EV’s not all the eco according to Volvo

[stealthn]

For those who haven’t seen or heard, Volvo did a full study on their XC40 Ice and the XC40 EV to compare their carbon footprint.
I was shocked when I read it as I knew the EV’s would start out at a loss with today’s mining, refining and manufacturing batteries (it will get better), but I had no idea!

Some highlights: in their lifetime the ICE will produce 58 Tonnes of CO2, the EV 54 Tonnes. The break even point where the EV will match the ICE vehicle then be “greener” 146,000 KMs or 90,000 miles!

I’ll stick to gas ��

Full article: https://www.volvocars.com/images/v/-/media/project/contentplatform/data/media/my23/xc40-electric-light/volvo-cars-LCA-report-xc40.pdf

[KNS]

These stories always seem to get buried and little publicized.

[svandamme]

Technically 90000 miles isn't an big milage for a modern car.

Anything over 90000 miles (which is bound to happen with most cars that aren't crashed) and the EV is greener.


So not sure how that argument in the title makes sense?
Nobody said the ROI had to be at 0km of the car's life. That wouldn't be reasonable at all.

[oldE]

Hmmm. Since we tend to run our vehicles 300-400,000km, maybe we should make the switch.

One of my biggest concerns is brakes. With regen, it seems the brakes on evs are barely used. I don't think this would be a problem for folks in non- corrosive climes, but around here the rear discs almost always need replacing first. Why? Because they are barely used and seize.

Best
Les

[berettafan]

We also cannot forget the generation capacity of the US and ROW and as well the political impact of handing China the keys to our energy supply.

[Crowbob]

Originally Posted by svandamme

Technically 90000 miles isn't an big milage for a modern car.

Anything over 90000 miles (which is bound to happen with most cars that aren't crashed) and the EV is greener.


So not sure how that argument in the title makes sense?
Nobody said the ROI had to be at 0km of the car's life. That wouldn't be reasonable at all.

I didn’t read the article but I assume it’s a study only of the carbon ROI. As far as dollar costs go, I wonder what the added cost per vehicle over it’s lifespan is.

[Nickshu]

Since this study was done in Europe where they have a lot cleaner electricity than we do (lots of nuclear) I would guess that break even number is way higher in the USA, like 150K.

Given that very few Americans keep cars more than 80-90K miles this is a landmark finding. The tech is always changing and improving, but in the USA we are WAY behind on building any infrastructure to make electric cars viable. It's not the charging stations, it's how we make power. We need to be building like 20 nuclear plants like 20 years ago.

[stealthn]

All good points, one other one that hasn’t been discussed is the end of life for the batteries. You cannot just recycle them so I would assume the environmental impact (not just carbon) is a little different.

[svandamme]

Originally Posted by Nickshu

Given that very few Americans keep cars more than 80-90K miles this is a landmark finding.

So those cars few americans keep more then 80-90k miles, nobody buys em second hand and they all go to the scrapper after that??

Because that's the only case it would be relevant in this discussion, no?

[Nickshu]

Originally Posted by svandamme

So those cars few americans keep more then 80-90k miles, nobody buys em second hand and they all go to the scrapper after that??

Because that's the only case it would be relevant in this discussion, no?

Interesting point. But that person owned a car before buying the used Ev, so unless you bought new, kept it as one owner per car, then ran it through the break even point wouldn't the clock startover at change of ownership (unless the buyer at 90K was a brand new driver, having never owned car before)?

[Bob Kontak]

Originally Posted by Nickshu

Given that very few Americans keep cars more than 80-90K miles this is a landmark finding.

So most Americans say "That car that I'm still paying for has 80k miles, time to unload it"?

Even if they did do that, the green aspect would carry into the future with subsequent owners.

Edit: Never mind. :-)

[PorscheGAL]

Just a glance but I didn't see it mention things like fluids in ICE cars-oil, transmission fluid, radiator and the carbon footprint for those.

I will be interested to see as Lead batteries start to be used in place of Lithium Ion, will that change the carbon footprint.

Personally, I don't drive an EV for the carbon footprint but I do think making the production of the car and energy, in general, more environmentally friendly is a noble goal and studies like this may help with that.

[svandamme]

Originally Posted by Nickshu

Interesting point. But that person owned a car before buying the used Ev, so unless you bought new, kept it as one owner per car, then ran it through the break even point wouldn't the clock startover at change of ownership (unless the buyer at 90K was a brand new driver, having never owned car before)?

the comparison was not per owner, but per car.
Any gains in ecofriendlyness carries forward into the 2nd hand market just the same.

[berettafan]

Originally Posted by svandamme

So those cars few americans keep more then 80-90k miles, nobody buys em second hand and they all go to the scrapper after that??

If we're talking modern volvos i think the answer is yes.

[Superman]

This is why I converted all my cars to fusion power.

[Steve Carlton]

The ICE was rated at 58 tonnes over 200,000 kms (124,000 miles, basically). The comparison average CO2 emissions were 27 (wind), 45 (European Union), and 54 (worldwide) tonnes, depending on how the electricity to charge them was generated.

I'd be curious what the US average is, and I'd expect that over time the power sourcing would be greener. Also, the cars are going to go more than 124,000 miles, although the battery packs will need replacement sooner or later (as do engines and transmissions on ICE cars).

For me, charging my EV costs about 20% of what an equivalent distance costs burning gasoline. And I get to charge the car in my garage. The service interval is every 20,000 miles and it's well known EVs cost less to maintain than gas cars. A lot of these EVs are disproportionately fast for their price. Smooth and quiet is usually a bonus, too.

It's a relatively new technology and I expect it will improve. Let's say we get solid state batteries that are greener to build and go 1,000 miles on a charge that takes 20 minutes. I think we're heading there in the next 10-20 years.

[aschen]

there is a semi famous study, too lazy to find on google but the C02 break even point between a tesla model S and a prius prime is something like 70k miles. Not all that suprising though most modern cars, even teslas do alot more than 70k miles in their lifecycle.

its no major conspiracy, people are aware, in general electric cars have a net bennifit over even the most frugal IC cars.

Of course the prius costs 1/3 the tesla to buy, 1/billionth to own, and should be a viable solution for most families. Most tesla owners (all actually) I know have a second road trip car. Toyota has been right all along the sensible engineering solution is hybrid. People think they are too cool for hybrid, like that generic cuv or sedan is any cooler.

[Mahler9th]

It is not all about near term environmental gains...

The future is fast approaching, and every major automaker and tier one supplier has been on the "future" program for a long time now.

It will be interesting to observe the pace of infrastructure change as compared to the adoption of EV and semi-EV powered vehicles in product families and by consumers.

The big oil companies have all been looking at the future for a long time.

I have a friend that runs a uranium company-- I bet they have been looking at the future for a couple of decades.

Then there is this:

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/commonwealth-fusion-systems-raises-1-8-billion-in-funding-to-commercialize-fusion-energy-301434560.html

$1.8B series B aint no joke.

It's gonna keep coming faster and faster now... approaching and/or surpassing the exponential...

[Rtrorkt]

for consideration

[cabmandone]

Originally Posted by svandamme

Technically 90000 miles isn't an big milage for a modern car.

Anything over 90000 miles (which is bound to happen with most cars that aren't crashed) and the EV is greener.


So not sure how that argument in the title makes sense?
Nobody said the ROI had to be at 0km of the car's life. That wouldn't be reasonable at all.

I don't believe it's a matter of that being a lot of miles. I have 180K on one of my vehicles and a few others with over 100K. It's a matter that for the average person, that's nearly 8 years of driving before you see the break even point and the EV becomes the greener option. I don't know how many people keep a car for 8 years. I think we're a rare breed that does.

Originally Posted by svandamme

the comparison was not per owner, but per car.
Any gains in ecofriendlyness carries forward into the 2nd hand market just the same.

But if the battery is the primary concern, and the battery requires being replaced once it goes to the next owner, doesn't that begin the cycle again? I honestly don't know how long the batteries last but I know that they aren't a lifetime part.