Electric cars emit more pollution than ice cars due to tire an brake dust particulates, I would measure a guess that it is worse for health as well. WSJ just had an article about this. And Canadians rioted last week over increasing fuel tax, which is hurting low income families, NO MORE TAX, WAKE UP PEOPLE, you're being sold a bill of goods that are damaged
@@jocodashcam295 Yep I know, I'm a chemistry nerd who has worked Refineries installing automated and networked volumetric and weight systems. I was just explaining how the contrast between between Fossil Fuel consumption and Future BEV consumption of Cobalt will massive difference.
Tesla fatcells don't use cobalt. And if everyone complains about cobalt, then I recommend them to throw away all your electronics. There is cobalt in everything and your phone which I reckon everyone use everyday. And specifically choose tesla as the only ev manufacturer for not using cobalt.
Public transport just waste people’s time Too expensive to travel anyway Is cheaper to own a car and schedule your time as pleased Not wasting time waiting in a station for a bus or worse missing it and not arriving to destination
@@Shocker8MTA In many cities, like Tokyo or Berlin, traveling by public transit is actually cheaper and faster than by car. Trains and buses come every 5 minutes. Asian and European public transit is superior because those countries invest in public transit. Owning a car may seem cheap in the US, but there are negative externalities that you are indirectly paying for. For example, you have to waste your precious time in traffic congestion. Also, spending your tax money on building more roads to relieve traffic congestion is much less cost-effective than spending it on public transit.
@@Rudenbehr You can be hit by a drunk driver or be shot by s road raged driver when you drive. I agree that public transit needs to improve its security, but no modes of transportation are absolutely safe. If mental health and homelessness are the problems, they require different solutions. The debate is about pollution and public transit pollutes the least.
Yet electric cars are still *not* the cleanest mode of transport. Bicycling, walking, and electric trains are. I thank you so much for including nuclear energy in clean energy! Well done!
@MagicStick absolutely not true. No 'high chances' documented about EVs and snow. Millions of people driving with EVs in the winter, including myself, in heavy-snow areas.
@MagicStick about 260km in the winter and 350km in the summer. Never needed more. I like warm interior, so heating is always up to 21C. The car warms up several times faster than any ICE, btw. Why don't you go and try one before rambling here?
You haven't actually answered the question. You've just made it look like you're answering the question while making oil production look as dirty and deadly as you can imagine without looking fake.
The drive to the grocery store during COVID lockdown is a small sample if everyone’s daily drivers are either all electric or hydrogen fuel cell. There is nothing more satisfying on a drive than rolling down those windows on the highway on a 70 degree day and actually smelling grass.
you have to factor in the energy it takes to clean-up abandoned pump jack wells... So many have been left uncapped because the regulations and bonding requirements, the money that companies pay ahead of time as insurance, for those wells are so minimal that it’s nearly impossible to hold drillers responsible or to pay for cleanup. Some companies simply walk away from wells, meaning they are still liable; when firms go out of business, they are not.
@@daytonbill1 If these knuckleheads knew how much diesel fuel a container ship from China uses to get their Chinese garbage goods here. They would all run to their safe spaces with their emotional support animals.
Great work Mark and Robert. Suggestion to improvements: Add info on Cobalt mining (so many think all cobalt comes from Congo and is done by small children, and have no idea how much is mined for tooth fillings, tire studs, laptop/smartphone batteries, used in refining oil, etc) and the russian and saudi oil mining too.
The use of cobalt in EV batteries is going away, but sadly, it's use in the desulfurization of transportation fuels continues with no end in sight. The use of cobalt is no longer much of anti-EV talking point.
i can finally hope the gas and diesel cars come to an end in 2030 or later but car manufactuers can move on to an refreshing electric that is more enviroment friendly and brings an shiny brighter future
Indeed and Congratulations for the film makers! The only critique I would like to add is about “renewable” energy! Nowadays there is a lot of criticism about environmental impact of f.I. windmills and solar panels as not being recyclable etc. wish is used in anti EV criticism!
It's now came out, the battery of a model 3 takes 7 months of average U.s. driving to break even on the carbon footprint of the battery production when compared to an old stylecombustion car. California has reach 50% of it total energy use from renewables, so even the charging aspect will die off soon enough. Meanwhile gas still requires energy to refine from oil, and burns into the air from the exhaust. Just wait for the numbers on 4680 batteries!
@@jasoncatt "Using this model, Reuters found that, in the United States, a new 54-kilowatt-hour Tesla Model 3 must be driven 13,500 miles before it becomes cleaner than a Toyota Corolla achieving an average 33 mpg over its lifetime. However, if the same Tesla were driven in Norway, it emissions "break-even point" would come at just 8,400 miles, according to the analysis."
How often I've said: So you think that building an island in the middle of the ocean, pumping up oil, shipping it to land, refining it, putting it in a truck and getting that into a small pump you can drive to is better? Now I can just point to this video, thank you!
That is exactly why it was made. Hope to have more coming in the future to address the other lame excuses to not go electric like "what about the windmill blades".
But for the amount of fuel you get from that, if you take a lot of it to land at once, doesn't it allow to power many more gas cars than the energy used?
@@benurm2390 No, especially when you consider the energy used to Refine and transport the oil and gas. and when you consider one is constantly polluting and one is not there is no denying that EV is many times cleaner. here is an article that helps explain, cleantechnica.com/2021/03/02/electric-car-batteries-need-far-less-raw-materials-than-fossil-fuel-cars-new-study/
@@GasTroll I agree with most of the things you said, don't get me wrong. but from the underground till the refining, whether you use petrol or not, you have to do it all the time! for several reasons & we use some of those "reasons" to make cars (regardless of fuel) EVs are better in long term; no doubt. but first of all, we should put the efficiency first; and secondly, we should change the way of our living. without trying to use less energy, we will waste it in some form and in long term, that does not really matter what form it is. auto industry is not even #1 among pollution sources!
@@GasTroll and one more thing... if you want to dig that deep, there are some diggings for the EV part as well! don't be a bigot, please! dig both sides! (again... no offense! as I said, I'm with you on many things that you said)
Ship sulfur emissions are now being regulated. James Hansen states: " regulations have been imposed by the International Maritime Organization starting in 2015 and becoming stiffer in 2020." Excellent video!
I am an avid EV supporter, but unfortunately this video does not provide all the numbers to silence the skeptics. 1. It does not compare the energy and CO2 needed to produce an EV vs an ICE car. That's one part where the EV loses and needs to travel a lot of kms to pay off the debt. 2. It compares the energy needed to produce gasoline with the energy needed to drive an EV. That's a little like comparing oranges to apples. 3. I wish there was a final number of the energy needed to drive 1 km in an EV vs the energy needed to drive 1 km in an ICE. And how much of that energy is clean/renewable based on the current mix. 4. The main problem is not lithium, but cobalt, which is produced in one country that does not respect human rights very much.
I don't agree, 1. BEV is new and manufacturing is still in its infancy when compared to ICE. It is rapidly becoming more efficient. 2, this is the whole point, we don't need to burn oil for our personal transportation. The focus here is not CO2, it is the effect on our health. 3. I hope to get this number someday. 4. Cobalt is a non-issue. The oil companies use more cobalt than EVs, Tesla is very close to completely eliminating cobalt from their batteries. and to me giving work and income to an extremely poor country is a good thing,. It is not our responsibility to tell them how old workers can be to work in a mine, that is their decision and if you ask them if the world should stop buying their Cobalt what do you think they would say? They have actually already said this, and the people want to work in these mines. it is needed income for a country with very little income. I believe these stories about children in these mines is oil company propaganda and is ridiculous when compared to what burning fossil fuel does to humanity every day.
@@GasTroll I wish there was a final number of the energy needed to drive 1 km in an EV vs the energy needed to drive 1 km in an ICE. And how much of that energy is clean/renewable based on the current mix. I hope to get this number someday. If you can't get that number then your analysis is worthless. With an EV you are toting a 1 tonne battery around, so by definition you're going to use a lot more energy than an ICE vehicle to go the same distance. How is that energy generated? Mainly from fossil fuels, and if you think it will be wind and solar in the future, you're living in cloud-cuckoo land. Very dishonest and one sided video. You complain about 'oil company propaganda' but this video is 'green' energy company propaganda. How about some honesty for once? And before you say it, I have nothing to do with the fossil fuel industry.
"you're going to use a lot more energy than an ICE vehicle to go the same distance" Can you explain why a Camry gets a combined 30mpg and a Model 3 is rated at 140mpge? I'll give you a hint, a gallon of gas produces a certain amount of energy. If you can't explain this, your analysis is worthless.
You forgot about the Cobalt. Like the Cobalt catalysts used to filter petroleum to create low sulphur fuel. Or the few percent of Cobalt used in billions of tonnes of steel alloys, and the amount of batteries in portable devices beside EVs.
LiFePO4 as the chemical formula dictates has ZERO Cobalt. It technically has no exotic metal at all. Except for Phosphate which natural ore form is controversial to mine, but can be chemical process produced.
@@jtlanden9771 It allows a high lithium rate while providing a safety margin. Without that safety margin we could go for metallic lithium cathodes and have much higher charge capacity (IIRC 9 times higher than current cells) - but probably nobody would risk that cell type.
Cobalt is used specifically in LCO, NMC and NCA type Li-batteries due tu is high specific energy. However, the technology roadmaps for Li-batteries move towards Low and zero cobalt alternatives like NMC 811, LFP, LiNa, LiAl, LTO etc. as well as solid state batteries.
If you think renewable energy is the way to go just look at the nearly 4000 acre solar farm in texas where nearly all the solar panels were destroyed by a hail storm... And most parts of solar panels dont get recycled for those who don't know.
Another problem is cost. Many people can't afford an EV. Many people buy older used cars for much less and drive those. Until you can get a used EV for near the cost of a used gas car, you won't see widespread adoption of EV's if the masses can't afford them, or to fix or maintain them.
Absolutely true! But, if one can factor in the huge savings in gas cost, no oil changes, regenerative braking (unless an aggressive driver) that will allow brakes to last 10 years or more, I am guessing. In 4 years we paid less than $400 in charging (fuel). Albeit, we don't drive long distances on a daily basis and we charge at a few grocery stores where they have have paid parking and offer free charging AND the parking is reimbursed entirely when you pay for your groceries, so probably not a common scenario. But to say if we had a gas car and paid $100/month (really low, I think), that would be $1,200/year x 4 years equaling $4,800 vs. $400. No oil or brake changes. A substantial savings that one needs to factor in when looking at the cost of an EV vs. Gas.
But wait, there's more! Anti-EV people often seem to behave as though they believe that internal Combustion engines are just found under toadstools or something. A modern ICE has around 2000 components. They are manufactured in dozens of different factories, and shipped to an assembly plant. Many are made from specialised alloys containing rare metals to provide the specific qualities needed in that part. Plastic and rubber components are similarly specialised. A BEV, however, is simplicity itself. 16-20 moving parts, and overall the resource and energy input of building a new EV is about 30% less than that of the equivalent ICE vehicle. Which is why, in the long run, BEVs will be cheaper than current ICE cars. We just need to get past early adopter pricing.
Yes, it is astonishing to me how people except what has gone on for the last hundred years as being perfect, while they point out every little issue they can with anything new. Here the old technology happens to be killing 5 million people a year and this is completely ignored, instead they focus on birds flying into windmills. it is an absolute joke.
Yeah but isn't it funny how the EV activists seem to think that the electrical power for EVs is 'just found under toadstools or something'. Over 60% of the electricity generated in the US, comes from burning fossil fuels. Strange how the maker of this video overlooked that fact, isn't it?
@@snidelywhiplashTrue, but the figures that they give are not useful and seem exaggerated. What you need is how much CO2 is produced per kWhr of electricity. When you do the maths based on that, you find that EVs produce more CO2 per mile than internal combustion engine vehicles. See my post. And again this is assuming that CO2 is a pollutant, which it isn't. It is the basis of all life on Earth and is a minor greenhouse gas which is unlikely to be the cause of the warming of the past 170 years.
@@pauljackson2409 6 litres of diesel fuel use up 42 kWh of energy (which this video spells out nicely). That figure is directly from the horses mouth, which happens to be Mobil Oil. About half of which comes from well pumps, tank pumps, pipeline pumps - all in the form of electricity. So 21 kWh of electricity from the very same grid that you try to slander go into your previous fossil fuel - and then there are the remaining 21 kWh of energy in the form of burnt fossil fuel, be it in generators or at the refinery for heating the noxious cocktail of hydrocarbons to make the fossil fuel you need. So an EV - which can do 100km on 15-20 kWh of electricity - is supposed to be worse than an ICE car whose fossil fuel takes 21 kWh of the very same electricity and an additional 2 litres of fossil oil being burnt on top of 6 litres of fossil fuel being burned to do the same 100km. Your math and logic skills are seriously lacking.
Great video for making the viewer aware that there is a major downside to ICE vehicles. Thanks for allowing everyone to spread it all over. What we really need to do is get rid of coal fired power plants so there will be much less pollution from EVs and anything that uses electricity.
Crazy it takes the same c02 to produce electric car batteries as running average electric car for 15 years and the batteries don't last and need recycling electric cars also cause cancer miscarriage autism from EMF of the motors kill off bees as this effects Thier navigation
CLEAN POWER??---you understand this EUROPEAN SOURCES OF POWER image above is purposely vague. Nuclear power and hydro are considered to be CLEAN power. And, a country official from which country may even include NATURAL GAS as clean power. Misleading and not totally unexpected coming from the pro-renewable energy extremists pushing their intermittent, unreliable, non-dispatchable and weather dependent industrial wind and solar power plants.
Yeah, but he left out the other hazards related to EVs like the stock piling of black mass. I think that if there was a way to utilize an older battery technology, the better off we can be. Specifically I am talking about lead-acid. These batteries, unlike Lithium-based batteries, are actually recyclable. You have your plastic casing, the lead electrodes and sulphuric acid. That's it. Besides, EVs have these as well.
@@WJCTechyman There is no "stockpiling of black mass." It is recycled and the lithium and rare metals in it are recycled. Lead-acid batteries are too heavy for the amount of energy they store. And they can't be charged rapidly.
Just one slight note. Everyone think nowadays, the ice engines has 30% avg efficiency, but this is actually the maximum, the average is around 12 percent%, so 88% of the petrol and diesel being burned for nothing.
@@GasTroll Yep, 30% is the peak, when engine runs on 4500rpm, and the load torque are in perfect ratio (do not ask what is that ratio.), air is on the right temperature with the right humidity and so on. Cars usually are not in this perfect conditions, so the real world average efficiency around 10-12%. Just think on it. For example. Better cars can do 100km from 4L of diesel. If you accept this as a base line, and you say that has 30% efficiency average, than just take a look on the VW 1XL car, which can go 100km from 1L, so that car has 120% of efficiency? (thermodynamics' law says the theoretical maximum is 50%) Possibly the 1XL 's average is close to 35%, but if that is the 35% then a car which consume 4L will be around 9%
The 30% efficient ICE is just a myth on the internet. You will see everywhere on the internet, but you won't find any proper test. Other myth on the internet is the 99% efficient battery. This also only happen in lab condition. It is closer to 80% in real life. (Just think on it, where the heat come from when a battery is overheating? When a battery got 20 Celsius warmer, than actually 500KG of battery got warmer, that is a crazy amount of energy. Tesla's consumption will probably go down to 11kwh/100km just because of the new battery design which has significantly less internal resistance)(raw calculation: 6kwh just to heat up the battery once with 20 degrees Celsius)
@@buscseik 10-12% sounds low to me. Do you have sources? I know an ICE starts everyday cold, it is less efficient until it heats up. Also as the parts in the engine wear the efficiency drops.
@@GasTroll Sorry, I have no link to source , it is only common sense. I have link to to VW 1XL: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car Just think on it, if 4L is 30% than 1L is 120%?
I feel that you really missed the huge impact of flaring during extraction. This is done in much of Middle East, and remote locations in North America.
24/7 uncontrolled flaring emissions pollution is routine US refinery operation also, which results in many tons/hour of air emissions of CO2 and probably other GHGs and toxic air pollutants.
@GasTroll, my compliments to you on this video for easy-to-understand explanations and excellent visuals. You and I firmly believe that transitioning to EVs is the way to go. While there are many good truths in the video, there are also some partial truths and at times misinformation. The video doesn’t do it for me yet, sorry ... I would like to know the whole unbiased truth of both sides of the story, and it's not here. But before y’all whip out your flamethrowers, note that I’m not here to bash or defend EVs versus ICEs. And I’m definitely NOT here to defend the fossil fuel companies. I bought my first EV earlier this year, and my solar panels help with charging it. I love it! In my experience, the research outcomes consistently align with the pre-conceived notions of folks funding the research. I suspect this video is no exception. I wish experts on both sides would work together with the same data, assumptions, limitations, and analysis techniques to agree on conclusions. But I suspect there’s no money in that. I humbly ask viewers to not allow yourselves to be played by either side. As the old saying goes: "If you’re not part of the solution, there’s plenty of money to be made by prolonging the problem." Now for some details ... I was sad to see that, in some places, the video employs a classic technique: it leads the viewer to think something without actually saying it in the video, which in turn absolves the video creator from any liability. POLLUTION FROM GENERATING ELECTRICTY FOR EVs TODAY: The video talks about pollution from generating electricity for EVs being less than that for ICEs, but that’s because there aren’t many EVs on the road today. A more accurate comparison would be to calculate emissions from generating electricity using today’s sources if all ICEs were EVs. I wish the video would have gone there. OFFSHORE RIG ELECTRICITY USE: The video claims that on average there are 1470 offshore rigs in use, and then proceeds to the calculations. My gut feeling was that 1470 was far too high, and a quick internet check with Statista.com shows there’s never been more than 400 in use for 20 years. That's the number I was expecting. And there’s a difference between an offshore rig used for drilling and/or workovers and an offshore platform used for producing the fossil fuels. Many (sorry I don’t know the percentage) offshore production platforms use natural gas to generate electricity, not diesel. (Natural gas is absorbed in oil like carbon dioxide is absorbed in soda water. As oil is produced on an offshore platform, natural gas is separated from the oil and cleaned to fuel quality. Some of the natural gas is piped to run the generators for electricity, and the rest is sent down the sales line for revenue. Fuel gas volumes are excluded from cashflow analyses and reserve bookings.) With such a disparity between the video and actual, I’m not convinced of the video’s numbers. LITHIUM MINING: The video talks about mining lithium in Australia, China, Chile, and Argentina, but what’s missing are many details after the mining is complete. It doesn't address quantities of energy consumption, emissions, and waste (including toxic waste) disposal incurred (1) transporting the lithium ore to processing plants, (2) converting lithium ore to lithium carbonate, (3) transporting the lithium carbonate to battery plants, and (4) lithium battery manufacturing. By (2) I mean processes like ore size reduction (crushing and milling), calcination, heating to 1000 degrees C, water leaching, evaporation and crystallization, and finally lithium recovery in the form of lithium carbonate. There’s also no discussion about what percentage of lithium batteries is actually repurposed or recycled. The video is missing a full-cycle (“shovels to wheels”) analysis of mining, transporting, manufacturing, disposing/recycling, finding and developing new mines, and building new plants to supply enough lithium to replace ICE vehicles with EVs. "Shovels to wheels" must be objectively compared to "wells to wheels," and this video doesn't go there. And I expect environmental-related and/or tribal-related slowdowns will occur as new lithium mines are found and/or developed. It's ironic. OIL SPILLS: From the video I got the impression that most oil in the ocean comes from manmade spills. That’s completely false. The biggest oil polluter in the oceans is, by far, mother nature and should have been included in the video. Most oil enters the ocean naturally through seeps that have been flowing for centuries, and marine life has grown in those areas to where it is today. While the manmade spills pollute more rapidly than the seeps and the wildlife loss is devastating, the spills occur over a very short time and nature has a way of cleaning up oil quickly (principally evaporation, weathering, consumption by microbes, and sinking). The video gives the viewer the impression that marine life is struggling and suffering when it's actually existed with oil seeps for centuries. SURFACE AREA REQUIREMENTS are completely missing from the video. Any analysis should include how much surface area (land and water) is required to generate sufficient renewable electricity at today’s technology levels, along with expectations as to how this will decrease in the future as technology advances. Deforestation and harm-to-wildlife estimates (bird strikes, marine migration pattern disruptions, etc.) are good to know as well, but be careful as some (but not me) may take these to be show-stoppers. An unbiased analysis must compare the energy created per acre per year of renewables versus energy created per acre per year of a typical oil well or even a natural gas well. OPTIMISTIC SOLAR COSTS: The video claims getting solar today is immediately cheaper than buying electricity from the grid. This is utterly false where I live in the USA, even with me not buying pricey storage batteries to go with my 31 solar panels generating about 10 kW. And as government revenue from gasoline taxes declines because fewer ICE vehicles are on the road, I predict the government will make up the lost revenue by raising taxes on EVs. I know a colleague in the USA who pays US$2000 a year to register his two EVs in California. I pay US$642/year for mine. COSTS AND CAREER TRANSITIONING are missing from the video (N.B. this is likely out of the video's scope anyway). How much will switching to renewables raise or lower the electric bill for an average user? Also, you need a lot of people to make these changes happen. Can the fossil-fuel workers start working in the renewables industry? And for those who do, how will their salaries in renewables compare to fossil fuels? PUMPING JACK ELECTRICITY USE: The video claims that an average pumping jack uses 9960 kWh/month. That’s way more than what I’m used to, but unfortunately I no longer have access to actual numbers to back my claim. While the video addresses how much energy is spent bring the oil and natural gas to the surface, the video doesn’t address how much energy the oil and/or natural gas are delivering. I could say more, but I think that’s enough for now. Some of you won’t end up reading this far anyway. To sum it up, improvements are needed in this video to investigate more realistic scenarios and situations to accurately report the entire (and unbiased) truth of both sides of the story. Transitioning to renewables is the way to go IMO, but it's not as simple, cheap, clean, and effortless as the video makes it out to be.
I know of not a single reputable source saying the transition to both EVs and Renewable Energy is going to be cheap or easy. As far as 'clean', that word is meaningless without context or comparison. It's far cleaner than fossil fuels. Wind is 44x cleaner than natural gas, 90x cleaner than coal, and produces power from a fuel that is free and delivered to source, also free of charge. Hydropower generation, on average, emits 35x less GHGs than a natural gas generating station and about 70x less than a coal-fired generating station. When discussing the impact of manufacturing for renewable or fossil fuel infrastructure it's important to know that by far the biggest carbon footprint in a gas vehicle or fossil fuel power plant comes from the fuel it burns in its lifetime, not its manufacture.
Is all the oil extracted going towards transportation? the numbers are biased towards that assumption. what happens if its factored correctly to transportation use?
Tim, where is the assessment of the carbon contribution for EV’s from extraction of the minerals, shipping of raw materials, conversion of raw materials into the batteries themselves, and then the shipping of the batteries to the manufacturing facilities where the batteries eventually end up in vehicles. We can’t ship lithium batteries on planes. So they’re transported using the same bunker fuel as petroleum is.
@@MrCalistarius exactly. That's the part I was missing too. Minerals also needs to be shipped and are shipped with the same ships. And also needs processing too. We are roughly the same pollution wise after the end of the whole process.
@@gaborborsodi5802 oh dear me. Yes but is that going to exceed the amount used shipping oil needlessly around the world?? Think about that for 1 second and you will realise no it's not. Also it is expected that by 2050 or sooner no more lithium or Cobalt Nickel etc will need to be mined at all for battery use. By then there will be enough in the system that with recycling no more will need to be mined. It is I. Possible to include every si gle fact and calculation in a video of 13 min long and it still be understandable and still get the point across.. #stopburningstyff
@@MrCalistarius shipping is rapidly switching to EV use however the big switch will happen when hydrogen fuel cell technology is scaled up for shipping. The only real safe use for that technology anyway. I know that ships moving oil from Venasuala burn the stock unrefined crude oil! Which has a very high sulpher content and also contains sufficient vanadium metal that issues with the engine exhaust stack blocking up with condensing vanadium Metal is a serious problem for any ship burning it. Engineers have to hammer the sides of the exhaust flues to break up the 2 or 3" thick vanadium metal and drop it down the flue every day! If it's not done it gets too thick to break up and the ship becomes stuck with blocked flues
One thing you failed to say about Lithium mining is that it can only be mined by strip mining. Strip mining, The pros of surface mining are that it has a lower financial cost and is a lot safer than underground mining because all mining operations take place above the surface. The cons are the hazards it presents to human health and the environment. Humans face a variety of health risks caused by mining such as different cardiovascular diseases, food, and water contamination. Habitat destruction, alongside air, noise, and water pollution, are all significant negative environmental impacts caused by the side effects of surface mining. Plus failed to say the types of heavy equipment used to mining Lithium....If you ask me this video is one sided and not factional to both methods of fuels
The arguement is never about not going green. We want to go green, but how and when? Plus affordability is also a issue. This is where the right and left disagree when the left aims for a much aggressive approach and the right prefers a change at a much slower pace.
If you believe this, you need to do more research and stop letting people lie to you. He cherry picked the supply chain and only showed you certain links of the chain and also did not explain how cars are build and how these batteries are recycled. He also compared the entire oil industry to an electric car. The world mostly uses Oil not renewable energy by aa huge margin.
@@russellkeeling4387 Tell me you didn't watch the video without telling me you didn't watch the video. Also, ICE vehicles are 20-80x more likely to catch fire than EVs. If we replaced all ICE cars with EVs we would reduce car fires by 98%. Only someone fully immersed in misinformation still believes the nonsense you're saying.
@@donaldperry148 Some video may say they are cleaner but take a minute to think about it for yourself. They are not cleaner because electricity must still be produced for them to operate. Huge mines scare the earth to produce the crap that goes into them. The only good thing about them is the battery is completely recyclable.
@gas troll You wrote: 'One of my calculations was not correct 70,250,400 cars can be powered by the energy used to pump oil out of the ground in the US and offshore!!! not 19,500,000 in the video. ' You should update the video to reflect that fact to keep your credibility. That's a massive error. It's not enough to mention it in the video description. Otherwise brilliant video. Thanks, D.
Well, it's our CANDU attitude that does that. I live about an hour's drive from one of the largest nuclear generating stations on the planet: Bruce Nuclear Generating Station.
I understand that company’s like Toyota, Nissan, Mazda, etc are only interested in making large Four-Wheel Drive electric vehicles. Does this mean we are back to where we started, because these large vehicles create more pollution to create the larger body, larger wheels, tyre’s etc larger electric motor, and larger battery.
My arguments in the past against ICE always started with the elements and it wasn’t very affective but then I started with how inefficient the internal combustion engine is and how much money you can save running an electrical car .... well now I’m getting through to people! Thanks for this content as it makes it so much easier to get the point across!👍🙏
All that oil is used to make fuel for cars, trucks, rockets, ships, aircrafts, agricultural and mining equipments, the oil is also used to make million of by-products including car parts, tires, insulation..... coal is mined with diesel trucks and is used to make stainless steel. Cement, sand, gravel basically everything is related to the oil industry including EVs
The power station the charges your EV is only 33% efficient, then you have the loses your EV has including huge losses for HVAC. The thermal efficiency of my tdi is over 40%.
@@marclang7431 what facts are you talking about, the ones you stated? Those aren’t facts, might have been over 10 years ago lol but I don’t even think so. There is so much info available online that are recent facts so look them up as I’m already informed and I’m not going to even try to educate anybody who tries to defend ICE vehicles at this day and age! F off and choke on it!
Hello . Thank you for the great work, I’ve seen it on fully charged where I learn that I should ask permission to use if I want it to post! which is what I’m asking actually. Im a car UA-camr who just started here in Morocco and I assure you that Morocco is one of the countries who signed for a the change, encouraging renewable energy for better future. I hope to get answer thanks
So while this had the potential to describe the environmental impact of EV vs Gas, it completely ignored a host of challenges that EV systems do still have in terms of lifetime environmental and energy cost. It's unfortunate because by calculating lifetime energy costs and environmental costs on both sides we could all have a clearer understanding of why to make the transition. EV still has energy transmission costs (energy lost through increased transmission rates on an overburdened and old electrical grid system, toxicity of lifetime usage and increased mining of lithium and other hard metals for battery storage, something you downplay with bad rhetorical logic [while not addressing the issue hasn't actually SCALED yet which is what you're arguing for], spent nuclear storage fuel storage, lifecycle cost and recyclability challenges of solar equipment once this generation of panels is degraded and needs replacing). It's not as simple as 'gas bad, electric good'. EV still has energy costs and recyclability challenges that are different and unique, but we should probably move toward them because they have both immediate benefits and a long term net lower impact and higher efficiency.
But what you missed is, that he did not play down anything regarding the electricity grid/transmission/production. He simply said: Gas production needs a sh*tload of electricity as well, so we'd be better of just using it to drive than to produce fuel which is than burnt at a 30% efficientcy. Yes, he did downplay the minig of the minerals used for the battery production. BUT you mine lithium and conbalt once for a battery that last 20+ years. Gas has to be pumped at a constant rate, as it is only used once...
Regarding lithium extraction - good news! Karlsruhe Institute of Technology in Germany has found a way to filter lithium from the groundwater in geothermal power plants. It is very easy to convert the existing systems, thus not requiring massive amounts of funding for the extraction of lithium.
GasTroll, I learned about this video while listening to you on "The Tech Guy" podcast today. Very well done. You have me looking at EVs more seriously and I'm certain my and my wife's next cars will be an EV. Still not sold on adding solar to my house simply because of the high cost to install on clay spanish tile roofs. Thanks so much for enlightening people. Do you plan to make the app available for Android users at some point?
CLEAN POWER??---you understand this EUROPEAN SOURCES OF POWER image above is purposely vague. Nuclear power and hydro are considered to be CLEAN power. And, a country official from which country may even include NATURAL GAS as clean power. Misleading and not totally unexpected coming from the pro-renewable energy extremists pushing their intermittent, unreliable, non-dispatchable and weather dependent industrial wind and solar power plants.
You my friend are an uneducated fool if you believe ev's are an answer to anything. Follow the money and you will learn all you need to know of this con.
Great Video! Just one question... how much Oil/Energy does it take to ship lithium to the factories where the batteries are produced? Is that even a big factor?
Well, considering that cars don't run on Lithium I don't see how it could be anything close to as bad as endlessly feeding our fuel tanks. Tesla is working on mining in the same location as some factories so in some cases there is no shipping.
@@GasTroll uhm nonsense, lithium has to be mined, processed, transported, shiped to China where its mostly transformed. We still have very few EV on roads compared to ICE but where is the lithium to make 80 million cars a year?! Dont forget that lithium is mined in Australia, Argentina, Chile..... and they aren't always made in the best conditions.
Erm...I totally understand the point made about inefficiency of using oil as fuel for ICE cars. However you make no mention about the oil used to mine the lithium, diesel trucks used in the mines and transporting planes flying miners in and out of mines etc Or the oil used in the manufacture and transport of EVs and solar panels and wind turbines. The fact that once the batteries for EVs lose power the car is discarded because a replacement battery costs too much. Whereas ICE vehicles have a much longer life span etc. Oil is not only used for running cars. So your comparison makes no sense in reality. .
I would say the fuel side of things was well explained, nothing with electric was very well explained tho. He more or less just brought up a problem and quickly dismissed it with minimal hard data. And at least in my area in Minnesota, the large majority of power is generated with coal, diesel, and natural gas. Green energy makes up for less than 7%
@@kevinsaj604 That’s fantastic, however, I would encourage you to look into the complete process of making solar panels themselves and how much non renewable energy they require to make, as well as how much gets wasted in the process. Deforestation is also involved in production believe it or not.
@@bkranz-1283 Minnesota's clean energy progress is continuing at a strong pace. Overall, renewable energy generated 24.9 percent of the state's electricity in 2017 compared to 8.4 percent in 2007, an increase of over 300 percent in the past decade. The video is from 2021.
Seems like EV propaganda to me. Regardless, the EV's can't exist without the oil industry, since the shipping of parts rely on oil burning cargo ships. Not only that, but the reduction transmissions in their drivetrains rely on synthetic oil, and the interior is made of plastics, both of which come from the oil industry. Not only that, but the tarmac that our cars drive on are also made by the oil industry.
there are a few things forgotten in favour of EV's: mining, refining and shipping of lithium does need a lot of energy. Same thing with massive amounts of copper for the car and the charging infrastructure. Same thing with rare earths for the magnets of the motor. Solarpanels and windturbines also have to be build out of something and have to be recycled. To connect this things to the grid, you also need high amounts of copper. And the battery will just last about 8-12years (and so also the car). At the time just a small amount of the battery can be recycled. You will also go through a lot of tires with an EV. The windturbine blades often will land in a landfill and yes, they are made from glass fibre reinforced plastic that the synthetic resin is made from oil. Solarpanels also land in a landfill. All in all not so green anymore. Wanna do something for the environment? Ride a bike more often for short distance drives (without e-motor), take less flights, buy less stuff that you will throw away in a short period of time, insulate your home, plant a tree, drive your old car as long as possible (when it's finally done, reevaluate an EV to a gas or diesel car), repair stuff instead of buying new, try to seperate your waste as good as you can, ... this will help more than just buying an EV and thinking that will safe the planet. Because it isn't.
hey, I wanted to thank you for making this video, it has helped me a lot for my assignment. Also I wanted you to know that their might be a mistake... at 1:58 you say 20-30 m3 of diesel produces 300,000 kWh of electricity a day and that would be 13 billion kWh a month. And that's a BIG number.
Beautifully done! Informative, entertaining, and persuasive. I had never even thought about the energy that goes into getting the gas into the gas tank before. Can't wait till polluting gas-guzzlers are off the road!
@@lockheedmartinf-22raptor73 According to an article in The Week, estimates have shown that synthetic gasoline could cost between $3.80 and $9.20 a gallon. That's likely to be more than the average driver will be willing to pay.
In terms of total running costs, it's been said that if you buy an ICE car at 20,000 or buy an EV with an upfront cost of 30,000, you'll still end up paying the same in running costs, but you'll have a better ride with the EV. I've tried to provide a source, searching UA-cam to find that video again, where this claim was made, but was sadly unsuccessful. So right now, it's just my word for it. But I am sure there are plenty of EV owners outthere, who can support the claim.
I don't disagree with the broader message but where I am seeing bias on the oil side, is basically all oil production and it's power cost is being attributed to public transport alone and it's more like 50%... I don't think it helps any argument to be dishonest. Destroy every public car on earth over night and we'd still need a lot of that oil as things stand. The biggest block to EV's in UK is the price point, people on lower income can't afford them and don't trust the batteries second hand. For one new E.V, I could buy 10 second-hand petrol cars that would last for about 45 years or so, probably much longer if you bought smart... It's not something anyone should expect to be a swift change over. The infrastructure with charging points and power stations needs to be bulked up alongside demand. If there was a vast spike in demand our infrastructure couldn't cope as is either, with the current price point though there is no danger of that anyway.
As EV user, but also gas, I share this video as much as I can. I find it the best one with all info and animation, clear and easy to understand the situation and the figures
Great video. Still waiting for someone to take the normal consumption gas vs EV numbers then combine them with these numbers scaled down to per vehicle to get the true emissions comparisons on a per car basis. I mean without these extra numbers EVs still come ahead as long as you drive them at least 2-4 years or so, but this would change that equation even more.
And getting better and better. Teslas are produced entirely with solar energy, their Semis are powered by solar/batteries and our grids all over the world (especially with lots of wind and sun) are getting greener and greener. Texas of all places is installing the most renewable energy in the US and likely will be the first state to have a fully clean grid... crazy.
I actually did this before i bought my Tesla. My truck gets 15 MPG and there is less than 1% coal power in my region, so in my case, the break even point was only 20k miles.
Mark, I came directly from the Fully Charged version. Wanted to just tell you how brilliant it is. Absolutely fantastic script, facts and figures and animation. How can we help you get subtitles in other languages?
This is brilliant, Id love to see a summary of the Co2 output for the life cycle of a EV vs ICE - including manufacturing - which is apparently higher for an EV?
Engineering Explained has a video where he goes into the data that I find pretty useful. Here's the link: ua-cam.com/video/6RhtiPefVzM/v-deo.html&ab_channel=EngineeringExplained and in case you are suspicious of links in the comments Engineering Explained is the channel and the title of the video in the link is Are Electric Cars Worse For The Environment? Myth Busted
Tesla released this in their quarterly earnings report, could not find it right now but did find their environmental report for 2021, but keep in mind EV production is still in its infancy and has much potential to become more efficient, this combined with the recycling of metals used in the batteries, a cleaner global electricity mix, the fact that many of these EVs will far outlast ICE vehicles, we will soon see the difference between ICE and EV will be much greater when it comes to CO2, but there are many other benefits as described in the video, like the impact to human health and well being. www.tesla.com/ns_videos/2021-tesla-impact-report.pdf Lifetime fuel consumption and use-phase GHG emissions 4 30,000 litres (~8,000 U.S. Gallons) of fuel burned per car 70 tons of CO2e released into the atmosphere Burned fossil fuel is extremely difficult to decarbonize as carbon capture is not economically viable today. 70 MWh of electricity charged per car 30 tons of CO2 released, assuming current global grid mix Production and lifetime use of EVs is possible to decarbonize using well-established technologies Battery pack is recycled at the end-of-life and used to build a brand-new battery pack, over and over again
So much wrong here, conveniently forgetting the carbon used in production compared to petrol cars that gives no equivalence until 100,000 miles driven, so misleading 🤬
@@olly7248 From what i have been able to find an EV battery releses from 40-100 kg of CO2/Kwh, asuming a 60kwh battery that is 2.4-6 tons of CO2 comparing this to an gas car that consumes 8 liters/100km (3kg co2/liter included combustion and production) it will take 10000-25000km before the eletric car is cleaner(asuming a swedish grid to charge the car) on avrage in sweden people drive 15000km/year wich means this point will happen after 0.7-1.7 years asuming an avrage lifetime of 250000km for these vehicles the gas vehicle will have relesed 60 tons of co2 during its lifetime, this is 10-25 times more CO2 emissions than the eletric car
Very intuitive video with creative animation and clearly logical calculations. Thank you for the hard work. 😊 I now understand why it takes over 200 dollars to maintain a gas car and only 40 plus for a electric car based on gas and electric price in my country.
@@fritzhopper5145 What does replacing a battery for maintenance have to do with a 1.685MW battery costing $1.685 million dollars. vs a 50 gallon tank costing a few bucks.
@@fritzhopper5145 I know if I park my Volt outside when it is -20 it costs $0.13 / hr to maintain the battery. The tank of gas stays the same though. If you own a Tesla and it gets salvaged for any reason (e.g. hail damage) you get a lifetime ban from the supercharger network. Will be interesting to see how dangerous negelected / rusty EV's become here in 10+ years for service techs, or even Fire/rescue / salt spray / accidents / dry rot high votsge cables.
CLEAN POWER??---you understand this EUROPEAN SOURCES OF POWER image above is purposely vague. Nuclear power and hydro are considered to be CLEAN power. And, a country official from which country may even include NATURAL GAS as clean power. Misleading and not totally unexpected coming from the pro-renewable energy extremists pushing their intermittent, unreliable, non-dispatchable and weather dependent industrial wind and solar power plants.
So many data in this "analysis" is wrong... starting from the share of renewable in the electricity mix in the EU, which is still in majority fossil based. In any case, I would not give much credit to a Tesla sponsored video...
So… no emissions when recycling batteries? No emissions producing or at end of life of solar panels or windmill fibreglass blades? No oil or diesel used mining for battery materials or copper for that matter? No emissions upgrading or maintaining electrical grid? I have a 23 year old Toyota Corolla that has another 8 or more years left in it that I paid $2500 for at 150,000km. Good on gas, parts are cheap and easy to get. No EV will ever compete with my car.
Actually there is a lot of mining for ICE cars and petroleum. A short video can't begin to examine all the different sources of power and materials required. There are rare earth metals, cobalt etc used in petroleum. The pipes require iron, nickel etc. There are many pumps needing copper, rare earth metals, etc. No matter how you cut it, ICE just takes more resources, energy, and produces way more CO2.
May I make a suggestion, please. Colossal amount of vehicle are petrol or diesel, and they are different brands, different types and shape, and not everyone likes Tesla. Why don't You introduce car CONVERSATION to electric?
Exactly! As I stated elsewhere in this thread, why reinvent the wheel? It's the fuel we need to reinvent, not the cars. Develop the fuel so that current cars could be converted to use and you instantly lower the environmental impact massively, rather than add to it by having to make EV's to replace every ICE car in the world. Current (excuse the pun) car conversions to EV are like EV prices themselves, far too high so that only those who are well off can afford them.
Yes but it is history, I don't think there are any wars being fought right now. Trying to keep this in current times. but maybe I'll mention it in the next video.
This is an excellent video, even though a bit harsh at some points, but funny. I also believe a schoolfriendly version of this would do amazing, not only for schoolkids.
What's not school friendly about this? Humour is important in getting stuff across to kids. Anyone who could potentially get upset by this probably is too young to show it them anyway. I will be sharing with my students as is. Bird poop included!
Its too harsh about ICE, and the oil industry, tell me what is not related to the oil industry please! Even the solar panels and windfarms are made possible because of fossil fuels, those offshore windfarms do you think they grow from salt water?!
@@alanmay7929 well everything is manufactured. If we do not start to break the cycle, we'll never improve the system. We humans have always improved the system. Now that we know what damage burning fossil fuel does, and know we can do better, we need to do this. Not doing it is foolish. Blocking the transition, knowing the damage it causes on us and future generations can be considered criminal.
A great deal of cherry picking only showing the downsides of Internal combustion engines. They are 30% efficient power stations are 25% efficient another 3-5% is lost in transmission. So the power to charge a car comes from where? a coal, gas or oil burning power station that fuel has to be transported to the power station( see above), we are now using green power stations Drax in Lincolnshire burns 25 million trees per year transported from Eastern Europe by? polluting ships and trucks. The energy density of wood is far lower than coal ie many more tons of trees needed to generate the same power but higher energy needed to transport, not mention the environmental impact of deforestation. An electric car uses 70% more energy to manufacture, then 60% or so of the energy put into the battery is lost during charging, so it takes more energy to power a battery car Then look at renewable free energy each wind turbine releases about 1200 tons of CO2 to build( Limestone is CO2 locked up in rocks for millions of years), have to be replaced after 25 years they cannot be reused or recycled so are dumped in landfills! I could go on!. I agree we need to begin changing the way we transport ourselves but this video is deliberately misleading!
I love this video but I think you need to clarify that this only represents the generation of energy to power the vehicle. If you add manufacturing emissions of either, gas powered vehicles still lose, but it's important to note that each does have emissions that add to the total lifecycle emissions (I live in a large city that primarily mines nickel so I know first hand how bad it used to be with SO2 sirens, etc). Maybe that could be your next video :) The mining industry is accelerating their own transition to BEV mining equipment so the gas camp arguments are dwindling at such a rate they won't hold up much longer.
I think you should ve taken into consideration that the demmad for energy will increase with eletric cars and new wind and solar parks will be constructed, not mentioning, the material for recharge points. That wouldnt pollute more? Furthermore, the internal combustion cars are becaming more and more efficient.
@@lisboaluk Why would demand for power increase just because we don't use gasoline/diesel? Super large power plants represent the best in technology at maximizing efficient conversion of fuel to energy, and it's already cheaper to build/use wind and solar than coal or oil. There are thermodynamic limits on the efficiency of ICE engines, particularly since ICE engines are most efficient under consistent loads, not under the full power-near idle-full power profile of cars.
What percentage of the oil pumped out of the ground is actually refined and turned into fuels for vehicles vs other uses ? and what are the energy / environmental impacts of mining cobalt ? It's a pretty one dimensional video.
One dimensional only if you believe the lies that have been spreading. All oil is refined. Cobalt is a nonissue, many times more cobalt is used for oil refining and catalytic converters than is used in batteries. Please realize there is a lot of oil company propaganda out there that has confused this issue.
@@GasTroll Nice selective answering of both of those, admittedly rhetorical, questions. I think there are similar levels of propaganda and hype around electric vehicles - and no amount of me driving around in a plug in electric vehicle will offset the carbon footprint of the “developing” countries. I don’t disagree that gasoline is not the best or most efficient source of energy now or for the future, but I also don’t subscribe to the view that plug in electric vehicles are answer. The current generation is the first iteration and will, in time, be replaced by something better - hydrogen, or synthetic fuels. Remember VHS and Betamax ? That’s where we’re at right now.
@@markschraider In those developing countries the pollution per capita is many times less of what it is in the west, and you have the audacity to say your actions will not help while you point fingers at the less fortunate. absolutely unconscionable! You are a great example of why we are in the situation we are in.
@@markschraider Thank you, but I am referencing facts, I do spend a lot of time researching this, and believe it or not, it is worse than I expect. It seems you have bought into the oil company propaganda. I really hope you can wake up from this and look at the facts with fresh eyes, we will all benefit from this. the amount of natural resources we use in the west, especially the wealthy, is pure gluttony. The research I am doing on my next video will show how bad it really is. 😃
🔌🔌I like that some new *apartment developers in Arizona* are adding Level2 smart charging stations. In some cases, it is up to 160 stations per apartment complex. The price to add a charger is $1,500/ea for the developer and the utility incentives are up to $4,000/ea with a maximum amount of chargers per complex based on the number of units.🔌
Absolutely excellent video. As an EV owner the most annoying thing someone can say is the tired old statement of "& where does an EV get its electricity from"....whilst completely disregarding where petrol & diesel come from!
I have a question for you where do you think tires, lithium, nickel, aluminium, copper..... comes from and are made?! They all need the oil industry. Where do you think your food is made?
A newer trope being circulated among anti-EV people now is "How will the electrical grid have enough capacity to charge all these cars?" which admittedly strikes me as a fair question. I would love to see an analysis of that.
@@snidelywhiplash Well it is kind of concern since usa don't want Nuclear and relying heavily on renewables. But also since most people charge at night, it could offset the burden on the grid.
Great video! However, the reason the EV is clean is thanks to nuclear power. The 53% of of dirty sources (6:00) still require all of the petroleum costs mentioned up to that point. Which doesn't seem bad, but the bulk of the clean fraction( 47%) comes from nuclear power. I agree nuclear power is one of the cleanest sources we have, but in current times (2021), nuclear power is opposed by many of the same people who extol the virtues of EV vehicles. Just keep in mind that for EV to be clean, we need nuclear, at least for the next 10-30 years.
@@billpee9513 No the claim that claim is independent of the electricity source - as just the production of the fossil fuel (well to wheel energy cost) uses up about the same amount of electricity (especially if well, refinery and end user are in the same country) as the EV does to drive...
Millions of people die every day from pollution related illnesses, it's incredible that we are still able to breathe in these air contaminated cities around the world, they say they will stop manufacturing petrol cars until 2031, that's a lot of time when we already have the tech for ev's.
Yes, did you see my video on this? ua-cam.com/video/q9V3oLPcsmk/v-deo.html no one seems to be watching this one an it is showing exactly wha you mention here.
The tanker truck running over the fish was a great touch.
Electric cars emit more pollution than ice cars due to tire an brake dust particulates, I would measure a guess that it is worse for health as well. WSJ just had an article about this. And Canadians rioted last week over increasing fuel tax, which is hurting low income families, NO MORE TAX, WAKE UP PEOPLE, you're being sold a bill of goods that are damaged
Keep on troutin’ 🐟🚛
Take public transport whenever you can guys. That is the most efficient way. Tax both ice and bev and fund public transport.
Nope... the most efficient way is to walk or use regular bicycle...
Missing the part that refineries use a lot of cobalt.
There is variants of Lithium Ion which use ZERO 0 Cobalt e.g. LiFePO4.
@@Neojhun He's talking about the refineries. A lot of cobalt is used in desulfurization of diesel fuel.
@@jocodashcam295 Yep I know, I'm a chemistry nerd who has worked Refineries installing automated and networked volumetric and weight systems. I was just explaining how the contrast between between Fossil Fuel consumption and Future BEV consumption of Cobalt will massive difference.
Tesla fatcells don't use cobalt. And if everyone complains about cobalt, then I recommend them to throw away all your electronics. There is cobalt in everything and your phone which I reckon everyone use everyday. And specifically choose tesla as the only ev manufacturer for not using cobalt.
@@Neojhun not for tesla batteries
Yes, EV pollutes less than gas cars, but public transit pollutes even less! The priority should be making public transit better.
Public transport just waste people’s time
Too expensive to travel anyway
Is cheaper to own a car and schedule your time as pleased
Not wasting time waiting in a station for a bus or worse missing it and not arriving to destination
@@Shocker8MTA In many cities, like Tokyo or Berlin, traveling by public transit is actually cheaper and faster than by car. Trains and buses come every 5 minutes.
Asian and European public transit is superior because those countries invest in public transit.
Owning a car may seem cheap in the US, but there are negative externalities that you are indirectly paying for. For example, you have to waste your precious time in traffic congestion. Also, spending your tax money on building more roads to relieve traffic congestion is much less cost-effective than spending it on public transit.
@@ScrewycummingsI’m not taking a train next to a crazy homeless person. Someone got stabbed in Portland
@@Rudenbehr You can be hit by a drunk driver or be shot by s road raged driver when you drive. I agree that public transit needs to improve its security, but no modes of transportation are absolutely safe. If mental health and homelessness are the problems, they require different solutions. The debate is about pollution and public transit pollutes the least.
Public transportation only works in condensed cities. Any rural area you NEED a car
Love the animation and have arrived to you from Fully Charged. I would like to share the animation with my linked in community. Keep up the good work.
Yes share it please
Yet electric cars are still *not* the cleanest mode of transport. Bicycling, walking, and electric trains are. I thank you so much for including nuclear energy in clean energy! Well done!
Well obviously. Cars in general are never going to be the cleanest. But between petrol and electric cars, electric is the winner
Yet they aren't alive. Soon, children will not appreciate the vehicles of electricity
Nuclear energy is not as clean as you might think
nuclear energy is the cleanest conventional energy
@@smoothmusicful why?
9:12 I love how in the end it just starts a fire in the car
I love it. People say EVs are more likely to catch fire. But actually, the probability of an EV catching fire is 20x less than that of an ICE car lol
@MagicStick absolutely not true. No 'high chances' documented about EVs and snow. Millions of people driving with EVs in the winter, including myself, in heavy-snow areas.
@MagicStick about 260km in the winter and 350km in the summer. Never needed more. I like warm interior, so heating is always up to 21C. The car warms up several times faster than any ICE, btw.
Why don't you go and try one before rambling here?
@MagicStick How often do you drive 800kms straight?
@@vanessaoelmann4211 because they now calculate them by the number of cars, not by the number of EV's.
This is just brilliant video, thanks for making it!
Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!!!!!!
You haven't actually answered the question. You've just made it look like you're answering the question while making oil production look as dirty and deadly as you can imagine without looking fake.
The drive to the grocery store during COVID lockdown is a small sample if everyone’s daily drivers are either all electric or hydrogen fuel cell. There is nothing more satisfying on a drive than rolling down those windows on the highway on a 70 degree day and actually smelling grass.
Some of my very best memories are during the COVID lockdowns.
you have to factor in the energy it takes to clean-up abandoned pump jack wells... So many have been left uncapped because the regulations and bonding requirements, the money that companies pay ahead of time as insurance, for those wells are so minimal that it’s nearly impossible to hold drillers responsible or to pay for cleanup. Some companies simply walk away from wells, meaning they are still liable; when firms go out of business, they are not.
Something I did not think about.I have heard about this though. Thanks
@@GasTroll ...and for gas wells that fuel our electricity production.
You should BOYCOTT all fossil-fuel starting right now. And that includes everything delivered by truckers to the store.
@@jtlanden9771 that includes plastics, so no autos of any kind, and no phones or computers...
@@daytonbill1 If these knuckleheads knew how much diesel fuel a container ship from China uses to get their Chinese garbage goods here. They would all run to their safe spaces with their emotional support animals.
I love the random oil trucks clapping the people throughout the video it was funny
Thank you. It is a huge task to find all this information,, I've tried. Your efforts are appreciated.
Great work Mark and Robert. Suggestion to improvements: Add info on Cobalt mining (so many think all cobalt comes from Congo and is done by small children, and have no idea how much is mined for tooth fillings, tire studs, laptop/smartphone batteries, used in refining oil, etc) and the russian and saudi oil mining too.
Will do!
No cobalt in the new battery LMFP
The use of cobalt in EV batteries is going away, but sadly, it's use in the desulfurization of transportation fuels continues with no end in sight. The use of cobalt is no longer much of anti-EV talking point.
i can finally hope the gas and diesel cars come to an end in 2030 or later but car manufactuers can move on to an refreshing electric that is more enviroment friendly and brings an shiny brighter future
Indeed and Congratulations for the film makers!
The only critique I would like to add is about “renewable” energy! Nowadays there is a lot of criticism about environmental impact of f.I. windmills and solar panels as not being recyclable etc. wish is used in anti EV criticism!
Be great to see an update including the production of the batteries themselves.
It's now came out, the battery of a model 3 takes 7 months of average U.s. driving to break even on the carbon footprint of the battery production when compared to an old stylecombustion car. California has reach 50% of it total energy use from renewables, so even the charging aspect will die off soon enough. Meanwhile gas still requires energy to refine from oil, and burns into the air from the exhaust. Just wait for the numbers on 4680 batteries!
@@emmanuelgutierrez8616 Link? That's a lot quicker than I've been reading.
@@jasoncatt "Using this model, Reuters found that, in the United States, a new 54-kilowatt-hour Tesla Model 3 must be driven 13,500 miles before it becomes cleaner than a Toyota Corolla achieving an average 33 mpg over its lifetime. However, if the same Tesla were driven in Norway, it emissions "break-even point" would come at just 8,400 miles, according to the analysis."
@@emmanuelgutierrez8616 Do you have a link to the Reuters article?
Most battery pollution is due to the diesel chuggers mining the minerals.
Really, really good. You earned my subscription with this one. Thank you.
How often I've said:
So you think that building an island in the middle of the ocean, pumping up oil, shipping it to land, refining it, putting it in a truck and getting that into a small pump you can drive to is better?
Now I can just point to this video, thank you!
That is exactly why it was made. Hope to have more coming in the future to address the other lame excuses to not go electric like "what about the windmill blades".
But for the amount of fuel you get from that, if you take a lot of it to land at once, doesn't it allow to power many more gas cars than the energy used?
@@benurm2390 No, especially when you consider the energy used to Refine and transport the oil and gas. and when you consider one is constantly polluting and one is not there is no denying that EV is many times cleaner. here is an article that helps explain, cleantechnica.com/2021/03/02/electric-car-batteries-need-far-less-raw-materials-than-fossil-fuel-cars-new-study/
@@GasTroll I agree with most of the things you said, don't get me wrong. but from the underground till the refining, whether you use petrol or not, you have to do it all the time! for several reasons & we use some of those "reasons" to make cars (regardless of fuel)
EVs are better in long term; no doubt. but first of all, we should put the efficiency first; and secondly, we should change the way of our living. without trying to use less energy, we will waste it in some form and in long term, that does not really matter what form it is. auto industry is not even #1 among pollution sources!
@@GasTroll and one more thing... if you want to dig that deep, there are some diggings for the EV part as well! don't be a bigot, please! dig both sides! (again... no offense! as I said, I'm with you on many things that you said)
Ship sulfur emissions are now being regulated. James Hansen states: " regulations have been imposed by the International Maritime Organization starting in 2015 and becoming stiffer in 2020." Excellent video!
"The best car is no car. We need better infrastructure to move a majority of people out of their car dependency." - CT
This is the best video i have ever seen on youtube till now about this topic, also the animation is simple and easy to understand. Great video!
I am an avid EV supporter, but unfortunately this video does not provide all the numbers to silence the skeptics.
1. It does not compare the energy and CO2 needed to produce an EV vs an ICE car. That's one part where the EV loses and needs to travel a lot of kms to pay off the debt.
2. It compares the energy needed to produce gasoline with the energy needed to drive an EV. That's a little like comparing oranges to apples.
3. I wish there was a final number of the energy needed to drive 1 km in an EV vs the energy needed to drive 1 km in an ICE. And how much of that energy is clean/renewable based on the current mix.
4. The main problem is not lithium, but cobalt, which is produced in one country that does not respect human rights very much.
I don't agree,
1. BEV is new and manufacturing is still in its infancy when compared to ICE. It is rapidly becoming more efficient.
2, this is the whole point, we don't need to burn oil for our personal transportation. The focus here is not CO2, it is the effect on our health.
3. I hope to get this number someday.
4. Cobalt is a non-issue. The oil companies use more cobalt than EVs, Tesla is very close to completely eliminating cobalt from their batteries. and to me giving work and income to an extremely poor country is a good thing,. It is not our responsibility to tell them how old workers can be to work in a mine, that is their decision and if you ask them if the world should stop buying their Cobalt what do you think they would say? They have actually already said this, and the people want to work in these mines. it is needed income for a country with very little income. I believe these stories about children in these mines is oil company propaganda and is ridiculous when compared to what burning fossil fuel does to humanity every day.
@@GasTroll
I wish there was a final number of the energy needed to drive 1 km in an EV vs the energy needed to drive 1 km in an ICE. And how much of that energy is clean/renewable based on the current mix.
I hope to get this number someday.
If you can't get that number then your analysis is worthless. With an EV you are toting a 1 tonne battery around, so by definition you're going to use a lot more energy than an ICE vehicle to go the same distance. How is that energy generated? Mainly from fossil fuels, and if you think it will be wind and solar in the future, you're living in cloud-cuckoo land.
Very dishonest and one sided video. You complain about 'oil company propaganda' but this video is 'green' energy company propaganda. How about some honesty for once?
And before you say it, I have nothing to do with the fossil fuel industry.
"you're going to use a lot more energy than an ICE vehicle to go the same distance"
Can you explain why a Camry gets a combined 30mpg and a Model 3 is rated at 140mpge? I'll give you a hint, a gallon of gas produces a certain amount of energy.
If you can't explain this, your analysis is worthless.
You forgot about the Cobalt. Like the Cobalt catalysts used to filter petroleum to create low sulphur fuel.
Or the few percent of Cobalt used in billions of tonnes of steel alloys, and the amount of batteries in portable devices beside EVs.
LiFePO4 as the chemical formula dictates has ZERO Cobalt. It technically has no exotic metal at all. Except for Phosphate which natural ore form is controversial to mine, but can be chemical process produced.
Cobalt is currently used in the cathode of a lithium ion battery because it allows a high rate of lithium
@@jtlanden9771 It allows a high lithium rate while providing a safety margin. Without that safety margin we could go for metallic lithium cathodes and have much higher charge capacity (IIRC 9 times higher than current cells) - but probably nobody would risk that cell type.
Cobalt is used specifically in LCO, NMC and NCA type Li-batteries due tu is high specific energy. However, the technology roadmaps for Li-batteries move towards Low and zero cobalt alternatives like NMC 811, LFP, LiNa, LiAl, LTO etc. as well as solid state batteries.
ua-cam.com/video/RFHvq-8np1o/v-deo.html
Brilliant. Should be shown in schools around the world, and a summary should be stuck to every fuel pump, just like health warnings on tobacco.
If you think renewable energy is the way to go just look at the nearly 4000 acre solar farm in texas where nearly all the solar panels were destroyed by a hail storm... And most parts of solar panels dont get recycled for those who don't know.
At least one UA-camr talking Truth ❤
it's showing a utopia... nothing more..
Another problem is cost. Many people can't afford an EV. Many people buy older used cars for much less and drive those. Until you can get a used EV for near the cost of a used gas car, you won't see widespread adoption of EV's if the masses can't afford them, or to fix or maintain them.
Absolutely true! But, if one can factor in the huge savings in gas cost, no oil changes, regenerative braking (unless an aggressive driver) that will allow brakes to last 10 years or more, I am guessing.
In 4 years we paid less than $400 in charging (fuel). Albeit, we don't drive long distances on a daily basis and we charge at a few grocery stores where they have have paid parking and offer free charging AND the parking is reimbursed entirely when you pay for your groceries, so probably not a common scenario.
But to say if we had a gas car and paid $100/month (really low, I think), that would be $1,200/year x 4 years equaling $4,800 vs. $400. No oil or brake changes. A substantial savings that one needs to factor in when looking at the cost of an EV vs. Gas.
But wait, there's more! Anti-EV people often seem to behave as though they believe that internal Combustion engines are just found under toadstools or something. A modern ICE has around 2000 components. They are manufactured in dozens of different factories, and shipped to an assembly plant. Many are made from specialised alloys containing rare metals to provide the specific qualities needed in that part. Plastic and rubber components are similarly specialised. A BEV, however, is simplicity itself. 16-20 moving parts, and overall the resource and energy input of building a new EV is about 30% less than that of the equivalent ICE vehicle. Which is why, in the long run, BEVs will be cheaper than current ICE cars. We just need to get past early adopter pricing.
Yes, it is astonishing to me how people except what has gone on for the last hundred years as being perfect, while they point out every little issue they can with anything new. Here the old technology happens to be killing 5 million people a year and this is completely ignored, instead they focus on birds flying into windmills. it is an absolute joke.
Yeah but isn't it funny how the EV activists seem to think that the electrical power for EVs is 'just found under toadstools or something'.
Over 60% of the electricity generated in the US, comes from burning fossil fuels. Strange how the maker of this video overlooked that fact, isn't it?
@@pauljackson2409 The US's energy mix is discussed in the video at about @5:57.
@@snidelywhiplashTrue, but the figures that they give are not useful and seem exaggerated. What you need is how much CO2 is produced per kWhr of electricity. When you do the maths based on that, you find that EVs produce more CO2 per mile than internal combustion engine vehicles.
See my post.
And again this is assuming that CO2 is a pollutant, which it isn't. It is the basis of all life on Earth and is a minor greenhouse gas which is unlikely to be the cause of the warming of the past 170 years.
@@pauljackson2409 6 litres of diesel fuel use up 42 kWh of energy (which this video spells out nicely). That figure is directly from the horses mouth, which happens to be Mobil Oil. About half of which comes from well pumps, tank pumps, pipeline pumps - all in the form of electricity. So 21 kWh of electricity from the very same grid that you try to slander go into your previous fossil fuel - and then there are the remaining 21 kWh of energy in the form of burnt fossil fuel, be it in generators or at the refinery for heating the noxious cocktail of hydrocarbons to make the fossil fuel you need.
So an EV - which can do 100km on 15-20 kWh of electricity - is supposed to be worse than an ICE car whose fossil fuel takes 21 kWh of the very same electricity and an additional 2 litres of fossil oil being burnt on top of 6 litres of fossil fuel being burned to do the same 100km. Your math and logic skills are seriously lacking.
Great video for making the viewer aware that there is a major downside to ICE vehicles. Thanks for allowing everyone to spread it all over. What we really need to do is get rid of coal fired power plants so there will be much less pollution from EVs and anything that uses electricity.
Crazy it takes the same c02 to produce electric car batteries as running average electric car for 15 years and the batteries don't last and need recycling electric cars also cause cancer miscarriage autism from EMF of the motors kill off bees as this effects Thier navigation
CLEAN POWER??---you understand this EUROPEAN SOURCES OF POWER image above is purposely vague. Nuclear power and hydro are considered to be CLEAN power. And, a country official from which country may even include NATURAL GAS as clean power. Misleading and not totally unexpected coming from the pro-renewable energy extremists pushing their intermittent, unreliable, non-dispatchable and weather dependent industrial wind and solar power plants.
Yeah, but he left out the other hazards related to EVs like the stock piling of black mass. I think that if there was a way to utilize an older battery technology, the better off we can be. Specifically I am talking about lead-acid. These batteries, unlike Lithium-based batteries, are actually recyclable. You have your plastic casing, the lead electrodes and sulphuric acid. That's it. Besides, EVs have these as well.
@@WJCTechyman
There is no "stockpiling of black mass." It is recycled and the lithium and rare metals in it are recycled.
Lead-acid batteries are too heavy for the amount of energy they store. And they can't be charged rapidly.
Just one slight note. Everyone think nowadays, the ice engines has 30% avg efficiency, but this is actually the maximum, the average is around 12 percent%, so 88% of the petrol and diesel being burned for nothing.
Where are you getting this number? I think 30% is peak, it degrades from there.
@@GasTroll Yep, 30% is the peak, when engine runs on 4500rpm, and the load torque are in perfect ratio (do not ask what is that ratio.), air is on the right temperature with the right humidity and so on. Cars usually are not in this perfect conditions, so the real world average efficiency around 10-12%.
Just think on it. For example. Better cars can do 100km from 4L of diesel. If you accept this as a base line, and you say that has 30% efficiency average, than just take a look on the VW 1XL car, which can go 100km from 1L, so that car has 120% of efficiency? (thermodynamics' law says the theoretical maximum is 50%)
Possibly the 1XL 's average is close to 35%, but if that is the 35% then a car which consume 4L will be around 9%
The 30% efficient ICE is just a myth on the internet. You will see everywhere on the internet, but you won't find any proper test. Other myth on the internet is the 99% efficient battery. This also only happen in lab condition. It is closer to 80% in real life. (Just think on it, where the heat come from when a battery is overheating? When a battery got 20 Celsius warmer, than actually 500KG of battery got warmer, that is a crazy amount of energy. Tesla's consumption will probably go down to 11kwh/100km just because of the new battery design which has significantly less internal resistance)(raw calculation: 6kwh just to heat up the battery once with 20 degrees Celsius)
@@buscseik 10-12% sounds low to me. Do you have sources? I know an ICE starts everyday cold, it is less efficient until it heats up. Also as the parts in the engine wear the efficiency drops.
@@GasTroll Sorry, I have no link to source , it is only common sense. I have link to to VW 1XL:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car
Just think on it, if 4L is 30% than 1L is 120%?
I feel that you really missed the huge impact of flaring during extraction. This is done in much of Middle East, and remote locations in North America.
24/7 uncontrolled flaring emissions pollution is routine US refinery operation also, which results in many tons/hour of air emissions of CO2 and probably other GHGs and toxic air pollutants.
@@rd264 Flaring also wastes more than enough gas to power Germany.
@GasTroll, my compliments to you on this video for easy-to-understand explanations and excellent visuals. You and I firmly believe that transitioning to EVs is the way to go. While there are many good truths in the video, there are also some partial truths and at times misinformation.
The video doesn’t do it for me yet, sorry ... I would like to know the whole unbiased truth of both sides of the story, and it's not here.
But before y’all whip out your flamethrowers, note that I’m not here to bash or defend EVs versus ICEs. And I’m definitely NOT here to defend the fossil fuel companies. I bought my first EV earlier this year, and my solar panels help with charging it. I love it!
In my experience, the research outcomes consistently align with the pre-conceived notions of folks funding the research. I suspect this video is no exception.
I wish experts on both sides would work together with the same data, assumptions, limitations, and analysis techniques to agree on conclusions. But I suspect there’s no money in that.
I humbly ask viewers to not allow yourselves to be played by either side. As the old saying goes: "If you’re not part of the solution, there’s plenty of money to be made by prolonging the problem."
Now for some details ...
I was sad to see that, in some places, the video employs a classic technique: it leads the viewer to think something without actually saying it in the video, which in turn absolves the video creator from any liability.
POLLUTION FROM GENERATING ELECTRICTY FOR EVs TODAY: The video talks about pollution from generating electricity for EVs being less than that for ICEs, but that’s because there aren’t many EVs on the road today. A more accurate comparison would be to calculate emissions from generating electricity using today’s sources if all ICEs were EVs. I wish the video would have gone there.
OFFSHORE RIG ELECTRICITY USE: The video claims that on average there are 1470 offshore rigs in use, and then proceeds to the calculations. My gut feeling was that 1470 was far too high, and a quick internet check with Statista.com shows there’s never been more than 400 in use for 20 years. That's the number I was expecting.
And there’s a difference between an offshore rig used for drilling and/or workovers and an offshore platform used for producing the fossil fuels. Many (sorry I don’t know the percentage) offshore production platforms use natural gas to generate electricity, not diesel. (Natural gas is absorbed in oil like carbon dioxide is absorbed in soda water. As oil is produced on an offshore platform, natural gas is separated from the oil and cleaned to fuel quality. Some of the natural gas is piped to run the generators for electricity, and the rest is sent down the sales line for revenue. Fuel gas volumes are excluded from cashflow analyses and reserve bookings.)
With such a disparity between the video and actual, I’m not convinced of the video’s numbers.
LITHIUM MINING: The video talks about mining lithium in Australia, China, Chile, and Argentina, but what’s missing are many details after the mining is complete. It doesn't address quantities of energy consumption, emissions, and waste (including toxic waste) disposal incurred (1) transporting the lithium ore to processing plants, (2) converting lithium ore to lithium carbonate, (3) transporting the lithium carbonate to battery plants, and (4) lithium battery manufacturing.
By (2) I mean processes like ore size reduction (crushing and milling), calcination, heating to 1000 degrees C, water leaching, evaporation and crystallization, and finally lithium recovery in the form of lithium carbonate.
There’s also no discussion about what percentage of lithium batteries is actually repurposed or recycled.
The video is missing a full-cycle (“shovels to wheels”) analysis of mining, transporting, manufacturing, disposing/recycling, finding and developing new mines, and building new plants to supply enough lithium to replace ICE vehicles with EVs. "Shovels to wheels" must be objectively compared to "wells to wheels," and this video doesn't go there.
And I expect environmental-related and/or tribal-related slowdowns will occur as new lithium mines are found and/or developed. It's ironic.
OIL SPILLS: From the video I got the impression that most oil in the ocean comes from manmade spills. That’s completely false. The biggest oil polluter in the oceans is, by far, mother nature and should have been included in the video. Most oil enters the ocean naturally through seeps that have been flowing for centuries, and marine life has grown in those areas to where it is today. While the manmade spills pollute more rapidly than the seeps and the wildlife loss is devastating, the spills occur over a very short time and nature has a way of cleaning up oil quickly (principally evaporation, weathering, consumption by microbes, and sinking). The video gives the viewer the impression that marine life is struggling and suffering when it's actually existed with oil seeps for centuries.
SURFACE AREA REQUIREMENTS are completely missing from the video. Any analysis should include how much surface area (land and water) is required to generate sufficient renewable electricity at today’s technology levels, along with expectations as to how this will decrease in the future as technology advances. Deforestation and harm-to-wildlife estimates (bird strikes, marine migration pattern disruptions, etc.) are good to know as well, but be careful as some (but not me) may take these to be show-stoppers. An unbiased analysis must compare the energy created per acre per year of renewables versus energy created per acre per year of a typical oil well or even a natural gas well.
OPTIMISTIC SOLAR COSTS: The video claims getting solar today is immediately cheaper than buying electricity from the grid. This is utterly false where I live in the USA, even with me not buying pricey storage batteries to go with my 31 solar panels generating about 10 kW.
And as government revenue from gasoline taxes declines because fewer ICE vehicles are on the road, I predict the government will make up the lost revenue by raising taxes on EVs. I know a colleague in the USA who pays US$2000 a year to register his two EVs in California. I pay US$642/year for mine.
COSTS AND CAREER TRANSITIONING are missing from the video (N.B. this is likely out of the video's scope anyway). How much will switching to renewables raise or lower the electric bill for an average user? Also, you need a lot of people to make these changes happen. Can the fossil-fuel workers start working in the renewables industry? And for those who do, how will their salaries in renewables compare to fossil fuels?
PUMPING JACK ELECTRICITY USE: The video claims that an average pumping jack uses 9960 kWh/month. That’s way more than what I’m used to, but unfortunately I no longer have access to actual numbers to back my claim. While the video addresses how much energy is spent bring the oil and natural gas to the surface, the video doesn’t address how much energy the oil and/or natural gas are delivering.
I could say more, but I think that’s enough for now. Some of you won’t end up reading this far anyway.
To sum it up, improvements are needed in this video to investigate more realistic scenarios and situations to accurately report the entire (and unbiased) truth of both sides of the story. Transitioning to renewables is the way to go IMO, but it's not as simple, cheap, clean, and effortless as the video makes it out to be.
Read every word, thank you! I am like you: an EV advocate who feels we must start from common frames of reference in order to advance innovation.
I know of not a single reputable source saying the transition to both EVs and Renewable Energy is going to be cheap or easy. As far as 'clean', that word is meaningless without context or comparison. It's far cleaner than fossil fuels. Wind is 44x cleaner than natural gas, 90x cleaner than coal, and produces power from a fuel that is free and delivered to source, also free of charge. Hydropower generation, on average, emits 35x less GHGs than a natural gas generating station and about 70x less than a coal-fired generating station. When discussing the impact of manufacturing for renewable or fossil fuel infrastructure it's important to know that by far the biggest carbon footprint in a gas vehicle or fossil fuel power plant comes from the fuel it burns in its lifetime, not its manufacture.
Tnx Dan Harris
Remember kids, the devils are in the details. In this videos case, it was witholding information.
This is fantastic, well done. Saving this link to share with anyone who comes up with these rediculous arguments against EVs.
Is all the oil extracted going towards transportation? the numbers are biased towards that assumption. what happens if its factored correctly to transportation use?
Tim, where is the assessment of the carbon contribution for EV’s from extraction of the minerals, shipping of raw materials, conversion of raw materials into the batteries themselves, and then the shipping of the batteries to the manufacturing facilities where the batteries eventually end up in vehicles. We can’t ship lithium batteries on planes. So they’re transported using the same bunker fuel as petroleum is.
@@MrCalistarius exactly. That's the part I was missing too. Minerals also needs to be shipped and are shipped with the same ships. And also needs processing too. We are roughly the same pollution wise after the end of the whole process.
@@gaborborsodi5802 oh dear me. Yes but is that going to exceed the amount used shipping oil needlessly around the world?? Think about that for 1 second and you will realise no it's not. Also it is expected that by 2050 or sooner no more lithium or Cobalt Nickel etc will need to be mined at all for battery use. By then there will be enough in the system that with recycling no more will need to be mined. It is I. Possible to include every si gle fact and calculation in a video of 13 min long and it still be understandable and still get the point across.. #stopburningstyff
@@MrCalistarius shipping is rapidly switching to EV use however the big switch will happen when hydrogen fuel cell technology is scaled up for shipping. The only real safe use for that technology anyway. I know that ships moving oil from Venasuala burn the stock unrefined crude oil! Which has a very high sulpher content and also contains sufficient vanadium metal that issues with the engine exhaust stack blocking up with condensing vanadium Metal is a serious problem for any ship burning it. Engineers have to hammer the sides of the exhaust flues to break up the 2 or 3" thick vanadium metal and drop it down the flue every day! If it's not done it gets too thick to break up and the ship becomes stuck with blocked flues
One thing you failed to say about Lithium mining is that it can only be mined by strip mining. Strip mining, The pros of surface mining are that it has a lower financial cost and is a lot safer than underground mining because all mining operations take place above the surface. The cons are the hazards it presents to human health and the environment. Humans face a variety of health risks caused by mining such as different cardiovascular diseases, food, and water contamination. Habitat destruction, alongside air, noise, and water pollution, are all significant negative environmental impacts caused by the side effects of surface mining. Plus failed to say the types of heavy equipment used to mining Lithium....If you ask me this video is one sided and not factional to both methods of fuels
The arguement is never about not going green. We want to go green, but how and when? Plus affordability is also a issue. This is where the right and left disagree when the left aims for a much aggressive approach and the right prefers a change at a much slower pace.
Thanks for the video. I get so tired trying to explain these concepts to my parents. I'll just share this video next time this topic comes up.
This needs to be brought to more people's attention. Share the heck out of it every place you can.
ua-cam.com/video/G67i_Z8ukD4/v-deo.html
If you believe this, you need to do more research and stop letting people lie to you. He cherry picked the supply chain and only showed you certain links of the chain and also did not explain how cars are build and how these batteries are recycled. He also compared the entire oil industry to an electric car. The world mostly uses Oil not renewable energy by aa huge margin.
@@versailles9412 The US is approaching 50% renewable energy for power plants. That is an incredible change in the past decade.
This video is highly inaccurate and no I'm not a hater I own a Tesla it's just I believe in truth and facts and it ain't in this video
@Mark A that’s because nuclear power is by far the most efficient. However it needs to become no-risk for people to trust it not to fail and blow up
Batteries can be recycled over and over. Gasoline can not
Not if they explode or burn up. Then they just add a lot of pollution to the atmosphere. EVs are not cleaner.
@@russellkeeling4387 Tell me you didn't watch the video without telling me you didn't watch the video.
Also, ICE vehicles are 20-80x more likely to catch fire than EVs. If we replaced all ICE cars with EVs we would reduce car fires by 98%. Only someone fully immersed in misinformation still believes the nonsense you're saying.
@@russellkeeling4387the video shows that electric vehicles are cleaner
@@donaldperry148 Some video may say they are cleaner but take a minute to think about it for yourself. They are not cleaner because electricity must still be produced for them to operate. Huge mines scare the earth to produce the crap that goes into them. The only good thing about them is the battery is completely recyclable.
@@donaldperry148 Sorry but the fact is they are not. Not only less environmentally clean but far more expensive and dangerous.
I'm still watching, so forgive me if this is covered later. But obviously all of the oil produced by pump jacks isn't just used to make gasoline.
What planet are you tlking about, here on earth pumpjacks pump oil, oil is refined into gasoline then burned in ICEs.
@gas troll You wrote: 'One of my calculations was not correct
70,250,400 cars can be powered by the energy used to pump oil out of the ground in the US and offshore!!! not 19,500,000 in the video. '
You should update the video to reflect that fact to keep your credibility. That's a massive error. It's not enough to mention it in the video description. Otherwise brilliant video. Thanks, D.
Great video for every tesla hater that wants an argument to hate EVs.
In Ontario where I live, 8% of our grid emits GHG of any kind. Thank you hydro and nuclear!
Well, it's our CANDU attitude that does that. I live about an hour's drive from one of the largest nuclear generating stations on the planet: Bruce Nuclear Generating Station.
So glad I found this again
I understand that company’s like Toyota, Nissan, Mazda, etc are only interested in making large Four-Wheel Drive electric vehicles. Does this mean we are back to where we started, because these large vehicles create more pollution to create the larger body, larger wheels, tyre’s etc larger electric motor, and larger battery.
My arguments in the past against ICE always started with the elements and it wasn’t very affective but then I started with how inefficient the internal combustion engine is and how much money you can save running an electrical car .... well now I’m getting through to people!
Thanks for this content as it makes it so much easier to get the point across!👍🙏
All that oil is used to make fuel for cars, trucks, rockets, ships, aircrafts, agricultural and mining equipments, the oil is also used to make million of by-products including car parts, tires, insulation..... coal is mined with diesel trucks and is used to make stainless steel. Cement, sand, gravel basically everything is related to the oil industry including EVs
The power station the charges your EV is only 33% efficient, then you have the loses your EV has including huge losses for HVAC. The thermal efficiency of my tdi is over 40%.
@@marclang7431 🤣
@@cesarpegado69 you don't like facts?😁
@@marclang7431 what facts are you talking about, the ones you stated? Those aren’t facts, might have been over 10 years ago lol but I don’t even think so. There is so much info available online that are recent facts so look them up as I’m already informed and I’m not going to even try to educate anybody who tries to defend ICE vehicles at this day and age! F off and choke on it!
Hello . Thank you for the great work, I’ve seen it on fully charged where I learn that I should ask permission to use if I want it to post! which is what I’m asking actually. Im a car UA-camr who just started here in Morocco and I assure you that Morocco is one of the countries who signed for a the change, encouraging renewable energy for better future. I hope to get answer thanks
You can contact me through my channels about page
Ayyy, It's finally re-released!
I gotta say man, I wronged you.
So while this had the potential to describe the environmental impact of EV vs Gas, it completely ignored a host of challenges that EV systems do still have in terms of lifetime environmental and energy cost. It's unfortunate because by calculating lifetime energy costs and environmental costs on both sides we could all have a clearer understanding of why to make the transition.
EV still has energy transmission costs (energy lost through increased transmission rates on an overburdened and old electrical grid system, toxicity of lifetime usage and increased mining of lithium and other hard metals for battery storage, something you downplay with bad rhetorical logic [while not addressing the issue hasn't actually SCALED yet which is what you're arguing for], spent nuclear storage fuel storage, lifecycle cost and recyclability challenges of solar equipment once this generation of panels is degraded and needs replacing). It's not as simple as 'gas bad, electric good'. EV still has energy costs and recyclability challenges that are different and unique, but we should probably move toward them because they have both immediate benefits and a long term net lower impact and higher efficiency.
I agree with you but the channel is called Gas troll not really expecting an unbiased view on things :D
But what you missed is, that he did not play down anything regarding the electricity grid/transmission/production. He simply said: Gas production needs a sh*tload of electricity as well, so we'd be better of just using it to drive than to produce fuel which is than burnt at a 30% efficientcy. Yes, he did downplay the minig of the minerals used for the battery production. BUT you mine lithium and conbalt once for a battery that last 20+ years. Gas has to be pumped at a constant rate, as it is only used once...
Were do the bateries go when they go wasted?
What will happen when ALL the electric cars are continually discarding batteries???
Regarding lithium extraction - good news! Karlsruhe Institute of Technology in Germany has found a way to filter lithium from the groundwater in geothermal power plants. It is very easy to convert the existing systems, thus not requiring massive amounts of funding for the extraction of lithium.
Excellent watch! Thanks for doing such thorough research and presenting it in such a digestible format.
GasTroll, I learned about this video while listening to you on "The Tech Guy" podcast today. Very well done. You have me looking at EVs more seriously and I'm certain my and my wife's next cars will be an EV. Still not sold on adding solar to my house simply because of the high cost to install on clay spanish tile roofs. Thanks so much for enlightening people. Do you plan to make the app available for Android users at some point?
Glad it was helpful! I hope to make an android version if the app becomes profitable in the future.
If you are living in the sunshine states then Solar will help, for instant, if you live in Seatle?? you are doomed.
CLEAN POWER??---you understand this EUROPEAN SOURCES OF POWER image above is purposely vague. Nuclear power and hydro are considered to be CLEAN power. And, a country official from which country may even include NATURAL GAS as clean power. Misleading and not totally unexpected coming from the pro-renewable energy extremists pushing their intermittent, unreliable, non-dispatchable and weather dependent industrial wind and solar power plants.
You my friend are an uneducated fool if you believe ev's are an answer to anything. Follow the money and you will learn all you need to know of this con.
Great Video! Just one question... how much Oil/Energy does it take to ship lithium to the factories where the batteries are produced? Is that even a big factor?
Well, considering that cars don't run on Lithium I don't see how it could be anything close to as bad as endlessly feeding our fuel tanks. Tesla is working on mining in the same location as some factories so in some cases there is no shipping.
@@GasTroll uhm nonsense, lithium has to be mined, processed, transported, shiped to China where its mostly transformed. We still have very few EV on roads compared to ICE but where is the lithium to make 80 million cars a year?! Dont forget that lithium is mined in Australia, Argentina, Chile..... and they aren't always made in the best conditions.
@@GasTroll that tesla mining process is still under development and still won't solve the problem of lithium availability/production.
@@alanmay7929 Don't worry Alan, in the future only the very rich will be able to own their own vehicles or travel outside their own towns.
@@riche.6660 thats what she said....
Erm...I totally understand the point made about inefficiency of using oil as fuel for ICE cars.
However you make no mention about the oil used to mine the lithium, diesel trucks used in the mines and transporting planes flying miners in and out of mines etc
Or the oil used in the manufacture and transport of EVs and solar panels and wind turbines.
The fact that once the batteries for EVs lose power the car is discarded because a replacement battery costs too much. Whereas ICE vehicles have a much longer life span etc.
Oil is not only used for running cars. So your comparison makes no sense in reality.
.
I don't know where you get these numbers from, but they don't have much to do with reality
Best video of this subject EVER!!!! Congratulations and thank you. I will share this everywhere I can. 👍
Well explained! Absolutely love this video. Everyone in the world needs to see this.
Why not biobutanol
I would say the fuel side of things was well explained, nothing with electric was very well explained tho. He more or less just brought up a problem and quickly dismissed it with minimal hard data. And at least in my area in Minnesota, the large majority of power is generated with coal, diesel, and natural gas. Green energy makes up for less than 7%
@@bkranz-1283 In my country of Australia, 40% of homes have solar. Evs can be charged through renewable sources which is a big positive
@@kevinsaj604 That’s fantastic, however, I would encourage you to look into the complete process of making solar panels themselves and how much non renewable energy they require to make, as well as how much gets wasted in the process. Deforestation is also involved in production believe it or not.
@@bkranz-1283 Minnesota's clean energy progress is continuing at a strong pace. Overall, renewable energy generated 24.9 percent of the state's electricity in 2017 compared to 8.4 percent in 2007, an increase of over 300 percent in the past decade. The video is from 2021.
I love this video, your argument is so well made!
But it’s not an argument, it’s just plain facts.
Seems like EV propaganda to me. Regardless, the EV's can't exist without the oil industry, since the shipping of parts rely on oil burning cargo ships. Not only that, but the reduction transmissions in their drivetrains rely on synthetic oil, and the interior is made of plastics, both of which come from the oil industry. Not only that, but the tarmac that our cars drive on are also made by the oil industry.
One step at a time.
there are a few things forgotten in favour of EV's: mining, refining and shipping of lithium does need a lot of energy. Same thing with massive amounts of copper for the car and the charging infrastructure. Same thing with rare earths for the magnets of the motor. Solarpanels and windturbines also have to be build out of something and have to be recycled. To connect this things to the grid, you also need high amounts of copper. And the battery will just last about 8-12years (and so also the car). At the time just a small amount of the battery can be recycled. You will also go through a lot of tires with an EV. The windturbine blades often will land in a landfill and yes, they are made from glass fibre reinforced plastic that the synthetic resin is made from oil. Solarpanels also land in a landfill. All in all not so green anymore. Wanna do something for the environment? Ride a bike more often for short distance drives (without e-motor), take less flights, buy less stuff that you will throw away in a short period of time, insulate your home, plant a tree, drive your old car as long as possible (when it's finally done, reevaluate an EV to a gas or diesel car), repair stuff instead of buying new, try to seperate your waste as good as you can, ... this will help more than just buying an EV and thinking that will safe the planet. Because it isn't.
Not to mention the huge plastic cycle around oil refining. Recycle plastic doesn't have the right properties to be used in many sectors
hey, I wanted to thank you for making this video, it has helped me a lot for my assignment. Also I wanted you to know that their might be a mistake... at 1:58 you say 20-30 m3 of diesel produces 300,000 kWh of electricity a day and that would be 13 billion kWh a month. And that's a BIG number.
Yes, this is noted in the video description.
Beautifully done! Informative, entertaining, and persuasive. I had never even thought about the energy that goes into getting the gas into the gas tank before. Can't wait till polluting gas-guzzlers are off the road!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Nah imma keep my v8
@@lockheedmartinf-22raptor73 You do that. Just don't expect prices on fuel for that thing to become any cheaper in the upcoming years...
@@pHD77 synthetic fuel is going to become an abundance since aircraft still need them and is needed for racing as well
@@lockheedmartinf-22raptor73 According to an article in The Week, estimates have shown that synthetic gasoline could cost between $3.80 and $9.20 a gallon. That's likely to be more than the average driver will be willing to pay.
Best demonstration I've seen on the subject. Excellent. Now if they can just bring the initial cost of vehicles down a little more...
In terms of total running costs, it's been said that if you buy an ICE car at 20,000 or buy an EV with an upfront cost of 30,000, you'll still end up paying the same in running costs, but you'll have a better ride with the EV.
I've tried to provide a source, searching UA-cam to find that video again, where this claim was made, but was sadly unsuccessful. So right now, it's just my word for it. But I am sure there are plenty of EV owners outthere, who can support the claim.
Yeah, just a little🤣
I don't disagree with the broader message but where I am seeing bias on the oil side, is basically all oil production and it's power cost is being attributed to public transport alone and it's more like 50%... I don't think it helps any argument to be dishonest. Destroy every public car on earth over night and we'd still need a lot of that oil as things stand.
The biggest block to EV's in UK is the price point, people on lower income can't afford them and don't trust the batteries second hand. For one new E.V, I could buy 10 second-hand petrol cars that would last for about 45 years or so, probably much longer if you bought smart...
It's not something anyone should expect to be a swift change over. The infrastructure with charging points and power stations needs to be bulked up alongside demand. If there was a vast spike in demand our infrastructure couldn't cope as is either, with the current price point though there is no danger of that anyway.
As EV user, but also gas, I share this video as much as I can. I find it the best one with all info and animation, clear and easy to understand the situation and the figures
This is great! let's share it!
Great video. Still waiting for someone to take the normal consumption gas vs EV numbers then combine them with these numbers scaled down to per vehicle to get the true emissions comparisons on a per car basis. I mean without these extra numbers EVs still come ahead as long as you drive them at least 2-4 years or so, but this would change that equation even more.
And getting better and better. Teslas are produced entirely with solar energy, their Semis are powered by solar/batteries and our grids all over the world (especially with lots of wind and sun) are getting greener and greener. Texas of all places is installing the most renewable energy in the US and likely will be the first state to have a fully clean grid... crazy.
I actually did this before i bought my Tesla. My truck gets 15 MPG and there is less than 1% coal power in my region, so in my case, the break even point was only 20k miles.
Mark, I came directly from the Fully Charged version. Wanted to just tell you how brilliant it is. Absolutely fantastic script, facts and figures and animation. How can we help you get subtitles in other languages?
Contact me though my channel page
Please add footprint of manufacturing of both types of cars and solar panels and windmills..and engine oils.
excellent video, what is the editing software you use?, thanks
This is brilliant, Id love to see a summary of the Co2 output for the life cycle of a EV vs ICE - including manufacturing - which is apparently higher for an EV?
Engineering Explained has a video where he goes into the data that I find pretty useful. Here's the link: ua-cam.com/video/6RhtiPefVzM/v-deo.html&ab_channel=EngineeringExplained and in case you are suspicious of links in the comments Engineering Explained is the channel and the title of the video in the link is Are Electric Cars Worse For The Environment? Myth Busted
Tesla released this in their quarterly earnings report, could not find it right now but did find their environmental report for 2021, but keep in mind EV production is still in its infancy and has much potential to become more efficient, this combined with the recycling of metals used in the batteries, a cleaner global electricity mix, the fact that many of these EVs will far outlast ICE vehicles, we will soon see the difference between ICE and EV will be much greater when it comes to CO2, but there are many other benefits as described in the video, like the impact to human health and well being.
www.tesla.com/ns_videos/2021-tesla-impact-report.pdf
Lifetime fuel consumption and use-phase GHG emissions
4
30,000 litres (~8,000 U.S. Gallons) of fuel burned per car 70 tons of CO2e released into the atmosphere
Burned fossil fuel is extremely difficult to decarbonize as carbon capture is not economically viable today.
70 MWh of electricity charged per car
30 tons of CO2 released, assuming current global grid mix
Production and lifetime use of EVs is possible to decarbonize using well-established technologies
Battery pack is recycled at the end-of-life and used
to build a brand-new battery pack, over and over again
So much wrong here, conveniently forgetting the carbon used in production compared to petrol cars that gives no equivalence until 100,000 miles driven, so misleading 🤬
@@olly7248 100,000miles? where did you hear that?
@@olly7248 From what i have been able to find an EV battery releses from 40-100 kg of CO2/Kwh,
asuming a 60kwh battery that is 2.4-6 tons of CO2
comparing this to an gas car that consumes 8 liters/100km (3kg co2/liter included combustion and production)
it will take 10000-25000km before the eletric car is cleaner(asuming a swedish grid to charge the car)
on avrage in sweden people drive 15000km/year wich means this point will happen after 0.7-1.7 years
asuming an avrage lifetime of 250000km for these vehicles
the gas vehicle will have relesed 60 tons of co2 during its lifetime,
this is 10-25 times more CO2 emissions than the eletric car
Very intuitive video with creative animation and clearly logical calculations. Thank you for the hard work. 😊 I now understand why it takes over 200 dollars to maintain a gas car and only 40 plus for a electric car based on gas and electric price in my country.
1 gallon of gasoline = 33.7KWh of energy
50 gallon tank / barrel / drum = $5 - $150 ?
How much does a 1,685KWh (1.685MWh) battery cost?
Derp.
@@andyh8239 Do you replace battery every maintenance?
@@fritzhopper5145 What does replacing a battery for maintenance have to do with a 1.685MW battery costing $1.685 million dollars. vs a 50 gallon tank costing a few bucks.
@@andyh8239 I am only talking about regular maintenance cost here. Are we still talking about the same thing?
@@fritzhopper5145 I know if I park my Volt outside when it is -20 it costs $0.13 / hr to maintain the battery. The tank of gas stays the same though.
If you own a Tesla and it gets salvaged for any reason (e.g. hail damage) you get a lifetime ban from the supercharger network.
Will be interesting to see how dangerous negelected / rusty EV's become here in 10+ years for service techs, or even Fire/rescue / salt spray / accidents / dry rot high votsge cables.
this is great! thanks for making this!
CLEAN POWER??---you understand this EUROPEAN SOURCES OF POWER image above is purposely vague. Nuclear power and hydro are considered to be CLEAN power. And, a country official from which country may even include NATURAL GAS as clean power. Misleading and not totally unexpected coming from the pro-renewable energy extremists pushing their intermittent, unreliable, non-dispatchable and weather dependent industrial wind and solar power plants.
THANK YOU!
So many data in this "analysis" is wrong... starting from the share of renewable in the electricity mix in the EU, which is still in majority fossil based. In any case, I would not give much credit to a Tesla sponsored video...
Fossil fuel plant electricity is still way better than every car using fossil fuels.
So… no emissions when recycling batteries? No emissions producing or at end of life of solar panels or windmill fibreglass blades? No oil or diesel used mining for battery materials or copper for that matter? No emissions upgrading or maintaining electrical grid? I have a 23 year old Toyota Corolla that has another 8 or more years left in it that I paid $2500 for at 150,000km. Good on gas, parts are cheap and easy to get. No EV will ever compete with my car.
There is always one 😢
Actually there is a lot of mining for ICE cars and petroleum. A short video can't begin to examine all the different sources of power and materials required. There are rare earth metals, cobalt etc used in petroleum. The pipes require iron, nickel etc. There are many pumps needing copper, rare earth metals, etc. No matter how you cut it, ICE just takes more resources, energy, and produces way more CO2.
This video is great. Well done👍 Commenting mostly for the algorithm!
One of the best Videos I have ever seen in this regard. Bravo!
How have I not seen this until today. Algorithm sucks. I'll be sharing this one, thanks.
May I make a suggestion, please. Colossal amount of vehicle are petrol or diesel, and they are different brands, different types and shape, and not everyone likes Tesla. Why don't You introduce car CONVERSATION to electric?
Exactly! As I stated elsewhere in this thread, why reinvent the wheel? It's the fuel we need to reinvent, not the cars. Develop the fuel so that current cars could be converted to use and you instantly lower the environmental impact massively, rather than add to it by having to make EV's to replace every ICE car in the world. Current (excuse the pun) car conversions to EV are like EV prices themselves, far too high so that only those who are well off can afford them.
I'd also add to this how much energy is used, pollution created and life lost simply fighting over oil. That should always be added to the equation.
Yes but it is history, I don't think there are any wars being fought right now. Trying to keep this in current times. but maybe I'll mention it in the next video.
This is an excellent video, even though a bit harsh at some points, but funny.
I also believe a schoolfriendly version of this would do amazing, not only for schoolkids.
Good idea! Cut out all the death and make a G rated version. If a school wants it I would make it.
What's not school friendly about this? Humour is important in getting stuff across to kids. Anyone who could potentially get upset by this probably is too young to show it them anyway. I will be sharing with my students as is. Bird poop included!
Its too harsh about ICE, and the oil industry, tell me what is not related to the oil industry please! Even the solar panels and windfarms are made possible because of fossil fuels, those offshore windfarms do you think they grow from salt water?!
@@alanmay7929 well everything is manufactured. If we do not start to break the cycle, we'll never improve the system. We humans have always improved the system. Now that we know what damage burning fossil fuel does, and know we can do better, we need to do this. Not doing it is foolish. Blocking the transition, knowing the damage it causes on us and future generations can be considered criminal.
@@rlarno I totally agree!
Shell, BP, Pemex, Petrobras, and other oil companies doesn't like this video.
nope
Great video!
A great deal of cherry picking only showing the downsides of Internal combustion engines. They are 30% efficient power stations are 25% efficient another 3-5% is lost in transmission. So the power to charge a car comes from where? a coal, gas or oil burning power station that fuel has to be transported to the power station( see above), we are now using green power stations Drax in Lincolnshire burns 25 million trees per year transported from Eastern Europe by? polluting ships and trucks. The energy density of wood is far lower than coal ie many more tons of trees needed to generate the same power but higher energy needed to transport, not mention the environmental impact of deforestation. An electric car uses 70% more energy to manufacture, then 60% or so of the energy put into the battery is lost during charging, so it takes more energy to power a battery car Then look at renewable free energy each wind turbine releases about 1200 tons of CO2 to build( Limestone is CO2 locked up in rocks for millions of years), have to be replaced after 25 years they cannot be reused or recycled so are dumped in landfills! I could go on!. I agree we need to begin changing the way we transport ourselves but this video is deliberately misleading!
Such a great summary of why combustion cars are so resource hungry and we have to stop using them. :)
I love this video but I think you need to clarify that this only represents the generation of energy to power the vehicle. If you add manufacturing emissions of either, gas powered vehicles still lose, but it's important to note that each does have emissions that add to the total lifecycle emissions (I live in a large city that primarily mines nickel so I know first hand how bad it used to be with SO2 sirens, etc). Maybe that could be your next video :) The mining industry is accelerating their own transition to BEV mining equipment so the gas camp arguments are dwindling at such a rate they won't hold up much longer.
I think you should ve taken into consideration that the demmad for energy will increase with eletric cars and new wind and solar parks will be constructed, not mentioning, the material for recharge points. That wouldnt pollute more? Furthermore, the internal combustion cars are becaming more and more efficient.
@@lisboaluk gas vehicles, no matter how efficient, start off polluting and only get worse. There's no argument here, you are wrong.
@@devinthreethousand a radical change will pollute more I think. I think using gas, flex, hibrid and eletric all together is more rational
@@lisboaluk Why would demand for power increase just because we don't use gasoline/diesel?
Super large power plants represent the best in technology at maximizing efficient conversion of fuel to energy, and it's already cheaper to build/use wind and solar than coal or oil.
There are thermodynamic limits on the efficiency of ICE engines, particularly since ICE engines are most efficient under consistent loads, not under the full power-near idle-full power profile of cars.
@@lisboaluk Some of the first automobiles ever built were electric, so it's not really all that radical.
What percentage of the oil pumped out of the ground is actually refined and turned into fuels for vehicles vs other uses ? and what are the energy / environmental impacts of mining cobalt ? It's a pretty one dimensional video.
One dimensional only if you believe the lies that have been spreading. All oil is refined. Cobalt is a nonissue, many times more cobalt is used for oil refining and catalytic converters than is used in batteries. Please realize there is a lot of oil company propaganda out there that has confused this issue.
@@GasTroll Nice selective answering of both of those, admittedly rhetorical, questions. I think there are similar levels of propaganda and hype around electric vehicles - and no amount of me driving around in a plug in electric vehicle will offset the carbon footprint of the “developing” countries. I don’t disagree that gasoline is not the best or most efficient source of energy now or for the future, but I also don’t subscribe to the view that plug in electric vehicles are answer. The current generation is the first iteration and will, in time, be replaced by something better - hydrogen, or synthetic fuels. Remember VHS and Betamax ? That’s where we’re at right now.
@@markschraider In those developing countries the pollution per capita is many times less of what it is in the west, and you have the audacity to say your actions will not help while you point fingers at the less fortunate. absolutely unconscionable! You are a great example of why we are in the situation we are in.
@@GasTroll 😀 Troll by name and by nature ! Best of luck with your crusade, not everyone will be as susceptible to brain washing as you were.
@@markschraider Thank you, but I am referencing facts, I do spend a lot of time researching this, and believe it or not, it is worse than I expect. It seems you have bought into the oil company propaganda. I really hope you can wake up from this and look at the facts with fresh eyes, we will all benefit from this. the amount of natural resources we use in the west, especially the wealthy, is pure gluttony. The research I am doing on my next video will show how bad it really is. 😃
You know what's better than both? Biodiesel. It can be made from crops, pond algae, waste oils from cooking, and completely carbon neutral.
🔌🔌I like that some new *apartment developers in Arizona* are adding Level2 smart charging stations. In some cases, it is up to 160 stations per apartment complex. The price to add a charger is $1,500/ea for the developer and the utility incentives are up to $4,000/ea with a maximum amount of chargers per complex based on the number of units.🔌
Absolutely excellent video. As an EV owner the most annoying thing someone can say is the tired old statement of "& where does an EV get its electricity from"....whilst completely disregarding where petrol & diesel come from!
I have a question for you where do you think tires, lithium, nickel, aluminium, copper..... comes from and are made?! They all need the oil industry. Where do you think your food is made?
Great short documentary.
Robert Llewellyn for life😂❤️ gotta love this guy
Is this Roberts channel?
@@Gaja9314 nope but he did the voice over
Me too!
No, he has the Fully Charged channel like it says at the end of the video.
I know a lot of people who need to see this, well done sir.
A newer trope being circulated among anti-EV people now is "How will the electrical grid have enough capacity to charge all these cars?" which admittedly strikes me as a fair question. I would love to see an analysis of that.
So if it's a fair question, why is it a 'trope'?
@@pauljackson2409 If you knew what a trope was, you'd know why.
@@snidelywhiplash Whole country won't buy ev at once and infrastructure has to be improved anyway as we advance and population continue to increase.
@@blueisthecolor3463 The infrastructure argument is largely a red herring.
@@snidelywhiplash Well it is kind of concern since usa don't want Nuclear and relying heavily on renewables. But also since most people charge at night, it could offset the burden on the grid.
This is the best video I have seen on the Gas vs EV argument I have seen! Thank you for creating it!
Wow, thank you!
Great video!
However, the reason the EV is clean is thanks to nuclear power. The 53% of of dirty sources (6:00) still require all of the petroleum costs mentioned up to that point. Which doesn't seem bad, but the bulk of the clean fraction( 47%) comes from nuclear power. I agree nuclear power is one of the cleanest sources we have, but in current times (2021), nuclear power is opposed by many of the same people who extol the virtues of EV vehicles. Just keep in mind that for EV to be clean, we need nuclear, at least for the next 10-30 years.
And why do you think energy that comes from burning coal would change that greatly?
@@MJ0101_ the point is that to claim that switching to EV is beneficial over ICE implies support for nuclear power.
Don’t try to sell the Fission Bullcrap, nobody’s falling for it.
@@billpee9513 No the claim that claim is independent of the electricity source - as just the production of the fossil fuel (well to wheel energy cost) uses up about the same amount of electricity (especially if well, refinery and end user are in the same country) as the EV does to drive...
Millions of people die every day from pollution related illnesses, it's incredible that we are still able to breathe in these air contaminated cities around the world, they say they will stop manufacturing petrol cars until 2031, that's a lot of time when we already have the tech for ev's.
Yes, did you see my video on this? ua-cam.com/video/q9V3oLPcsmk/v-deo.html no one seems to be watching this one an it is showing exactly wha you mention here.
This is awesome, thank you so much for making this informative video and keeping it entertaining 👏
Your also missing the part that the oil will still be pumped regardless of ev as the petro chemicals are used in more than just cars