Wednesday, October 24, 2018

Cleaning the mess: answering FUDs by hydrocarbon industry

Recently I got a lengthy article [entire article is pasted in last part of this post] on why electric cars are no good, in our internal company channel. I am replying on this medium (I think this topic is of wider interest).

Many of the questions raised in the article resides in category of spreading FUDs (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubts). For example

  1. How are we going to produce more clean electric energy?
We are making rapid progress on renewable solar energy on both parameters - price and scale. So much that in recent months in India, solar energy has become cheaper than coal powered energy and states still refuse to buy solar energy due to intertwined relationship with coal lobby. This story is similar in Australia. Due to backlash from Coal lobby and automobile manufacturers,  US pulled back from Paris climate accord. For clean solar energy, problem now is not technology and cost but vested interests of hydrocarbon lobby.

     2. Who deals with the issue of clean mobility as a whole?
Why we need one? Who deals with current mobility as a whole?

     3. Use of rare earth metals and raw material to make cells and chemicals of batteries
In current battery technology, this is certainly the case. With every passing year, battery chemistry is improving to use less of rare earth elements and also energy density is increasing ~5% per annum. With more focus on improving battery chemistry and density, it should work.
4. Carbon footprint of a battery and battery recycling

Battery technology currently in infancy stage and till recently it didn’t have serious budget dollars. Even at the current stage, it is no worse than hydrocarbon transportation footprint. Once we see more green transportation, it will improve dramatically.

Stephane man assertion that “the life cycle of an electric vehicle makes it as polluting as a thermal vehicle.” is quite old and lame. The obvious and malicious fallacy in the argument is it adds the pollution of non-green grid on account of manufacturing and operations in the total carbon footprint of EV to inflate its numbers. EV alone can't fix the entire problem. it is a part of a solution to a multifaceted problem.

Daniel Roland comment on EV is to the point of being ridiculous. Just sample this

The electric car emits less particles than the thermal car, since it does not have an exhaust, but it has brakes, tires, and rolls on tar!
In the end, the electric car is no more ecological than the thermal car.

He does not even take into account the fuel and complex ICE engine into account before coming to conclusion. He also wants government to look at somewhere else - marine transport for problem as a diversion technique.

In conclusion, When we are evaluating renewable energy and EV industry, we need to consider following points:

  1. Hydrocarbon lobby is so vested and strong: Through media propaganda and public policy intervention, they keep spreading FUDs and keep diverting the discussion. In India, entire coal industry is state-controlled. In Australia and Germany, coal industry creates lot of jobs in the country. In OPEC nations, entire country economy is fueled by hydrocarbons and just 20 years back fortune and Forbes top 100 list was ruled by petroleum companies and they were treated as no less than head of state.
  2. EV and renewable industry is in infancy stage - currently EV and renewable industry gets a fraction of research dollars than hydrocarbon industry.still it is able to make a difference. 
  3. EV and clean grid is a part of solution of large multifaceted problem. It is not complete solution. Apart from these two, air transport, marine transport, goods transport industry needs to be cleaned but we need to start somewhere and in the right direction

The complete message is copied here for reference:

Hello all, I would like to share this piece of writing which may be or may not a Fable. Please read them - create interesting questions..
Carlos Tavares (PSA BOSS)
" the world is crazy. The fact that the authorities are ordering us to go in a technological direction, that of the electric vehicle, is a big turning
I would not want in 30 years to discover something that is not as beautiful as it looks, on the recycling of batteries, the use of rare materials on the planet, on the electromagnetic emissions of the battery in Recharge situation?
How are we going to produce more clean electric energy?
How to make the carbon footprint of a battery of the electric vehicle not an ecological disaster?
How can we ensure that recycling of a battery is not an ecological disaster?
How do I find enough raw material to make cells and chemicals of batteries over time?
Who deals with the issue of clean mobility as a whole?
Who today is asking the question sufficiently widely from a societal point of view to take account of all these parameters?
I'm worried as a citizen, because as a car manufacturer, I'm not audible.
All this agitation, all this chaos, will turn against us because we have made bad decisions in emotional contexts."
Stéphane man
(Director of the nuclear observatory)
- the life cycle of an electric vehicle makes it as polluting as a thermal vehicle.
Subsidizing it does not make sense, explains the director of the nuclear observatory, stéphane man.
The manufacture of batteries is so issuing that it is necessary to have travelled from 50 000 to 100 000 km in electric car.... to start being less producer of co² than a thermal car. 15 to 30 miles a day, 365 days a year, for 10 years!
AFP / Daniel Roland
However, contrary to what most people believe, subject to continuous propaganda of policies and industrialists, the electric car is no more virtuous than the thermal car, petrol or diesel.
These are the conclusions of an already old study of the environment and energy control agency (Ademe), deliberately ignored by the government (development according to the principles of the acv of energy balance sheets, gas emissions to Greenhouse effect and other environmental impacts induced by all electric vehicles and thermal vehicles by 2012 and 2020 (November 2013)
Since these cars are mainly used for short journeys, it is likely that the mileage needed to estimate "virtuous" will never be achieved.
In addition, all the co² emitted by an electric car is sent into the atmosphere even before it is travelled every kilometre.
While it is everywhere claimed that the electric car does not emit fine particles, as reported by the science and life magazine (January 2015), " tyres, brakes and road wear emit almost as many particles as the diesel ".
The electric car emits less particles than the thermal car, since it does not have an exhaust, but it has brakes, tires, and rolls on tar!
In the end, the electric car is no more ecological than the thermal car.
The public money devoted to its development is therefore totally unjustified.
These are astronomical sums:
- the government has launched an installation plan of 7 million reloading terminals at approximately EUR 10 000, a cost of around EUR 70 billion.
It is also poignant to see the elected representatives of small municipalities, believing to make a gesture for the environment, break the municipal bank to offer a kiosk;
- the "ecological" bonus for the purchase of an electric car exceeds € 10 per vehicle, often supplemented by a regional premium.
Almost all buyers are wealthy households, because these vehicles are very expensive: once again, the money of all is offered to the most privileged.
In fact, in the country of the atom, all means are good to "Boost" electricity consumption, which has been declining for years.
Because the electric car in France can be regarded as a " nuclear car almost all of the installed reloading terminals are connected to the ordinary electricity network at 80 % nuclear.
The certificates put forward by Mr. Bolloré and its autolib (Paris), Bluecub (Bordeaux) and bluely (Lyon), ensuring that they are recharged to renewable energies: these are only writing games; the electricity used is the same as elsewhere.
We are not here to promote the thermal car, itself an environmental calamity.
But, precisely, no one would have the idea to offer 10 euros to purchase a diesel car, to book him parking spaces and fill his tank at a broken price...
This is a very good analysis showing that our policies (and the greens) show us the show:
Diesel's paranoia only concerns motorists!!!
Heavy Goods, coaches, ships, are excluded!
Just to pinpoint the degree of paranoia of the most virulent critics of the diesel vehicle, it is necessary to reveal the data of the 'maritime industry' which has shown that considering the size of the engines and the quality of the fuel used, the - Freighters of the world pollute as much as all 760 million cars on the planet.
You know, these container containers that feed us into products that we manufactured in our offshore factories, today they burn each 10.000 tons of fuel for a return and return between Asia and Europe.
These unfortunate 40 ships are part of a 3.500 Flotilla, which must be added to the 17.500 tankers that make up all 100.000 ships that roam the seas.
In order not to leave the maritime domain, let us recall that the French recreational fleet is about 500.000 units, including 5.000 yachts over 60 metres, and the most average of them burn about 900 Litres of fuel in just one hour, while the 24 % of French households that heat up fuel are having trouble filling their tank for winter.
To continue on the path of paranoid schizophrenia, let us take into account the entire fishing fleet and the 4,7 million heavy lorries in transit across France and the thousands of aircraft that roam the sky.
To complete this small fable, let us not forget the indispensable agricultural area where average energy consumption is 101 litres of fuel per hectare.

ooooooooooooo End of the post oooooooooooooooo

No comments:

Post a Comment

Design thinking at work (Book summary)

Key things to keep in mind The essence of design thinking, in many ways, involves identifying problems by seeing things that other peo...