Oopsie.. electric cars may not be so enviro-friendly

[westwall]

Now that the kook has been dispatched, let's get back on topic.

Yesterday the SF Chronicle reported "Google banking on Solar", see:

Google invests $280 million to spur home solar

They are teamed up with SolarCity and will finance the installation of solar panels on 8,000 to 9,500 homes in the Bay Area.

And of course this:

Tesla to Sell Electric Model X in 2013, Make as Many as 15,000

The echo chamber will continue to offer nothing but reactionary bullshit as innovative entrepreneurs develop and market 'smart' cars, cars which after an initial investment protect the environment and begin to reduce our addiction to oil - something even George W. Bush acknowledged.

And the mass exodus of "green jobs" continues to China. Hundreds of millions of dollars going to China. That money was supposed to stay here in the US, but no. The government wonks couldn't be bothered to put a clause in the contract for the money that the jobs had to stay here. Nope, that would have been smart. We have no problem with innovation. But our money keeps magiacally going overseas. That we have a problem with.

And Tesla selling 15,000 luxury EV's to the rich and famous is a fatuous argument. Toyota sells 3,000 of it's more popular vehicles A MONTH! That is multiple lines with sales of over 40,000 per year. A couple of their lines sell 15,000 per month. I thought the goal was to sell EV's to the masses? I thought the goal was to build up an entire new infrastructure that would wean us off of fossil fuels....here's a hint 15,000 vehicles ain't gonna cut it.


"Aided by at least $43 million in assistance from the government of Massachusetts and an innovative solar energy technology, Evergreen Solar emerged in the last three years as the third-largest maker of solar panels in the United States.

Matthew Cavanaugh for The New York Times

Michael El-Hillow, chief executive of Evergreen, said falling prices for panels led to the closing.


But now the company is closing its main American factory, laying off the 800 workers by the end of March and shifting production to a joint venture with a Chinese company in central China. Evergreen cited the much higher government support available in China."

And....

Solar-Panel Maker to Close a Factory and Delay Expansion

By TODD WOODY

Published: November 3, 2010


SAN FRANCISCO — Solyndra, a Silicon Valley solar-panel maker that won half a billion dollars in federal aid to build a state-of-the-art robotic factory, plans to announce on Wednesday that it will shut down an older plant and lay off workers.

Solyndra opened Fab 2, a $733 million factory to make its high-tech solar panels. It plans to close an older facility, shown here.
The cost-cutting move, which will reduce the company’s previously announced production capacity, is a sign of the notable shift in the prospects for cutting-edge American solar companies, which now face intense price competition from Chinese manufacturers that use more established photovoltaic technologies.

Just seven weeks ago, Solyndra opened Fab 2, a $733 million factory in Fremont, Calif., to make its high-tech solar panels. The new plant was supposed to be the first phase of a rapid expansion of the company.

Instead, Solyndra has decided to shutter the old plant and postpone plans to expand Fab 2, which was built with a $535 million federal loan guarantee.

“Fab 2 is much more efficient and cost-effective than our existing facility,” Brian Harrison, Solyndra’s chief executive, said in an interview. “We’re adjusting our plans to be more in line with where the market is and where our business is at the moment.”

When Solyndra filed for an initial public stock offering in December, it estimated it would have a total production capacity of 610 megawatts by 2013 if its two plants were fully built out. The company now expects it have capacity of 285 to 300 megawatts by 2013.

Solyndra abandoned plans for the stock offering in June, citing market conditions"


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/15/business/energy-environment/15solar.html

Solyndra, a Solar-Panel Maker, Will Close a Plant - NYTimes.com

 

[daveman]

Now that the kook has been dispatched, let's get back on topic.

Yesterday the SF Chronicle reported "Google banking on Solar", see:

Google invests $280 million to spur home solar

They are teamed up with SolarCity and will finance the installation of solar panels on 8,000 to 9,500 homes in the Bay Area.

And of course this:

Tesla to Sell Electric Model X in 2013, Make as Many as 15,000

The echo chamber will continue to offer nothing but reactionary bullshit as innovative entrepreneurs develop and market 'smart' cars, cars which after an initial investment protect the environment and begin to reduce our addiction to oil - something even George W. Bush acknowledged.

And yet, unsurprisingly, you fail to understand the OP. Green technology isn't all that green.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Now that the kook has been dispatched, let's get back on topic.

Yesterday the SF Chronicle reported "Google banking on Solar", see:

Google invests $280 million to spur home solar

They are teamed up with SolarCity and will finance the installation of solar panels on 8,000 to 9,500 homes in the Bay Area.

And of course this:

Tesla to Sell Electric Model X in 2013, Make as Many as 15,000

The echo chamber will continue to offer nothing but reactionary bullshit as innovative entrepreneurs develop and market 'smart' cars, cars which after an initial investment protect the environment and begin to reduce our addiction to oil - something even George W. Bush acknowledged.

And the mass exodus of "green jobs" continues to China. Hundreds of millions of dollars going to China. That money was supposed to stay here in the US, but no. The government wonks couldn't be bothered to put a clause in the contract for the money that the jobs had to stay here. Nope, that would have been smart. We have no problem with innovation. But our money keeps magiacally going overseas. That we have a problem with.

And Tesla selling 15,000 luxury EV's to the rich and famous is a fatuous argument. Toyota sells 3,000 of it's more popular vehicles A MONTH! That is multiple lines with sales of over 40,000 per year. A couple of their lines sell 15,000 per month. I thought the goal was to sell EV's to the masses? I thought the goal was to build up an entire new infrastructure that would wean us off of fossil fuels....here's a hint 15,000 vehicles ain't gonna cut it.


"Aided by at least $43 million in assistance from the government of Massachusetts and an innovative solar energy technology, Evergreen Solar emerged in the last three years as the third-largest maker of solar panels in the United States.

Matthew Cavanaugh for The New York Times

Michael El-Hillow, chief executive of Evergreen, said falling prices for panels led to the closing.


But now the company is closing its main American factory, laying off the 800 workers by the end of March and shifting production to a joint venture with a Chinese company in central China. Evergreen cited the much higher government support available in China."

And....

Solar-Panel Maker to Close a Factory and Delay Expansion

By TODD WOODY

Published: November 3, 2010


SAN FRANCISCO — Solyndra, a Silicon Valley solar-panel maker that won half a billion dollars in federal aid to build a state-of-the-art robotic factory, plans to announce on Wednesday that it will shut down an older plant and lay off workers.

Solyndra opened Fab 2, a $733 million factory to make its high-tech solar panels. It plans to close an older facility, shown here.
The cost-cutting move, which will reduce the company’s previously announced production capacity, is a sign of the notable shift in the prospects for cutting-edge American solar companies, which now face intense price competition from Chinese manufacturers that use more established photovoltaic technologies.

Just seven weeks ago, Solyndra opened Fab 2, a $733 million factory in Fremont, Calif., to make its high-tech solar panels. The new plant was supposed to be the first phase of a rapid expansion of the company.

Instead, Solyndra has decided to shutter the old plant and postpone plans to expand Fab 2, which was built with a $535 million federal loan guarantee.

“Fab 2 is much more efficient and cost-effective than our existing facility,” Brian Harrison, Solyndra’s chief executive, said in an interview. “We’re adjusting our plans to be more in line with where the market is and where our business is at the moment.”

When Solyndra filed for an initial public stock offering in December, it estimated it would have a total production capacity of 610 megawatts by 2013 if its two plants were fully built out. The company now expects it have capacity of 285 to 300 megawatts by 2013.

Solyndra abandoned plans for the stock offering in June, citing market conditions"


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/15/business/energy-environment/15solar.html

Solyndra, a Solar-Panel Maker, Will Close a Plant - NYTimes.com

I remain optimistic, Google's investment is a good sign and I have faith in American innovation and design.

 

[flacaltenn]

It's a hoot to hear Ole OldRocks givin us all advice on how we can power our house and CAR from a home solar installation. I kinda suspected that his car was in the garage all day. Isn't gonna work for ANYONE who's actually got a REAL JOB now is it? Minor problems with planetary motion.. Nothing that man can't fix.. OH WAIT --- MORE BATTERIES!!

And I can't really think of a dirtier industry than battery recycling. Water, air, worker health, caustic/poisonous chemicals, solid waste, etc.

Hi, I'm OldRocks and I'd like to open a smelting and battery recycling operation in downtown S.F. (Say right next to CandleStick Park). HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. In the meantime, give me your address and send all my heavy metals to you!

 

[Flopper]

Electric cars may not be so green after all, says British study | The Australian

ELECTRIC cars could produce higher emissions over their lifetimes than petrol equivalents because of the energy consumed in making their batteries, a study has found.

This study was done by the National Center for Policy Analysis, an organization that's about as far right wing as you can get. There is no need to read the other studies related to taxes, environment, deficit, and healthcare. You know what they are going to say before you read them.

Studies such as these start with a conclusion. Facts are gathered to support the conclusion. Facts that do not support the conclusion are dismissed.

 

[Wry Catcher]

It's a hoot to hear Ole OldRocks givin us all advice on how we can power our house and CAR from a home solar installation. I kinda suspected that his car was in the garage all day. Isn't gonna work for ANYONE who's actually got a REAL JOB now is it? Minor problems with planetary motion.. Nothing that man can't fix.. OH WAIT --- MORE BATTERIES!!

And I can't really think of a dirtier industry than battery recycling. Water, air, worker health, caustic/poisonous chemicals, solid waste, etc.

Hi, I'm OldRocks and I'd like to open a smelting and battery recycling operation in downtown S.F. (Say right next to CandleStick Park). HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. In the meantime, give me your address and send all my heavy metals to you!

And no doubt your great-great grandpappy was sure the horseless carriage and those dang flying machines would never replace the horse. Naysayers may slow progress but history has shown human imagination and innovation can't and won't be stopped. Sadly the party of no and their fellow travelers will slow progress enough so China will be the leader in energy innovation and job creation.
Of course the banksters, financ'iers and pols will benefit at the expense of the American middle class and former industrial workers, now dubbed dead beats because their jobs were shipped overseas.

 

[flacaltenn]

WryCatcher:

And no doubt your great-great grandpappy was sure the horseless carriage and those dang flying machines would never replace the horse. Naysayers may slow progress but history has shown human imagination and innovation can't and won't be stopped. Sadly the party of no and their fellow travelers will slow progress enough so China will be the leader in energy innovation and job creation.

I'm not making friends am I? Who is it that wants energy to be RARE and EXPENSIVE? Who is it that equates economic growth with pillaging the earth? Who is it that's holding the entire economy hostage due to uncertainty in every financial sector and issue? Taxes, energy, healthcare, monetary policy.. ALL up the air.

THe list of alternatives is pretty dam slim and slightly shady. ELectric cars are a solution without a problem. Hybrids are electric vehicles and they make slightly more sense. Even ICE models exceed the emissions of an all-electric when you consider the energy source to charge them.

Want to be like CHina? Want to charge your electric cars whenever and whereever you want? China's building 20 new nuclear plants. Nothing's gonna stop that decision.

Let's build 80 new generation nuclear plants today and tear down the coal plants and dams. And here's the good part WryCatcher. Let's take that $100 per dishwasher GREEN subsidy that you eco-nuts gave to GE so they wouldn't have to pay taxes and use it to build an immediate demonstration (within 3 yrs) of the 3 best next generation nuke designs.
Don't hit me up with this political nonsense.

 

[daveman]

Electric cars may not be so green after all, says British study | The Australian

ELECTRIC cars could produce higher emissions over their lifetimes than petrol equivalents because of the energy consumed in making their batteries, a study has found.

This study was done by the National Center for Policy Analysis, an organization that's about as far right wing as you can get. There is no need to read the other studies related to taxes, environment, deficit, and healthcare. You know what they are going to say before you read them.

Studies such as these start with a conclusion. Facts are gathered to support the conclusion. Facts that do not support the conclusion are dismissed.

Sounds like AGW "science", doesn't it?

 

[daveman]

WryCatcher:

And no doubt your great-great grandpappy was sure the horseless carriage and those dang flying machines would never replace the horse. Naysayers may slow progress but history has shown human imagination and innovation can't and won't be stopped. Sadly the party of no and their fellow travelers will slow progress enough so China will be the leader in energy innovation and job creation.

I'm not making friends am I? Who is it that wants energy to be RARE and EXPENSIVE? Who is it that equates economic growth with pillaging? Who is it that's holding the entire economy hostage due to uncertainty in every financial sector and issue? Taxes, energy, healthcare, monetary policy.. ALL up the air.

THe list of alternatives is pretty dam slim and slightly shady. ELectric cars are a solution without a problem. Hybrids are electric vehicles and they make slightly more sense. Even ICE models exceed the emissions of an all-electric when you consider the energy source to charge them.

Want to be like CHina? Want to charge your electric cars whenever and whereever you want? China's building 20 new nuclear plants. Nothing's gonna stop that decision.

Let's build 80 new generation nuclear plants today and tear down the coal plants and dams. And here's the good part WryCatcher. Let's take that $100 per dishwasher GREEN subsidy that you eco-nuts gave to GE so they wouldn't have to pay taxes and use it to build an immediate demonstration (within 3 yrs) of the 3 best next generation nuke designs.
Don't hit me up with this political nonsense.

Political nonsense is all he has. He sees everything trough the lens of leftism. Every course of action is judged by how it will benefit not the nation, but his political side.

 

[flacaltenn]

Electric cars may not be so green after all, says British study | The Australian

ELECTRIC cars could produce higher emissions over their lifetimes than petrol equivalents because of the energy consumed in making their batteries, a study has found.

This study was done by the National Center for Policy Analysis, an organization that's about as far right wing as you can get. There is no need to read the other studies related to taxes, environment, deficit, and healthcare. You know what they are going to say before you read them.

Studies such as these start with a conclusion. Facts are gathered to support the conclusion. Facts that do not support the conclusion are dismissed.

Say what? The article says:

The study was commissioned by the Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership, which is jointly funded by the British government and the car industry.

How is it an NCPA idea?

 

[daveman]

Electric cars may not be so green after all, says British study | The Australian

ELECTRIC cars could produce higher emissions over their lifetimes than petrol equivalents because of the energy consumed in making their batteries, a study has found.

This study was done by the National Center for Policy Analysis, an organization that's about as far right wing as you can get. There is no need to read the other studies related to taxes, environment, deficit, and healthcare. You know what they are going to say before you read them.

Studies such as these start with a conclusion. Facts are gathered to support the conclusion. Facts that do not support the conclusion are dismissed.

Say what? The article says:

The study was commissioned by the Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership, which is jointly funded by the British government and the car industry.

How is it an NCPA idea?

Doesn't matter. Flopper's dismissed it, so it's disMISSed, buddy. Don't forget it.

 

[flacaltenn]

They ARE a crafty bunch of prey -- Daveman.. Hard to track, vicious when cornered, and they can disappear into nowhere fast. I'd rather get take-out...

 

[daveman]

They ARE a crafty bunch of prey -- Daveman.. Hard to track, vicious when cornered, and they can disappear into nowhere fast. I'd rather get take-out...

A box of chicken chow mein would offer more reasonable conversation.

 

[Flopper]

Electric cars may not be so green after all, says British study | The Australian

ELECTRIC cars could produce higher emissions over their lifetimes than petrol equivalents because of the energy consumed in making their batteries, a study has found.

This study was done by the National Center for Policy Analysis, an organization that's about as far right wing as you can get. There is no need to read the other studies related to taxes, environment, deficit, and healthcare. You know what they are going to say before you read them.

Studies such as these start with a conclusion. Facts are gathered to support the conclusion. Facts that do not support the conclusion are dismissed.

Say what? The article says:

The study was commissioned by the Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership, which is jointly funded by the British government and the car industry.

How is it an NCPA idea?

Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership is an organization that pushes biofuels and other low carbon fuels. Electric cars are the completion.

 

[flacaltenn]

Flopper:

Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership is an organization that pushes biofuels and other low carbon fuels. Electric cars are the completion.

Always a conflict huh? Even between ECO-LEFT factions fighting it out. How sad... I thought you folks would have evolved farther than that by now.. Bet you think one of them is always lying. Is it BIG BIOFUEL or BIG BATTERY?

I personally don't care where the analysis comes from. Only that's it's rational and true.

 

[luckymon88]

Sorry to say according to an article by the guys at TheEV.Biz several statements in the article published in The Australian (June 10, 2011) featuring the headline “Electric cars may not be so green after all, says British study” and the referenced study itself contain many facts that are highly suspect and incorrect about Electric Cars.

 

[skookerasbil]

Flopper:

Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership is an organization that pushes biofuels and other low carbon fuels. Electric cars are the completion.

Always a conflict huh? Even between ECO-LEFT factions fighting it out. How sad... I thought you folks would have evolved farther than that by now.. Bet you think one of them is always lying. Is it BIG BIOFUEL or BIG BATTERY?

I personally don't care where the analysis comes from. Only that's it's rational and true.

small battery.........and boost


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75fg2biiRS4]YouTube - ‪99 Cobra Burn out‬‏[/ame]

 

[Truthseeker420]

Electric cars may not be so green after all, says British study | The Australian

ELECTRIC cars could produce higher emissions over their lifetimes than petrol equivalents because of the energy consumed in making their batteries, a study has found.

Do you have a credible news source?

 

[skookerasbil]

Electric cars may not be so green after all, says British study | The Australian

ELECTRIC cars could produce higher emissions over their lifetimes than petrol equivalents because of the energy consumed in making their batteries, a study has found.

Do you have a credible news source?

who cares.........electric cars are a fad. A large percentage of them are purchased by the wealthy..........and how ironic is that?

Nobody wants electric cars that go around the block and have to be recharged..............

 

[DiamondDave]

Electric cars may not be so green after all, says British study | The Australian

ELECTRIC cars could produce higher emissions over their lifetimes than petrol equivalents because of the energy consumed in making their batteries, a study has found.

Do you have a credible news source?

Was picked up by a few more news sources as well... but funny thing is that the liberal sources stayed away from it like the plague... go figure

The study was not done by the paper/news source...

The study was commissioned by the Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership, which is jointly funded by the British government and the car industry. It found that a mid-size electric car would produce 23.1 tonnes of CO2 over its lifetime, compared with 24 tonnes for a similar petrol car. Emissions from manufacturing electric cars are at least 50 per cent higher because batteries are made from materials such as lithium, copper and refined silicon, which require much energy to be processed.

Not that I am putting this all out there as some end-all-be-all truth.. that would be a fail-o, TDM, rdummy type of move.... I would like to see the actual text of the study.... I simply put this out there as discussion...