Volkswagen ID Forum banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered User
Joined
·
257 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Toyota CEO Akio Toyoda claimed that electric vehicles are overhyped as being clean.
 

·
Super Moderator
ID.4 1st Edition
Joined
·
1,488 Posts
He has a point of course in that true EV 'cleanliness' is only as good as the upstream power generation.
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
470 Posts
The first new car I bought was 2005 Prius (silver like everyone else) and had a chance back in 1999 to drive a right hand drive first generation Prius. I am very disappointed in Toyota in more recent years. They went from being in the lead in more environmentally friendly cars to being part of the resistance to stricter California car emissions standards. I would be very surprised to see them with vehicles that are equal to the ID.3/ID.4 sooner than 2024.
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
217 Posts
He has a point of course in that true EV 'cleanliness' is only as good as the upstream power generation.
Except that he doesn't have a point and the 'cleanliness' isn't only as good as the upstream power generation (although obviously the greener the power generation, the better) The most comprehensive study on the environmental impact on ICE vs BEV to date is this study by Auke Hoekstra. Also explained in this Twitter thread.
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
182 Posts
They were at the forefront of hybrid sales and mistakenly thought they could just coast on that forever. Now they're behind the times and being stubborn about it. You know how many people would have been all over Toyota quality and pricing in the EV market? Instead they wasted money on stupid advertisements showing charging stations covered in cobwebs, to try and convince the public that EVs were passé.
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
170 Posts
EV is only as clean as your source of electricity. Living in area that is 100% coal powered means that with EV my footprint does not decrease relative to ICE for almost 7 years by which time battery pack is dead and needs replacement.

Getting 8kw worth of solar panels is still expensive and would run around at least 25k even after incentives and that should be really taken into account when buying an EV to be clean.

They have a good point in that EV just really shift the pollution point from your tailpipe to the power plant in most cases unless you live in area that is predominantly powered from renewable sources.
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
217 Posts
EV is only as clean as your source of electricity. Living in area that is 100% coal powered means that with EV my footprint does not decrease relative to ICE for almost 7 years by which time battery pack is dead and needs replacement.
This is factual incorrect and I really wish people would stop repeating this big oil sponsored nonsense. As shared two comments above, here's a more accurate source.
 

·
Registered User
Happy owner of a blue ID.4 FE
Joined
·
687 Posts
Even if you just shift fossil fuel burning from car to power plant there’s a net reduction in CO2 and other emissions. A gasoline powered car is only about 20% efficient, the rest of the energy in gas turns into heat. A power plant, however, can run at optimal rpm on highly efficient machinery and approaches the thermodynamic limit of 35% efficiency. Still not great, but the better efficiency lowers emissions more than linearly, since the optimal burning massively reduces soot and NOx emissions.
(I’m not a fan of fossil fuel based power plants, just wanted to point out thermodynamic realities. )
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
201 Posts
Except that he doesn't have a point and the 'cleanliness' isn't only as good as the upstream power generation (although obviously the greener the power generation, the better) The most comprehensive study on the environmental impact on ICE vs BEV to date is this study by Auke Hoekstra. Also explained in this Twitter thread.
That link show "6 errors" that are typically made in arguing against BEV.

So lets just assume emissions are indeed reduced with BEV, significantly. What is the good science of how that reduced emissions can improve or hurt our standard of living?
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
217 Posts
That link show "6 errors" that are typically made in arguing against BEV.

So lets just assume emissions are indeed reduced with BEV, significantly. What is the good science of how that reduced emissions can improve or hurt our standard of living?
How do you define "standard of living"?
 

·
Registered User
ID.4 FE GW
Joined
·
492 Posts
EV is only as clean as your source of electricity. Living in area that is 100% coal powered means that with EV my footprint does not decrease relative to ICE for almost 7 years by which time battery pack is dead and needs replacement.

Getting 8kw worth of solar panels is still expensive and would run around at least 25k even after incentives and that should be really taken into account when buying an EV to be clean.

They have a good point in that EV just really shift the pollution point from your tailpipe to the power plant in most cases unless you live in area that is predominantly powered from renewable sources.
Really? I bought a 3.2 kW solar power system in 2013 for $8K installed with all permits and labor. It saves me $1200 a year in electricity costs, so it has already paid for itself. PV panels have increased in power (higher efficiency) and their prices have fallen substantially since then. I suspect that an 8kw system would be under $15K now and you can lease it for less than your electric bill savings.

The Union of Concerned Scientists released a study report that shows the equivalent MPG of electric vehicles in terms of emissions per mile compared to gas cars. The value in California, the USA's most populous state, is 122 mpg for equivalent emission.

That said, it is best not to drive a car whenever possible and to buy them as infrequently as possible.
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
201 Posts
How do you define "standard of living"?
Your health, your wealth, your education, your freedom, your hope for the future.

I see a lot of people espousing ideas that leave me bewildered.
Seems like if given the choice, MANY people would gladly reduce total world GDP by ten percent, in exchange for .01 degree C average temp.

The link between things we care about, and money, has been tainted to where many people associate money with misery.

We care (or are supposed to anyway) about things like infant mortality, education, health, political freedom, low crime rates, low domestic abuse rates, etc etc etc.
ALL those things are made worse by a decreasing economy. People speak of this 7500 dollar tax credit as if its mandatory for the taxpayers to provide; as if it's a good idea, as if it should be more.
People are so pro-EV they would happily support pretty much any number you throw out there.
20k towards your new EV? ABSOLUTELY , BECAUSE WE HAVE TO SAVE THE PLANET.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top