,
13 tweets,
6 min read
Read on Twitter
We have a new German speaking contestant in the race do misinform the public about electric vehicles while it's still possible: the @OEAMTC.
Their 'expert tool' has performed miracles in terms of producing nonsense about EVs.
Let me walk you through it. (thread)
Their 'expert tool' has performed miracles in terms of producing nonsense about EVs.
Let me walk you through it. (thread)
I research EVs and renewable energy at the @TUeindhoven. In my spare time I debunk nonsensical studies on EVs.
Recent examples:
1) The "IFO study" of Buchal and Sinn ()
2) Frauenhofer plugging hydrogen over battery electric (innovationorigins.com/fraunhofer-ise…
Recent examples:
1) The "IFO study" of Buchal and Sinn ()
2) Frauenhofer plugging hydrogen over battery electric (innovationorigins.com/fraunhofer-ise…
3) @ADAC trying to make EVs look bad.
().
What's wrong with German speaking people??
Is there some anti-EV bubble of EV ignorati?
().
What's wrong with German speaking people??
Is there some anti-EV bubble of EV ignorati?
I even wrote a scientific article with the top 6 errors people make if they want to make the EV look bad: sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
This @OEAMTC study manages to make most of them.
This @OEAMTC study manages to make most of them.
The first problem is always: exaggerate how much CO2 is emitted for the production of the battery.
This is usually achieved achieved in two ways:
1) Assume it won't last long and/or has to be replaced.
2) Use outdated studies claiming lots of CO2 per kWh.
This is usually achieved achieved in two ways:
1) Assume it won't last long and/or has to be replaced.
2) Use outdated studies claiming lots of CO2 per kWh.
About how long they last: when the car has active cooling the battery lasts *at least* 1000 cycles and could last 3000 cycles. For a 37kWh battery that means 37000 kWh. The citigo-e uses ~0.164 kWh/km so that's *at least* ~225k km of driving and then it still has 80% range left.
The 100 kWh @Tesla battery will probably last well over 500k km with >80% range. See also: steinbuch.wordpress.com/2015/01/24/tes…
That the @OEAMTC takes 150k km, irrespective of battery size, tells you they don't have a clue about batteries.
Nice talk about this:
That the @OEAMTC takes 150k km, irrespective of battery size, tells you they don't have a clue about batteries.
Nice talk about this:
I am too sick and tired to go into detail and refer to my scientific publication for details but suffice to say it should be ~2.4t for the smallish 37 kWh battery of the Citigo-e (not ~5t) and ~6.5t for the 100 kWh @Tesla (not ~14t). This immediately makes the EV the winner.
But we continue, because why the hell are Hydrogen and E-Fuel made of clean wind energy, while batteries are charged with different kinds of average mixes?
Compared to batteries, hydrogen uses ~3x more electricity and e-fuel ~>10x more.
Why would you want to waste energy?
Compared to batteries, hydrogen uses ~3x more electricity and e-fuel ~>10x more.
Why would you want to waste energy?
Imagine you had 10 windmills.
You could use them in the following ways:
1) fuel 10 000 battery electric vehicles
2) fuel 3 000 hydrogen electric vehicles
3) fuel 1 000 E-Fuel vehicles
Can the @OEAMTC explain to me why option 1) is so bad it's the only one they left out?
You could use them in the following ways:
1) fuel 10 000 battery electric vehicles
2) fuel 3 000 hydrogen electric vehicles
3) fuel 1 000 E-Fuel vehicles
Can the @OEAMTC explain to me why option 1) is so bad it's the only one they left out?
I could go on and on about this study but it's friday, it's late and I want to spend some time with my wife so I'll finish now and be brief but blunt: this study is misinformation about EVs that is not worth the paper it's printed on.
Let me summarize the results:
Let me summarize the results:
The Tesla X 100 kWh emits ~14t to produce and ~0.6t when charged with wind. ~15t total.
That's 4x less than the BMW X7 diesel and in the real world the X will probably drive 300k km (e.g. ending in Poland) instead of 200k km. This makes the difference even bigger.
That's 4x less than the BMW X7 diesel and in the real world the X will probably drive 300k km (e.g. ending in Poland) instead of 200k km. This makes the difference even bigger.
The Citigo-e emits ~6t to produce and emits 0.4t when powered by wind for a total of ~6.5t CO2.
That is the winner of this match up by a mile.
I wonder why the @OEAMTC study left this winner out and hope they can correct.
That is the winner of this match up by a mile.
I wonder why the @OEAMTC study left this winner out and hope they can correct.
