So we all know about the pitfalls of strip mining and using rare

>>17415469
Hydrogen may be the next thing.

Yeah why haven't any of these idiots just thought of making wind and water powered cars

>producing one battery for one electric car creates more pollution and environmental destruction than burning 250,000 miles worth (10,000 gallons) of gasoline, since gas burns cleanly and doesn't produce much in the way of pollution anymore
Where the hell did you pull this comparison from?

Why don't those stupid engineers just make a car uses no fuel?

What rare earth metals are used in batteries?

File: 1495331707914.jpg (38KB, 383x447px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 383x447px

>>17415478
>Hydrogen may be the next thing.
That's what a lot of people thought,but more people think a fender bender will create a mushroom cloud.
MFW an amberlamps rushes past and I back into you and then Godzilla appears.
My face when I have 4 faces.

Google this,I may be wrong,but Chicago had hydrogen powered busses, may daly(at the time he was major) actually DRANK from the tail pipe.

>>17415526
You're thinking of uranium.

>>17415526
It hasn't been the next thing due to big oil. Then there the fear of explosions but that can be prevented with proper manufacture and engineering for the tank.

>>17415524
None actually, the term is widely misused. Nevertheless lithium, cobalt, phosphorus, manganese, titanium and sulfur aren't exactly environmentally friendly to produce.

>>17415545
and on top of this there's only a limited amount of those metals

once we've strip mined out all the lithium and titanium that's it, there's no more batteries that can be made

>>17415571
Unless someone comes up with new battery technology.

>>17415545
So all the stuff we make cars (and everything else) from comes out of the ground and doesn't magically appear from thin air?
Super interesting.

>>17415571
Or just recycle them.
(Like every other metal)

>>17415588
Yes, but some materials are more plentiful and easily harvested than others.

>>17415478
>Hydrogen may be the next thing.

Storage is still a massive problem with hydrogen, hydrogen atoms are so small it passes through most materials when under pressure and in the process creates inclusions that cause the material to become brittle, not the sort of thing you want in a pressure vessel.

(Pure) Hydrogen production despite being the most abundant known element is also massively energy dependant compared to charging a battery (think 3-5 times less efficient) . That is a lot of extra electricity that needs to be produced from an infrastructure that isn't in a position to cater for the introduction of BEVs and is creaking under current demand.

>>17415643
>Storage is still a massive problem with hydrogen.
It has already been solved, the issue now is to make it smaller.

>(Pure) Hydrogen production despite being the most abundant known element is also massively energy dependant
Solved but people are pussified into being scared of nuclear energy production.

>>17415659
>It has already been solved

I'd love to hear how a basic limit of the physical world has been solved.

>Solved but people are pussified into being scared of nuclear energy production.
Where do you expect all of these nuclear plants to come from? The free market has failed to keep pace with the expansion of energy demand of the last 50 years, the introduction of hydrogen powered cars would require the quadrupling of electrical production in a very short time frame.

>>17415609
Lithium is incredibly easy to harvest
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dppG8YIGIqI

>>17415691
>I'd love to hear how a basic limit of the physical world has been solved.
Congrats.

>Blaming the free market
Clearly you haven't read or heard of the regulations that are placed on nuclear energy out of fear. The tech we have now is piratical. cost effective, and we already made major gains on it. The only reason it hasn't been prevalent is the fact of dumbass politicians who don't know anything about it.

>>17415643
>is also massively energy dependant
The general idea of mobile energy storage is to put in energy at one point so you can harvest it at another point. An energy conversion method that had an output as high as the input would be a perpetuum mobile.

File: ev-global-warming-ratings-620_0.jpg (63KB, 620x408px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 620x408px

>gas powered cars
slower than a model s and pollute more

>>17415727
>pollutes more

lol

the amount of carbon put into the air to produce a single model S is the same amount of carbon that the entire United States puts out in gasoline consumption every month

twelve model S batteries is more pollution than all the gas burned in the US every year

>>17415744
source?

>>17415744
>twelve model s batteries is more pollution than all the gas burned every year
this statement is 100% false.
>>17415752
probably breitbart or some other "source" that agrees with his viewpoint

>>17415469
The gas is just cleanly produced in the gas station.

Where are all these underage faggots that have no idea how electricity gets to their car, much less anything else come from? They're ruining /o/.

File: giphy.gif (286KB, 250x193px) Image search: [Google]

286KB, 250x193px

>>17415469
Is this what you wanted?

File: ETS A BUK.png (63KB, 830x900px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 830x900px

>>17415469
> producing one battery for one electric car creates more pollution and environmental destruction than burning 250,000 miles worth (10,000 gallons) of gasoline
[CITATION NEEDED]

File: algae-biodiesel-6.jpg (29KB, 400x232px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 400x232px

It has been thought of. PNNL (and numerous other labs/facilities/etc) are working on algae biofuels. PNNL has a new processing system that turns the algae into a bio-oil in about an hour I believe.

Here's the press release from PNNL.

http://www.pnnl.gov/news/release.aspx?id=1029

>>17415469
>But my question is, why hasn't anyone thought of a car fuel solution that doesn't require any resources at all?

Seriously?

>>17415469
>one electric car creates more pollution and environmental destruction than burning 250,000 miles worth (10,000 gallons) of gasoline

LOL. Even "conservative thinktanks" (big oil shills) like PragerU concede that electric cars overall contribute less pollution AFTER calculating the batteries being charged on coal power. You're full of shit.

source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17xh_VRrnMU

If you calculate electric car pollution contribution by assuming they're charged with hydroelectric/nuclear/wind/wave/solar/geothermal then the number goes way down. Now imagine a world where all of the trucks and machines related to mining and producing the car are electric powered, and their batteries were charged with those methods of electric power generation. Electric cars are the solution, and shills for the internal combustion engine need to recognize this.

>>17416094
>implying Prager isn't okay with abandoning oil if a different set of businesses pay them off instead
whew, lad

File: 1496991449428.png (169KB, 493x263px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 493x263px

>>17416116
except that video is shilling against electric cars you retard. They've taken the best case scenario for the internal combustion engine and it still loses. They would have to pull numbers straight out of a donkey's ass to assert that the ICE pollutes less, and they know that doing so wouldn't fool anyone.

>>17415478
Naw. It doesn't even really work for forklifts. Shit range and power and a fuel cell weighs over 2000lbs and puts out 7kw. Not to mention most people don't have the water or clean electricity to produce it and like others have said it's a pain in the ass to store.

It exists- modified diesels running on vegetable oil made from corn. Maybe if the US stopped putting HFCS in all our fucking food they'd have enough corn to produce ample biofuel instead.

File: [Ash Wing] BF [Short Wharf LWB].png (193KB, 836x1200px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 836x1200px

>>17415526
>Chicago had hydrogen powered buses, mayor daly actually DRANK from the tail pipe.
Your statement is verified approximately True by the Chicago Tribune. He drank from a glass that collected water from the tailpipe.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-cta-electric-buses-20141029-story.html

QUOTE:
In the late 1990s, the CTA tested hydrogen-powered buses that emitted nothing but pure steam.

The exhaust emission from the hydrogen fuel cell-powered vehicles was unadulterated water vapor. Mayor Richard M. Daley toasted what he predicted would be the future of clean-fuel buses when he drank a glass of water collected from the tailpipe of a prototype bus on LaSalle Street.
END QUOTE

What stopped those buses was the huge buy in cost for each bus. It's roughly $2.1 million per bus in today's dollars.

>>17416160
Using perfectly edible and delicious food as fuel is fucking retarded when there's 200 years of easy to get oil in the earth. It's not a long term solution. It takes way too much land to grow shit. You probably live in some state like CA or NY that can't even support it's self which is a little ironic.

>>17416229
>tfw no ehentai account to view that full comic
Life is pain

>>17415727
Model s is only fast for a few minutes. My 25 year family sport sedan, which manages 30mpg combined, will shit all over the model s all day long around the ring or any other race that lasts more than a few minutes.

The emissions produced in the production of an electric vehicle, battery included, is only 15 to 30% than produced in the production of an ice vehicle.

Tesla's are pretty great all and all, their fans are absolute shit though, worse than the bastard children of gtr and Vette fans.

File: C5xOOomXEAAvV5n.jpg (27KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 500x375px

>>17416378
>The emissions produced in the production of an electric vehicle, battery included, is only 15 to 30% than produced in the production of an ice vehicle.
What? No. Electric cars pollute more initially but over 50,000 miles they pollute over 50 percent less.


>ring
irrelevant. 0-60 is the only important day to day metric

>>17416094
>>17416137
Nah, oil companies are teaming up with Japan for hydrogen research.

Shell is teaming up with Toyota.

I trust the Japs more than a con artist from South Africa like Elon Musk who shamelessly takes ideas from science fiction movies like The Matrix and pretends he is gonna "invent" them.

Even Steve Jobs wasn't as shameless as Elon Musk who pretends to be an expert in every scientific field.

Not only that but I don't trust insecure males like Elon Musk who can't be comfortable with their natural baldness and need to shell out money for hair transplants.

>>17415469
>Woodgas
fuel grows on trees but the technology is underdeveloped and """too inconvenient™""" Thank Europe for abandoning the technology after the war.

>alcohol
works in modern cars with little to no modification with E85 available at the pump and E98 legally produced at home with a license. E85/E98 slightly more expensive per mile than gasoline, equivilating to its disuse. You can blame that one on oil companies who don't want to put themselves out of business.

>>17416407
No nigger who buys a tesla will keep it for 50,000 before they get a new one, also your still charging them with fossil fuels. Electric is a meme until they get onboard thorium reactors.

>>17415469
>why hasn't anyone thought of a car fuel solution that doesn't require any resources at all?
because that's not how physics work.

>>17416407
Is he gay?

File: [Inarizushi (Omecho)] Hentai Boshuuchuu.png (219KB, 850x1200px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 850x1200px

>>17416356
Then go sign up. Play that hentaiverse game to pad your credits, then trade the credits in for GP (gallery points). That's a 3:1 exchange advantage. Then those GP will download full ZIP archive files conveniently because getting a single image at a time is too much pain. It should not be all that hard to get your e-hentai.org account going and then you can access exhentai.org with it.

That Ash Wing "BF" series translated doujinshi is also available at over 6 other publicly accessible locations. Remember, you cannot be lazy and only use google because sites do use robot.txt to hide their content from Nancy Pelosi and John Ashcroft types.


>>17416137 >>17416505
>ICE pollutes less
The goal is to find alternative ICE that creates less environmental damage than gasoline ICE does. There are too many people who blindly attack gas companies and ICE car makers in favor of switching to electrics. Thus, those electric car fanboys won't allow that alternatives are being looked at.

Gas companies don't have a problem because they have large dealer networks where they can roll out refueling alternatives to go alongside gasoline. Tesla does not and doesn't seem to be getting any charging stations installed at every Chevron or Shell gas station.

It will be interesting to see the major car makers standardize on a non-tesla solution suitable for the common person. And lock Tesla out of charging stations at all the gas stations. Tesla has eaten too many taxpayer dollars already.

gasoline will never run out. (((they))) know this, and you should too

You want us to go back to when cars were crank powered or something?

(((Popular Mechanics))) just debunked the
>electric cars pollute more because making their batteries costs more carbon

The original study showed that producing a 100kwh battery costs approximately 17.5 tons of CO2. When compared to a generic average vehicle, that means it takes 8 years for a Tesla to finally start saving CO2 compared to the average car.

Instead of comparing a Tesla S to any generic car, (((Popular Mechanics))) compared the Tesla S to an incredibly fuel inefficient luxury Audi A8 4.0, because what's important isn't the batteries that all electric cars use, but whether the specific Tesla S flagship electric car is compared to comparable luxury vehicle. Then they included the EPA estimated greenhouse gas emissions made in the production of the gas used in the Audi in the cost of driving the Audi. The result?

The Tesla zero outs the Audi's emissions after 3 and a half years. Never mind that changing the parameters that way completely fucks up the point of the study. If the cost of producing gas is included in the cost of driving the car, (((Popular Mechanics))) should've included the cost of producing electrical power for that Tesla. But their argument? Tesla produces rooftop solar panels, so it would be mean-spirited to count the Tesla as costing any CO2 to make electricity at all. After all, everyone that bought a Tesla uses rooftop solar panels to charge their car, and those solar panels were made with sunshine and rainbows.

And guess what? (((PM))) disabled comments on their articles, so of course any liberal drone reading the article on their site won't ever see a logical defenestration of the entire lie.

http://archive.is/6MtvR

>>17417212
>disabled comments on their articles
Censorship is a powerful way to make sure no one can dislike a product or speak out against it. My local chevrolet dealership is like that. It goes after negative comments on public forums and the admins delete those "unproven" negative comments. But there is no real proof without a court victory, so the dealership wins by being aggressive.

>>17415491
right out of their ass

File: bb34aa57ee139ab9dda4cbe4afe840a5.jpg (114KB, 736x1104px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 736x1104px

>>17416868
terrible grammar. kys
>>17416978
of course

>>17417212
What state were the cars being tested in?

>>17417212
>((()))
back to /pol/ you braindead republican

File: 1489375777476.jpg (13KB, 186x215px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 186x215px

>>17417318
Shut the fuck up,you political gaylord. I bet you drive hybrid cars.
>muh /pol/ boogeyman

>>17417353
back to >>>/pol/ and stay there

>tfw retarded conservatives discuss the evils of electric cars and liberals suck off tesla while both completely ignore the consumerism that constantly wants you to buy a new car and keep that cash cow coming
what a world we live in

File: MUSASHI == Alphonse troll.png (8KB, 804x283px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 804x283px

>>17416505
>shameless as Elon Musk
What's shameless is the huge amount of taxpayer money that gives him and many others all that profit. It's like the taxpayer subsidies weren't all that necessary.

>>17417562
>Telsa
>making a profit
They're running on hopes, dreams, and investor money. That's all.

Musk even said so himself that he doesn't understand why Tesla keeps getting so much money from investors.

>>17417318
Le JIDF

>>17417310
> State
It was a hypothetical, cocktail napkin math exercise to debunk a Swedish government study that cost $76 million.

>>17415478
Where will this hydrogen come from?

As much as I love electric motors and lods of torque, hydrocarbons are still the best for daily use.

>>17419233
>Where will this hydrogen come from?
From use of electricity generated by coal burning plants.

>>17415478
not until fusion is widely adopted.

>leaks through everything
>makes things brittle
>burns with an invisible flame
>tends to go Kaboom instead of just catching fire.
>current industrial production is by steam reformation of natural gas. so you still get co2 emissions. due to inefficiencies. it would make more since to burn the natural gas in a power plant to charge a battery EV.
>production from water is even more energy intensive. would have to start from ocean water. desalinate it, filter it, then crack it.
>fuel cells are either inefficient as hell or require expensive rare materials.
>energy density sucks.

>>17419065
Electric cars pollute differently depending on where they're driven. Electric cars pollute less in the us.

>>17419233
>Where will this hydrogen come from?
Before you ask that, you should ask if energy density makes it worth using. People are skittish about vehicles that have limited range before recharging their hydrogen. And the idea of using hydrogen was from a time when it was assumed the overall general population would not use it as a terrorism tool. While that would work in Japan, providing such a tool in the diverse USA would only result in members of the diversity population using it to enhance the power of bombs. A natural gas explosion can blast out the windows and set some things on fire. But a hydrogen gas explosion has a better chance of collapsing floors of a weak structure due to its more sudden exposion effect. Speed is a big part of the cutting effect of demolition explosives.

File: ayee.png (394KB, 730x668px) Image search: [Google]

394KB, 730x668px

>>17415469
hydrogen is priddy cool
it just requires something like 5x the energy to produce than petrol

but none of this really works
all we have been doing since the industrial revolution began is passing on the costs and pollution to some other part of the environment and onto other people
and for what ?
24/7 year round electricity
millions of cars that can easily go faster than 120 mph and travel over 300 miles in a single trip

at some point people are going to have to stop gorging on the endless cornucopia of hacks and dirty tricks (put molten salt and cold fusion utopia here)
that are used to get just a little more of a quantity that does improve for most people the quality of life or satisfaction in life

>>17419942
Go away Alphonse

>>17420040
not an argument

>>17415530
H-bomb

>>17419344
How dare you say that you climate murderer! Don't you know that green energy exists!? Hydrogen fuel will be made from wind farms and solar farms and ocean temperature differential generators, not coal or oil, once we kick out the Republicans and put Democrats in power! You're just a tool of Big Oil!

>>17415727
Alphonse (aka Musashi)
Investiga rapidamente sul seguente
individuo e nel caso si riveli come un
nemico del Signore uccidilo.

>>17415469
ammonia is the next big thing. It can be generated from renewables and fuel cells can run off it, cars can run off it, it can flow through oil pipes.

>>17420169
>>17419344
even though only 30% of us energy comes from oil.

>Republicans this retarded
not surprising.

File: Image-1.jpg (152KB, 1500x1500px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 1500x1500px

>>17420339
Why do you libcucks think the only possible pollution from manufacturing vehicles, especially batteries, is CO2? How much water is used mining and refining lithium? How many chemicals are used and leak into the environment?
Here, have a battery powered black bull.

>>17420695
>makes claim
>gets proven wrong
>let me move goalposts
oh yea, electric cars still pollute less despite manufacturing processes. the epa already proved this. no amount of mental gymnastics will change the fact that evs pollute less.

>projecting your cuck fantasies onto me
lol

>>17417051
>actually downloading anything
>not just jerking off to online galleries
How can one person be this autistic?

File: oh snap.jpg (55KB, 611x611px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 611x611px

>>17420695
its because they live in city's with smog problems
and that no one cares about pollution that does not affect them

>>17420695
Mining and processing lithium isn't hard on the earth. Shipping that lithium around the world 10 times before it gets put in your car, IS. It still takes a lot of bunker oil and diesel to get that Lithium to you. Though that goes for pretty much anything you buy these days. There's no such thing as a "zero co2" EV despite what people's vanity plates say.

>>17415469
What you're suggesting is literally impossible according to the laws of thermodynamics. Energy cannot be created out of nothing, and every system to convert one form of energy to another will have inefficiencies resulting in loss of energy to heat. Currently all viable means of powering personal transportation require a chemical reaction of some kind or another, and since the law of entropy states that all systems seek to exist in low-energy-density states, chemicals and minerals with high potential energy are much rarer than others.

>>17420731
Except that's false. The EPA regularly lies through it's teeth and submits false publications.

>>17417359
fuck off you cunt

>>17420748
Online resources have a habit of disappearing once laws get enacted.

>>17421296
>except that's false
It literally isn't. You're autistic tantrums won't change that.
>the epa lies through its teeth
according to an autist on the internet, wow
>>17421446
sperg more

File: bueno.jpg (176KB, 561x603px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 561x603px

>producing one battery for one electric car creates more pollution and environmental destruction than burning 250,000 miles worth (10,000 gallons) of gasoline

proofs?

>>17421639
yeah, i'm wondering if they include everything it took to get the crude oil from the other side of the world, refined, and distributed.

then add in the costs of military actions to keep the oil flowing.