Mazda clarifies its EV creates diesel-like emissions

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a30368903/mazda-mx-30-ev-vs-diesel-emissions/

Sample quote

Mazda is suggesting what no automaker wants to sanction: that lithium-ion batteries degrade over time, reducing performance and range, to the point where it could negatively affect long-term ownership. There aren't enough EVs with six-figure mileage to say for sure, but it seems accurate that fast charging, depleting the battery to empty, and age can all reduce battery health.

Mazda is also suggesting another hot take: EVs with large batteries are bigger polluters over their life cycles than EVs with smaller batteries. This makes sense, given the energy needed to replenish a battery at several times the capacity of the MX-30. Mazda cites a life cycle assessment by the journal Sustainability and quotes an unnamed figure of the European Union's average CO2 emissions from producing electricity in 2016 to say all this.

Yes, diesel cars pollute with other gases and particulates at the tailpipe that EVs don't. But at least the CO2 emissions from driving an EV are mostly understood, since battery-electric cars can only run as clean as the local electrical grid. Then there's the humane problem of people in poor countries mining rare-earth minerals, and the environmental impact of extracting lithium.
End quote

Many have been saying this for a very long time but of course the greenies tend to ignore reality.

Let's assume that over the lifetime use of vehicle, EVs and ICEs have the exact same CO2 emissions. The EVs still win because the bulk of their emissions generally aren't in populated areas where people have to breath the exhaust, and then have the subsequent health issues (and if they don't have health insurance, the rest of us get to cover their health care costs anyways, but I digress...).

But in reality, EVs, especially when produced using renewables, have lower lifetime emissions, in addition to not making exhaust in populated areas.

https://insideevs.com/news/382257/eqc-reduce-co2-70-percent/

While some current batteries from some manufacturers are pretty terrible and may need replaced to restore range, it won't be like that forever. Tesla is working on a million mile battery right now. They're already good for 500k miles.

I wouldnt believe anything Musk says. He'll say and do literally anything to pump up the stock price - loves to "debut" vehicles that are nowhere near production or even have a place to be built either, I can't believe so many people are that easily fooled.

Solar energy (PV/wind/etc) "charging" a flywheel-driven car is the way to go.

I've made more than a few dollars buying and short Tesla stock based on Musk's antics. I bought on his "funding secured" claim, then sold and shorted it in time for the SEC to come out with it's investigation statement. Plenty of instances of that happening. Musk wild claim, buy and sit for a day or two, sell and then reality hits and short it for a day or two and cover. Wee.

Right, because we all know power plants are out in the middle of nowhere.

People that buy into the Electric car hype:

I think that anyone who lives in a large urban center should be forced to buy an EV. If what said above is a positive, that the bulk of emissions are in these areas, then eliminate all ICE vehicles in cities and let us drive whatever the heck we want everywhere else...

The calculations are pretty complex but that sounds about right. Electric cars move the smokestack somewhere else but don't eliminate it, at least not today. But electric cars can be charged at night which helps to even out the grid so that is good.

I've had a Leaf for a few years now and I think electric cars are great for a bunch of reasons that have nothing to do with pollution or being "green". Almost zero maintenance, charge at home, quiet, simple, no warm up period, lots of torque at low speed, heater and defrost blow hot as soon as you start the car, no exhaust system to rot out, brakes last a long time due to regen braking, used EVs are super cheap to buy, etc.

If I knew that electric vehicles did not mean the end of gasoline powered vehicles, I'd sure have more of an open mind to them.

That's more or less what some areas are doing by announcing ICE bans in urban areas in the future. But, I don't really like that idea, since by the time the bans go into affect (2030+), EVs should be much more competitive with ICEs, so like Andy, they'll be bought because they're better, not just because of pollution or a desire to "go green".



I see these future bans as furthering a sort of "urban vs rural" divide, which leads to opinions like this:



I can see a point in the future where EVs are price and usefulness comparable, so most people will choose them, at least for daily drivers. At that point, the remaining emissions from the ICE vehicles shouldn't be enough to really worry about.

I don't think force is a good word here. I believe the local and federal gubmints can give tax breaks to make ownership attractive for city folk. Then leave more octane for me!

There is a company in California that has many 300,000 mile Teslas. If I remember correctly most have the original batteries. If I find a link to the article I will post it.

https://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/fiat-centoventi-concept-electric-car-ces-2020/

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/bus...ns-are-full-for-electric-mustang-mach-e/

it`s the 70`s all over again

So how accurate is that an EV battery's lifev is really just dependent on rate of charge, depth of charge, temp?, rate of discharge, and charge cycles? Seems like an on board real time display of calculated used lifetime battery life would be rather useful, since so many here are mentioning miles on an EV, which means relatively little it seems..

All those are factors that affect life. Same with your cordless power tools and laptops etc.

Age and temp are big factors.

Seems like an algorithm wouldn’t be that hard to incorporate many of the variables and display some sort of ‘remaining life’ metric, but automakers might be slow to embrace that idea. A calculation of total charging and discharging watts would cool.

I'm pretty sure the current EVs do have a readout of battery capacity remaining/range at full charge.

Leaf's have some sort of battery bar width.

Tesla's show the current max range whenever you charge to 100% (I think it shows an estimated max range when you charge to lower amounts too, or you just do the math, xxx miles at 90% charge is yyy at 100% charge).

https://www.forbes.com/sites/arielc...sed-1-million-mile-battery/#13d2bf0333e3

I'll reply to my own post

https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2014/jan/27/flywheel-hybrid-flybrid

That’s regenerative braking, nothing that isn’t already being used on many platforms.

Yes, and when flywheel capacity/weight improves, we can expect to see phev consumer autos. That will at least solve the battery problems.

See this is why EV vehicles aren't widely accepted, they don't look like conventional vehicles. They look goofy.

We handle diesel portable generators. The most common metric for servicing is run time hours. Those who are more diligent mainly use amount fuel consumed as their servicing guideline, that is where I my EV algorithm suggestion came from.

https://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/tesla-electric-cars-surpass-300000-miles-in-shuttle-service/

These people just want to feel good about what they think they are doing to supposedly save the environment! They cut down acres of oxygen producing trees to put up solar panels, hardly a win for the environment! In our stae they are putting up electric car charging stations that are powered by diesel generators!

Actually, one of the reasons why adopters are interested in them is because they don't look like conventional vehicles.

Like I said, not widely accepted. Most people don't want to drive a clown car.

Several years ago, I read that STYLING was a popular reason that people were buying the silly looking Toyota Prius. The traditional Corolla was available as a hybrid with similar mileage and size but people wanted the Prius by a wide margin. Could it be that they wanted to appear to care about the environment more than they actually did? A reversal of status where they preferred to be miserly or sensitive to the ecological impact of automobiles?

You don't seem to understand.

https://www.goodcarbadcar.net/total-toyota-prius-sales-figures/

While I'm taking liberties with the Prius, considering it a EV vehicle, production figures don't suggest unconventional styling is an issue of acceptance. In fact, it's prob de rigueur.

And if you look at its competitors, they are different from their gas-powered brothers.

I understand perfectly. Tell me just how many clown cars are sold compared to conventional cars? Sure there are other variables involved, like unknowns about service life, operating costs and range but you only get the fringe market with the weird looking cars. When you have spent better than 4 decades in new car dealerships talking with customers and seeing what does sell, I'll consider your opinions.
The pure EV is a different animal then a hybrid and a slightly different market. I would point to the Honda Insight as a prime example of what I'm saying. How many of them do you see on the road and then look at the more conventional looking Tesla. I see a lot of them.