Categories
climate change

Environmental Shell Game

There is an old physics joke that goes like this: “There’s this farmer, and he has these chickens, but they won’t lay any eggs. So, he calls a physicist to help. The physicist then does some calculations, and he says, um, I have a solution, but it only works with spherical chickens in a vacuum.”

The joke here is that theory frequently ignores reality. In order for the theory to match reality, one has to assume that things like irregularly shaped chickens living in contact with the real world don’t exist, because they make it impossible for theory to match reality. Which brings us to today’s post.

The claims about EVs are that they are more efficient than internal combustion engines. The claims are that even an F-150 gets an equivalent to 65 miles per gallon. What are they using for an equivalent? Some bullshit math that is purely theoretical and has no basis in reality? Or are they representing the actual facts?

The EPA is the one who decides, through what they call ‘advanced computer modeling’ what the Miles Per Gallon equivalent is for each car. The EPA says one gallon of gasoline contains 115,000 BTUs of energy–which equates to 33.7 kilowatt-hours, equaling 3,412 BTUs per KW-hour.

A natural gas powered generator like this one uses 301 cubic feet of gas to generate 20 kilowatt hours of electric power. Since  1 cubic foot of natural gas = 1,037 BTU, then one KW of electricity costs 15,606 BTUs to create in the real world. What this means is that the EPA is claiming that electric generation is almost 5 times more efficient in theory than it is in practicality. Why? Because a lot of the energy in that natural gas is lost to inefficiencies like friction in the bearings, hysteresis losses, and other things in the generating process that generate heat.

Perhaps it’s more efficient in large power plants? Nope, it turns out that large powerplants are inefficient as well.

In theory, 3,412 Btu of thermal energy is equivalent to 1 kWh of electric energy. For existing coal-fired power plants, heat rates are typically in the range of 9,000 Btu/kWh to 11,000 Btu/kWh. 

There are also line losses. That is, the electric lines, transformers, and other parts of the electric grid have their own losses caused by imperfect conduction and distribution. Physics is a bitch.

The game that they are playing here is obvious. They are taking the theoretical value for gasoline and electricity and ignoring the losses that occur due to inefficiencies in generation and transmission of electricity so that they get a number that far overstates the efficiency of electricity, making EVs seem far more efficient than they are.

This is why that F-150 that is supposed to be the most efficient pickup truck only has a range of 58 miles when towing a boat. My F-150 with its 36 gallon fuel tank has a range of over 300 miles towing my 18 foot pontoon boat.

Since we know that they are vastly overstating the efficiency of electric vehicles, that calls the environmental value of electric vehicles into question. Even using the EPA’s faulty metrics, one must drive an EV for over 20,000 miles before it becomes ‘greener’ than than an internal combustion powered vehicle. This is due to the toxic and environmentally unfriendly battery.

The thing is, the battery must be changed out much sooner than the engine in an ICE powered car. The US government requires that a battery on an EV be warrantied for 8 years or 100,000 miles. That is apparently the limit for batteries, as one Florida family recently discovered. I once had a car with over 250,000 miles on it. I still saw it driving around town for years after I sold it.

Over all, I think that there is a shell game being played with EVs. They are not nearly as efficient or as environmentally friendly as we are being led to believe. So the question remains: Why are we being misled, and to whose benefit?

15 replies on “Environmental Shell Game”

I am a geologist/paleontologist in academia, which gives me an insight into said world. From the academia standpoint the man-made global warming trash that has been pushed the last forty or so years is a massive scam. The government, specifically National Science Foundation throws millions at any research grant that promotes climate (CC) change or global warming (GW).

If an academic program does not have a CC/GW course of study they get denied outside funding and ridiculed. Professors that have 20+ years of research into environmental change conveniently forget basic natural laws governing CC in favor of blaming mankind. All for the sake of raking in outside sources of funding. I have colleagues who don’t believe in GW and yet say they do in public so they can get a piece of the pie.

So this is what it is like in academia with the cult of environmentalism. Lots of good scientists throwing away the science so they can get more money. I imagine the .gov shoves cash towards industry development of EVs and it is another way for people to get rich. They are not energy efficient, and we are arrogant if we think we can control the natural process of GW. If this planet were alive, we would be mere ants in comparison.

Divemedic, I don’t think we are being misled. I think the stupidity of our populace is being exploited once again to get a few more billionaires. And a lot of people go along with it to make a little more money. Example, a guy can make 100k a year putting up and maintaining wind generators. Guy knows it takes 20 years of operation before that generator becomes “carbon neutral” and pays back the pollution cost of the lithium, copper, and cement that went into its manufacture. Guy does not care. He’s got a 100k/year job for the next 20 years.

So long as the money flows, everyone will look the other way when the cost comes due. I don’t know what it will look like but I know its gonna be bad when this scheme crashes down.

Good analysis of the common man issue. I work in O&P (olefins and polymers) industry. I’m being asked to evaluate and develop projects aimed at carbon reduction (with no gain to production, efficiency, cost reduction, etc.). Even if I think GW is a crock, even if my boss thinks it is a crock, we have to pursue those types of projects due to multiple fed and state level permits we have to comply with to operate. My choices are to work those projects or seek employment elsewhere. Like emission controls on 1970’s era cars, the chemical plants will run less efficient, have more issues, and generally emit the same amount of pollutants as before but everyone will “feel” better cause we did something. I’m less than a decade from retirement.

How to tell when the gov and it’s agents are lying…
Their lips (or keyboards) are moving.

Yeah, still waiting on the deaths their computer models predicted from Covid. Post vax doesn’t count, those weren’t in the model.

Over all, I think that there is a shell game being played with EVs. They are not nearly as efficient or as environmentally friendly as we are being led to believe.
And, sadly, the Dumbmasses study the Government and Media claims, swallowing them whole, believing and regurgitating them as proven.

So the question remains: Why are we being misled, and to whose benefit?

Read Agenda21. They intend to cull the herd and absolutely control the rest. When I first read it I shrugged. I couldn’t see any mechanism that would bring it to fruition. Along comes covid, used to drive the masses to the jab. I’d bet a goodly sum that many of the children who survive the jab will not have children.
It’s not just the EV push. Every time they have to make a decision, it seems like they make the worst one.
Selling off the STRATEGIC Oil reserve? Seriously?
I’m supposed to believe Biden won?

“Why are we being misled, and to whose benefit?”

To take away our mobility so we are easier to control. The elites have hated the automobile since Henry Ford made it available to the masses. Along with the efficiency lies, we lack the generation or grid distribution to replace all our ICE vehicles with EVs. We’d need 2X (simple calculation based on converting our gasoline usage to kW hours) or 3X (likely number with losses) of both to keep our current mobility.

wait until that 9600+ lb ev hummer slams in to you at 50-70 mph in your non electric car…we know these ev’s start on fire just charging…what happens when 2 of them collide at 70 mph?…heavier vehicles do more damage to the roads…we still don’t know how they plan on getting that gas tax back…it’s all part of their stupid game…

Hah. Who knew the government would falsify data to hide the truth? Like how they figure inflation or unemployment.

As to electric vehicles, they kind of work okay in places like Southern California. But here in Florida where you lose 25% of your battery life right off the bat because it’s flaming hot and humid here? Hahahahaha, snort, giggle. Same in really cold places (cold being below freezing.) Great if you have the cash to ignore reality, but…

I can see it now — hanging on the dealership wall, a map of the U.S. with colored bands East to West, delineating the optimum months of the year you will be able to use the EV you are about to buy and MTTF. Below it will hang your state map in pockmark style showing the hours of the day/night allowed for charging in various counties and municipalities. Some states will have passed laws that lesser jurisdictions cannot override state law, in which case the state map will be of a solid color, probably green.

You will sign a notice that you are aware of the limitations. Heh.

story today, couldn’t stomach reading all of it, but now they are looking at using your ev battery to help the grid…so you will pay higher electricity prices to charge it, then when the grid needs help, you let them use your car battery to assist the grid…wtf…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.