So, we have another Government initiative on the way

Marcusm

BoatMad wrote: »

It should be Pointed out that the HSE took the court initiative on their own and only informed noonan after the fact. It is true however that once informed he did nothing to curtail the excesses of the HSE. ( which has a history of very aggressive court actions )

He did state subsequently that the matter was incorrectly handled.

To suggest however that this is assiciatec with irrationality with diesel is nonsensical

I see no issue with current gov policy on diesel. It's consistent with the importance of the transport m

The HSE wasn't established until 10 years later!

You mean the Dept of Health of which he was the minister.

The current policy encourages consumer use of diesel; it's a short sighted position. Transport diesel could have duty rebated if necessary. I'm simply pointing other that even 20 years ago he was far from infallible and frankly cloth eared. You can see it as group think of the minister becoming a prisoner of the civil service and losing the ability to sit back and challenge orthodoxy.

ABC101

cros13 wrote: »

Well your numbers are accurate. But you're neglecting three points:

1. EVs are between three and five times more efficient than combustion vehicles. Thermal efficiency of the latest Prius for example is only 40% (advertised) and that's with heat recovery from the exhaust and regen braking and an electric motor helping, whereas you'd struggle to find an EV with an entire system efficiency (charger, battery, inverter, motor) of less than 80-90%.

2. The power station has room for multiple layers of heat recovery and isn't impacted by weight considerations either. So some combined-cycle plants can hit 60% thermal efficiency.

3. EVs don't inherently "require carbon to be burnt". They are neutral as to where the electricity that charges them comes from. Whether that's a gas combined cycle plant or an an ould lad on a exercise bike running a dynamo. While there is carbon in the grid fuel mix at the moment that's not necessarily always going to be the case. And as you reduce the carbon intensity of the grid every connected car is immediately impacted, no matter how old.

Another point is while ~450g/kWh is the correct average for the 24 hour grid mix, most EV charging is done during nightsaver hours when the average is around 100g/kWh lower.

It's also worth noting that you can't sue that figure to compare EVs to combustion vehicles because the g/100km advertised for the combustion vehicles don't include transport and refining emissions and losses for the fuel (and those can be several kilograms per liter in addition to the carbon content of the fuel), only the local emissions.

I'm sure I left out many points, but it's not possible to cover all points in a simple blog here just using text etc.


No system is 100% efficient, whether it be mechanical or electrical, there will always be losses.

However I'm a bit surprised over your figures for efficiency of EV's. The US Dept of Energy are stating around 59 to 62% efficiency.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/evtech.shtml

Another chap here stating Well to Wheel efficiency of 30% for a EV.

http://https://matter2energy.wordpress.com/2013/02/22/wells-to-wheels-electric-car-efficiency/

There is a matter of efficiency in getting a barrel of oil out of the ground and refining it to a litre of fuel at the forecourt station. That's why VLCC's are used to ship crude oil efficiently.

But so too is there efficiency losses in a electrical transmission grid, corona, iron, hysteresis losses, heat losses, joule losses, then add on distribution losses which increase at lower voltages.

Still better than a ICE I agree, but there are efficiency losses in all systems.

If you want a Zero Co2 intensity for Ireland, that could very easily be achieved by building one large power station (5 or 6 GW) outside Ireland ( Wales or France) and importing the electricity via a electrical link.

TBi

ABC101 wrote: »

There is a matter of efficiency in getting a barrel of oil out of the ground and refining it to a litre of fuel at the forecourt station. That's why VLCC's are used to ship crude oil efficiently.

But so too is there efficiency losses in a electrical transmission grid, corona, iron, hysteresis losses, heat losses, joule losses, then add on distribution losses which increase at lower voltages.

It takes a lot of energy/electricity to refine crude oil into petrol. So all the efficiency losses you mention regarding electricity apply to ICE cars too.

n97 mini

I had a look at this the other day while charging my car and 51% was coming from renewables, i.e. wind mostly (not sure if hydro is part of renewables). That's something that ICE cars can't compete with!

http://smartgriddashboard.eirgrid.com/

ABC101

ABC101 wrote: »

In fairness a rapid hike on diesel prices would be unfair, if the Govt wish to phase out diesel cars then it should be done on a gradual basis i.e. 5 years etc to reach parity with petrol.

While diesel cars can be more economic than petrol, they have a higher carbon density, so emit more Co2 / litre than petrol, 2.6 Kg Co2 / Lt diesel vrs 2.3 Kg Co2 / lt petrol.

EV's are most probably the future, but they too require carbon to be burnt to make electricity, Ireland's Co2 intensity in gm/ Kwhr is around 457 average / year. Sometimes lower / higher.

http://statistics.seai.ie/chart.php?ref=TRA04

Wind generation is producing about 31% atm...

http://smartgriddashboard.eirgrid.com/

I think that eirgrid dashboard is really cool!!

Leaf at indicated 100 km/h uses around 17 kWh/100 km. With the charger inefficiency, say 19 kWh/100 km. That's:

19 kWh x 457 g/kWh / 100 km = ~87 g/km

..which is alright but not great compared to a small diesel car which would need to archive 3.8 l/100km to reach the same.

It just goes to show that for the BEVs to really be environmentally friendly the grid needs massive investments in clean energy.

Alf Veedersane

There's going to need to be an investment in RE anyway because even with the increased contribution from renewables in 2015, the overall electricity consumption was even greater so the carbon intensity of electricity increased by 2.5% to 467.5 g CO2/kWh.

That said, there is certainly a large benefit in terms of local air quality.

TBi

TBi wrote: »

It takes a lot of energy/electricity to refine crude oil into petrol. So all the efficiency losses you mention regarding electricity apply to ICE cars too.

No to mention the extraction of oil from the ground and the transportation to the refinery and from refinery to pump.

This doesn't even include the energy consumed in the exploration of oil wells.

Alf Veedersane

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

There's going to need to be an investment in RE anyway because even with the increased contribution from renewables in 2015, the overall electricity consumption was even greater so the carbon intensity of electricity increased by 2.5% to 467.5 g CO2/kWh.

That said, there is certainly a large benefit in terms of local air quality.

Another great way to reduce air pollution is to completely ban the sale and burning of smokey fuels for heating, for instance, coal, turf, briquettes with the exception perhaps of wood, not that we have many trees in Ireland.....

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

No to mention the extraction of oil from the ground and the transportation to the refinery and from refinery to pump.

This doesn't even include the energy consumed in the exploration of oil wells.

I didn't mention that earlier as I'd like to know what's the energy efficiency of the fuel delivery to the power grid. Their fuel does not magically appear in the plants either (unless it's wind or non-pumped hydro).

samih

samih wrote: »

Leaf at indicated 100 km/h uses around 17 kWh/100 km. With the charger inefficiency, say 19 kWh/100 km. That's:

19 kWh x 457 g/kWh / 100 km = ~87 g/km

..which is alright but not great compared to a small diesel car which would need to archive 3.8 l/100km to reach the same.

It just goes to show that for the BEVs to really be environmentally friendly the grid needs massive investments in clean energy.

Don't forget most cars emissions are completely underrated..... Probably by 20-30% or more, but never mind the Co2, the stuff that causes cancer and actual damage to the environment which was the focus of the VW scandal is what worries me the most and the fact when we pay tax we pay tax which isn't based on pollution what so ever !

samih

samih wrote: »

I didn't mention that earlier as I'd like to know what's the energy efficiency of the fuel delivery to the power grid. Their fuel does not magically appear in the plants either (unless it's wind or non-pumped hydro).

Who knows ? but at least we're adding more wind power and soon hopefully solar PV. Unfortunately our energy consumption is also growing.

Imagine transport on the grid ? that's probably some TW hrs worth of electricity extra required to be added to the grid. Mind boggling really. I can;t see most of that come from renewable sources. Nuclear........

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Don't forget most cars emissions are completely underrated..... Probably by 20-30% or more, but never mind the Co2, the stuff that causes cancer and actual damage to the environment which was the focus of the VW scandal is what worries me the most and the fact when we pay tax we pay tax which isn't based on pollution what so ever !

True, the emissions are better managed at grid level where generation can be done outside cities than at individual car level. Unfortunately taxation is measured by g/km of CO2 at the moment and I'd say many/all of the current diesel cars could return 3.8 l/100 km at indicated 100 km/h on motorway. Costwise electric cars wins hands down but not by carbon dioxide emissions per kilometer.

grogi

samih wrote: »

True, the emissions are better managed at grid level where generation can be done outside cities than at individual car level. Unfortunately taxation is measured by g/km of CO2 at the moment and I'd say many/all of the current diesel cars could return 3.8 l/100 km at indicated 100 km/h on motorway. Costwise electric cars wins hands down but not by carbon dioxide emissions per kilometer.

I did a calculation a couple weeks ago - depending on the source of electricity the Leaf generates up to 200g/km of CO2. A modern diesel realistically generates around 120-140g/km at the pipe...

samih

samih wrote: »

True, the emissions are better managed at grid level where generation can be done outside cities than at individual car level. Unfortunately taxation is measured by g/km of CO2 at the moment and I'd say many/all of the current diesel cars could return 3.8 l/100 km at indicated 100 km/h on motorway. Costwise electric cars wins hands down but not by carbon dioxide emissions per kilometer.

It's not what diesel cars do on the motorway that counts, it's what they do combined per tank or the lifetime of the car.

Most cars consumption go up greatly in city and town driving, electrics are the complete opposite but they're still many times more efficient over all. Though the faster you drive in an ICE car the more energy you will consume also.

An ICE car probably would do no more than 12 Kms on the energy available to a Nissan Leaf 24 Kwh for instance.

TBi

samih wrote: »

Costwise electric cars wins hands down but not by carbon dioxide emissions per kilometer.

Again you haven't included the co2 emissions needed to get that 3.9l/100 km of fuel into the car.

TBi

TBi wrote: »

Again you haven't included the co2 emissions needed to get that 3.9l/100 km of fuel into the car.

True, and that is what I said earlier. I don't think Irish power grid has published their true emissions either.

What I said is that the Irish power grid (compared to Norway for example) needs some massive work going forward!

TBi

Bobby explains it better than I.

grogi

grogi wrote: »

I did a calculation a couple weeks ago - depending on the source of electricity the Leaf generates up to 200g/km of CO2. A modern diesel realistically generates around 120-140g/km at the pipe...

You could probably add about 30% to that for a modern diesel since the published figures are meaningless.

I'd like to know the actual pollution emissions emitted from vehicles and power stations not Co2.

IF people are worried about Co2, then they should lobby our Government and Farmers to re-plant our natural forest which is long gone, Farmers greatly over produce in this country and we are one of the if not "the" most de-forested lands in all of continental Europe but because we're so used to it most people don't notice or care and anything that is planted is pine rubbish for industry.

Most of our electricity comes from Gas, but it's still cool to watch some days where 20-55% comes from wind. This greatly reduces Particulate matter and Nox emissions.

Ireland has a lot of old diesels on the road and particularly commercial vehicles these should be taken off the road or converted to Gas.

ABC101

For the record I am not attempting to upset people's enthusiasm for EV's.
I don't rate Tesla motors, not because of the car or the idea, but the company is in a unsustainable position (IMO) and its share price defies gravity. A lot of investors are going to get burnt there. When other automobile makers shift their attention seriously to EV technology Tesla will have to compete on price grounds and that is when serious problems will crop up.
This is already happening with the Chevrolet Bolt, which has a CD of 0.34, but is still judged to be efficient as a EV with a CD of 0.21, why, because at city commuting speeds (50kph and less) air resistance is much less of an issue. In addition the Chevy Bolt has a Permanent Magnet motor as distinct from a normal induction motor. So the efficiency gain in the type of motor used helped offset the air resistance to the shape of the body. Serious competition is shaping up.
Now the Nissan Leaf..... in my opinion.... is probably one of the best cars ever produced. Not only does it look cool... it is cool and for city driving is almost perfect. Hopefully the technology will continue to get better and better, especially with respect to range. 200 mile range would be a game changer, 300 miles a TOTAL game changer.
Japan is an engineering nation, where Engineers are looked up to and in a sense honored. I'm not at all surprised that it was Japan who produced the Prius and the Leaf. I've said it before and I'll say it again... "You cannot beat the Japs", they really are very good at engineering, from motorbikes, to cars, cameras, walkmans, etc etc.
WRT Co2 intensity, our energy mix is what it is for various reasons. Yes I would like to see Moneypoint switching over to NG and keeping coal as a back up, but that is not going to happen.
Renewable energy can and does make up 50% (sometimes slightly more) of the mix, but again it is the Co2 intensity which is the end result which counts. That number is crunched by eirgrid and we have to trust that it is correct.
But we have to use the equipment / system we currently have, and we should not be deluding ourselves with how good electricity is and how bad ICE are. There are good and bad in both systems, efficiency losses in both etc.
Well done to those who have taken the plunge in running a Leaf / EV, that takes courage and conviction to put your money where your mouth is and of course it does in the end benefit humanity by reducing our Co2 emissions.

ABC101

TBi wrote: »

samih wrote: »

Costwise electric cars wins hands down but not by carbon dioxide emissions per kilometer.

Again you haven't included the co2 emissions needed to get that 3.9l/100 km of fuel into the car.

You have not included the Co2 emissions to get the lithium out of the ground and into the battery.
To what level are we going to take this argument to?

TBi

ABC101 wrote: »

You have not included the Co2 emissions to get the lithium out of the ground and into the battery.
To what level are we going to take this argument to?

That's a one time cost. Only when making the car. I'm arguing about the CO2 emissions while running a car. So basically how much CO2 is generated driving an EV vs driving an ICE.

The user posted that leccy takes x amount of CO2 to make but didn't factor that CO2 into the making of petrol/diesel.

ABC101

Anybody any thoughts on the Nissan xStorage idea? 4.2KwHr battery array.
I think it is a great idea, but the maths don't stack up (IMO). Anybody willing to suggest otherwise?

Jesus people are talking like Co2 is pollution, unreal. Is that people's only concern, really ?

TBi

TBi wrote: »

Bobby explains it better than I.

I have listened to that before I think and I agree. However, in case of oil fired power plant the oil for it needs to be extracted transported and refined similarly to road fuels. Massive volume of coal needs to be dug out shipped etc. increasing the true value for the grid output too. There there is peat and the planned import of Canadian timber to be burned in some plant in the west, again increasing the true CO2 output of the power grid.

Natural gas is cleaner than other fossils not only by the fact that it produces less CO2 per volume but also that it doesn't actually need refining to be useful.

As Ireland does not really do combined heat and power generation probably 50 percent of the energy of fuels is lost as a heat in the power plants which is crazy. The energy grid needs to do better than that.

ABC101

TBi wrote: »

ABC101 wrote: »

You have not included the Co2 emissions to get the lithium out of the ground and into the battery.
To what level are we going to take this argument to?

That's a one time cost. Only when making the car. I'm arguing about the CO2 emissions while running a car. So basically how much CO2 is generated driving an EV vs driving an ICE.

The user posted that leccy takes x amount of CO2 to make but didn't factor that CO2 into the making of petrol/diesel.

Yes... I agree with you, but to produce X Co2 to make Y MwHr etc, we also have to import carbon fuels either via ship (coal + oil) or by Gas pipeline etc. A lot of Europe's gas is piped from Russia etc. What is the cost there?
I think we are getting into silly territory by trying to go to the 29th level of forensic investigation in the discussion of EV vrs ICE.
I doubt anybody on this forum has the info / access to the info for cost comparisons WRT importing carbon into Ireland. Does anybody really know accurately the real Co2 cost in pumping X Million Btu or Y M SCuffs from Russia to Ireland?
I would rather leave that out of the discussion, just work on what we can reasonably work with given the numbers that we can get from SEAI, Eirgrid, and of course our own experience with charging up an EV (which members here are sharing) and comparing it with our experience of running a ICE car.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Jesus people are talking like Co2 is pollution, unreal. Is that people's only concern, really ?

It's not a poison as such but does appear to have an effect to the way the Earth's systems works. As most of the energy comes from fossil fuel this CO2/kWh of energy is a good measurement for efficiency of the power generation. There is a direct cost involved. Less kilos of fuel used to cover our need the less expensive it will be. Doubly so when each kilo of carbon dioxide is also taxed.

ABC101

Deleted User wrote: »

Jesus people are talking like Co2 is pollution, unreal. Is that people's only concern, really ?

Acidification of the oceans?

While Co2 may not be directly classed as a pollutant (humans exhale it, plants inhale it), it is of major concern to all about the increasing concentrations of Co2 in the atmosphere, more than 400ppm now!

Deforestation should be much more of a concern ! Ireland being a major offender in deforestation, Ireland's a place other countries should look at when they want to know what total deforestation looks like.

josip

Deleted User wrote: »

Deforestation should be much more of a concern ! Ireland being a major offender in deforestation, Ireland's a place other countries should look at when they want to know what total deforestation looks like.

OT, but Ireland's forestation trajectory in the last 130 years has been in the right direction.
You can't criticise the modern day Republic of Ireland for the deforestation wrought by the colonial sheep farmers.
(You could criticise them for the species of trees subsequently predominantly planted)
http://www.rohanlon.org/downloads/O'Hanlon%20Forestry%20Source%20June%202012.pdf

Soarer

This thread is appalling. I'm sure most of this could be done via pm.