why I think that government ban on normal cars in 2040 is downright retarded.

gas2.org/2015/02/20/tesla-loss-battery-range-less-feared/
electrek.co/2016/11/01/tesla-battery-degradation/
teslacentral.com/worried-about-tesla-battery-degradation-its-23-miles-every-100000-driven
venturebeat.com/2015/02/18/tesla-model-s-battery-life-how-much-does-range-decrease-over-time/
steinbuch.wordpress.com/2015/01/24/tesla-model-s-battery-degradation-data/

>If you're only discharging your battery to 50% before recharging

I didn't say that. You just made that up.

>And Tesla is not the only EV in the world.

I drive a 2011 Volt. It still does 35 miles on electric mode.

That's not going to take away farm subsidies, and it's not going to improve biomass

You need to watch a YouTube video of the process and how much energy and time is put in to extract such little fuel, while oil is already there

>Not atmospheric pollution
For the kind of kilowatts you're advocating in electric engines, it most certainly does if that power grid that charges your battery in the first place isn't powered by clean energy.

I'm more concerned about nuclear plants not being pushed more as opposed to electric cara by 20XX bills

And modern technology had greatly reduced your and your mother's chances of dying when you were born, and helped you get through the illnesses, especially tonsillitis, assuming your tonsils were removed. So modern technology seems to have a positive impact overall.

>For the kind of kilowatts you're advocating in electric engines, it most certainly does if that power grid that charges your battery in the first place isn't powered by clean energy.

The grid is not 100% fossil fuel. Gas powered cars run on 100% fossil fuel. Even without the 6x efficiency advantage, EVs would be cleaner.

>I didn't say that. You just made that up.

It's from the first fucking source that you linked jesus christ do you even read this shit you post or do you just google it and grab the one with the headline that sounds best?

So the way you're measuring battery degradation in Tesla cars is by 100% charging your Tesla battery (which you said Tesla's couldn't do) and then letting the onboard computer calculate how much range is left. So it's not actual empirical observations on how far the car goes or how much power the battery holds, it's a model.

>Even though this is mostly a reliable method, sometimes the computer in the car can’t accurately estimate how much energy the battery holds and might display an inaccurate range number.

woops

>posts an article from 2011
The process of recycling lithium is a lot cheaper now because there's an actual effort to create infrastructure for recycling them.
The simplest solution is electrolysis which is the same solution for refining most metals. You react the lithium with something so it doesn't burn when it comes into contact with water, and run current through that water to draw the lithium in much the same way other metals are refined.

>No it doesn't. The dictionary definition is "the ratio of the useful work performed by a machine or in a process to the total energy expended or heat taken in." It refers specifically to how wasteful (or not) something is.
That's the technical term. It's not the one used in common parlance.

>The waste products from lithium mining for the most part are easy to physically isolate. The atmospheric pollution is negligible compared to oil extraction and refinement.
The waste product of lithium is the fact that we have 95% of all lithium batteries not being recycled. Lithium batteries left into the environment are dangerous.

>Electric transport is taking over, words on the internet won't stop it.
I don't disagree. What I disagree on is how we're going to get that electricity into the machines. I don't think it's definitively settled that we're going to be using lithium batteries to store it for vehicles.

>It's from the first fucking source that you linked jesus christ do you even read this shit you post or do you just google it and grab the one with the headline that sounds best?

That source was wrong, then. Discharging past 50% does not meaningfully impede lifespan of lithium batteries. They are uniquely (compared to lead acid anyways) deep discharge tolerant.

>So the way you're measuring battery degradation in Tesla cars is by 100% charging your Tesla battery (which you said Tesla's couldn't do)

Not that they are physically incapable, but that software limits it, which is true. Over the air updates can permit 100% charging, something done recently for people fleeing hurricane Irma.

>woops

That doesn't really matter when you have that much range, and can fast charge in 30 minutes.

>That's the technical term. It's not the one used in common parlance.

i.e. dumbspeak

>The waste product of lithium is the fact that we have 95% of all lithium batteries not being recycled. Lithium batteries left into the environment are dangerous.

The solution is more recycling then, not a return to internal combustion

>I don't disagree. What I disagree on is how we're going to get that electricity into the machines. I don't think it's definitively settled that we're going to be using lithium batteries to store it for vehicles.

I personally don't care how the energy is stored. Lithium is just what's available and mature right now. Lots of exciting chemistries close to market, like dual carbon, metal air and sodium glass. We'll see which one comes out on top.

it's all a big fucking joke. They have to use Lithium because Nickel-Metal hydride is patented or some shit.

And it would take too long and too many court battles to get all the patents to make NiMH electric cars or some shit.

Nickel is more toxic and produces more emissions to make batteries out of because you need to smelt it, lithium is much softer and can be hydraulically extruded into shape

The Ovionic NIMH patent buyout by Chevron delayed mass market electric cars but only by ~20 years.

>making plant food is bad for the environment
yeah no

Or we can just wait for graphmeme.

That lithium battery will need to be changed eventually. Not something that can be recycled; superbad for the environment.

the patent for one NiMH battery "arrangement" expires in August 2018.

In 2019, you might see some cheap electric car.

Also used for soap, pharmaceuticals, make up, paint, plastic, for lubrication, etc.
About the only resource used more than oil is water.

>Not something that can be recycled

What? Yes it can. But before that it gets reused as home solar energy storage. That's where Power Wall cells come from.

same is said for normal cars? Why do you care

I live in a small town here in mid-west America. There are a few that drives electric cars but most don't. Mostly because electric cars don't have the power needed for most work around out area. But also only the rich gay wads drive them here.

What gets me is that if we need to find a new fuel source, why not hydrogen? Years ago, a guy out east made a new way to store hydrogen and the government (and the big 3 auto manufactures) shut him down immediately. Which goes to show you that it's really about the money and less about anything else.

But other than that, I LOVE my 74' Corvette.

Only 2% of a battery is lithium. Retards.

>why not hydrogen?

Fuel cells are more expensive than 300 mile battery packs and wear out faster, hydrogen leaks out of anything you try to keep it in (a typical hydrogen sedan would go from full to empty if left sitting for a month) and hydrogen is much less economical to produce by electrolysis than by splitting it out of natural gas.

>Years ago, a guy out east made a new way to store hydrogen and the government (and the big 3 auto manufactures) shut him down immediately.

Probably this didn't happen. If you go looking for a source it will turn out to be another water powered car/hho investment scam. If you mean Stan Meyer, he died of cerebral aneurysm.

There have been a long string of "water powered car" and "HHO" inventors after him. None have ever brought any product to market. Is this because of the government in every case? Or because the tech does not work, and if they say it's the government keeping them down, gullible rubes will keep giving them investment money for decades?

Hydrogen also has the issue of having little infrastructure. There are only a handful of fueling stations that supply it, to actually make it viable, you need to make it available everywhere you can get gasoline products.

A few of the manufacturers actually have a some good hydrogen cars out in production already, But you can only buy or use them in areas like san Fransisco that have a hydrogen pump.

Because this strip mining meme is bullshit. Also, too much money invested in Gubmint Motors developing (or at least attempting to develop) electric cars that work without exploding.

Hydrogen is not a fuel source. It is a fuel store, like a battery but you can be forgiven for not understanding that because the electric car idiots don't understand that either.

Gas cars don't ever explode?

what the FUCK did you call me you little asshole

Oil accounts for 85% of the world's energy.
Solar panels don't have that long ofva shelf life, like you said, and are made of hazardous materials that can't be recycled. Still don't generate power on cloudy days or at night, so useless in some areas of the world.
Wind turbines don't generate electricity half the time; only 40% efficient when working. Lot of oil used to lubricate the turbine...and they catch fire a lot. Blades fall out pretty frequently, too, so they really can't be used in a heavily populated area.
Nuclear is super expensive to start and then has to be maintained 100's of years after it's taken offline when the plant becomes obsolete. One of the first nuclear plants to be online in Britain that was decommissioned after 50 years of service will have to be manned for the next 250+ years to ensure a meltdown won't occur.
Not saying advanced won't happen or should be researched, but any improvements will require oil to make the materials.
Oil industry is what drives the American economy, also. When we're the #1 producer, like we are now, it's great for everyone.

>but you can be forgiven for not understanding that because the electric car idiots don't understand that either.

??? Yes I do. What's your problem?

Batteries are recyclable.

lithium can be recycled.

we cant recycle oil.

>Russia
10.5
>Saudi Arabia
10
>United States
9.2
>Iraq
4.3
>China
4.1
>Canada
3.8
>Iran
3.5
>UAE
2.7
>Kuwait
2.5
>Venezuela
2.4

This is not a lithium mine, this is an open pot copper mine. Lithium is extracted from brine typically.

Source: I'm a geologist

you dumb cunt , this is how its mined fuck head youtube.com/watch?v=50rXYrFCQMw