Which is Greener - Electric or ICE?

marcopolomt said:
Heard all the arguments under the sun. In regards to the article, I don't know many cars scrapped before 68300 miles. Here are some other common arguments.

EVs are still fuelled by coal-generated electricity.

An EV is still 'greener' even if powered indirectly by coal. In reality the grid becomes greener every year. Live generation stats may be found here: National Grid: Live Status

But EVs use harmful chemicals to build the batteries.

Maybe, but they are getting better. Newer generations of batteries use less cobalt with some being cobalt free. Cobalt is still used in petrol refining litre after litre. for an EV its used once and can last hundreds of thousands of miles. When the vehicle is scrapped the batteries can be repurposed for energy storage. There are already commercially available home storage solutions derived from old leaf batteries. What happens to old electric car batteries? | National Grid Group

When these are eventually scrapped, potentially a couple of decades after their creation they can be recycled. I don't see petrol being recycled anytime soon. Redwood Materials

In short EV's are only going to get greener whereas oil exploration is becoming more and more costly and environmentally dangerous.
Click to expand...
Not to forget the huge manufacturing resources needed to produce an IC engine! An electric motor is a relatively simple device to produce and batteries are produced using similar or identical cells already being produced in existing factories to meet non-automotive needs.
 
Gomev said:
I quite like this video which sums it up nicely for me.

Click to expand...

I don't know how I have never come across this before but that is a brilliant video. Stays away from banging on about carbon dioxide but just applies common sense across the whole argument. makes fossil fuels look ridiculous.
 
Believe it or not, the majority of oil can be recycled - redistilled/rerefined/reprocessed, to be reused again.
Hydraulic/quench/cutting/turbine/lube/compressor oil to name a few are used on an industrial scale.
The government even have policies on favouring the recycling/reuse of such oil.

What do the Environment Agency do? Cripple the companies who actually want to follow the rules and ignore the waste companies who choose to sell the waste to companies who sell the oil to marine companies for fuel on tankers and such.
Whilst they have reduced the sulphur content for the marine industry, the oil could be better directed to recyclers for a lower carbon footprint in the uk.

So, what's better for the environment?
Oil to be recycled for industries to be reused with a lot lower carboon footprint?
Or
New oil to be sold adding to carbon footprint, while used oil goes to the marine industry to be burnt off by tankers?

What's the less of 2 evils?

Or take the dutch stance and make companies sell their used oil to other countries under legislation?

Someone else's problem, not in my back yard?

But EV's are cleaner overall whichever way you look at it.
 
m4rmite said:
Believe it or not, the majority of oil can be recycled - redistilled/rerefined/reprocessed, to be reused again.
Hydraulic/quench/cutting/turbine/lube/compressor oil to name a few are used on an industrial scale.
The government even have policies on favouring the recycling/reuse of such oil.

What do the Environment Agency do? Cripple the companies who actually want to follow the rules and ignore the waste companies who choose to sell the waste to companies who sell the oil to marine companies for fuel on tankers and such.
Whilst they have reduced the sulphur content for the marine industry, the oil could be better directed to recyclers for a lower carbon footprint in the uk.

So, what's better for the environment?
Oil to be recycled for industries to be reused with a lot lower carboon footprint?
Or
New oil to be sold adding to carbon footprint, while used oil goes to the marine industry to be burnt off by tankers?

What's the less of 2 evils?

Or take the dutch stance and make companies sell their used oil to other countries under legislation?

Someone else's problem, not in my back yard?

But EV's are cleaner overall whichever way you look at it.
Click to expand...
Hi oil is a commodity we can’t live without even EVs use oil for lubrication of several of there parts, the problem is caused when you burn it mainly
Les
 
m4rmite said:
Believe it or not, the majority of oil can be recycled - redistilled/rerefined/reprocessed, to be reused again.
Hydraulic/quench/cutting/turbine/lube/compressor oil to name a few are used on an industrial scale.
The government even have policies on favouring the recycling/reuse of such oil.

What do the Environment Agency do? Cripple the companies who actually want to follow the rules and ignore the waste companies who choose to sell the waste to companies who sell the oil to marine companies for fuel on tankers and such.
Whilst they have reduced the sulphur content for the marine industry, the oil could be better directed to recyclers for a lower carbon footprint in the uk.

So, what's better for the environment?
Oil to be recycled for industries to be reused with a lot lower carboon footprint?
Or
New oil to be sold adding to carbon footprint, while used oil goes to the marine industry to be burnt off by tankers?

What's the less of 2 evils?

Or take the dutch stance and make companies sell their used oil to other countries under legislation?

Someone else's problem, not in my back yard?

But EV's are cleaner overall whichever way you look at it.
Click to expand...
True, and we cannot do without oil as lubricants in the various forms. Synthetics based on plant oils are there but the volumes required make this difficult to achieve currently. I am less easy about just using waste oil for ship bunkering unless it is properly recycled to remove some highly toxic elements from industrial use. There are problems with continually recycling oil too due to molecular changes due to use that cannot be undone.
 
Also an ICE car has Cat conv Exhaust, Radiator , Water pump plus Antifreeze, Cam belt ,Fan belt , Add Blue, And many other nastier compared to an EV
 
Esi said:
Also an ICE car has Cat conv Exhaust, Radiator , Water pump plus Antifreeze, Cam belt ,Fan belt , Add Blue, And many other nastier compared to an EV
Click to expand...
A mg5 has 9 litres of antifreeze, 4.2 for the heating/ cooling system and 4.8 for the battery temperature management..
That's more than most ICE vehicles.

The rest are fair game though.
 
m4rmite said:
A mg5 has 9 litres of antifreeze, 4.2 for the heating/ cooling system and 4.8 for the battery temperature management..
That's more than most ICE vehicles.

The rest are fair game though.
Click to expand...
The LEAF has none at all of that!

No battery coolant and a heat pump
 
I’ve been doing quite a lot of rush-hour commuting recently and sitting in traffic jams sucking up all the fumes I dream of the age when that line of traffic is quiet and free from tailpipe emissions. I know there are many arguments about the net result.
 
It's a bit like when lots of folk swapped from smoking to vaping. Is it 100% harm free? No. Is it less harmful? That depends on what you class as harmful, but on balance, probably. Doesn't make it perfect, but every little helps, as the ads say...
 
JimB said:
Really? No emissions from material sourcing, manufacture, transport, assembly and maintenance of solar, wind or wave energy installations.

It is probably less, but if it's nought I might start going to church on Sundays, on foot.

On second thoughts, no, even more evangelists lurking around there 😂

I love electric, but BEHAVE! 🤔
Click to expand...
Theoretical possible, and EVs are a nessesary part of it. You can use it to drive to church too if you dont like waking. All energy used for mining and manufacturing can be renewable, evan metal reduction can use green hydrogen. So the only nessecary fossile fuel left is for lubricants and the nylon shirt of the sales person and they can be replaced too. The point is, it is wrong to attribute CO2 emmisions to the EVs, rather to the processes that actually produce it. You might as well apportion the waste produced by all your anchestors to your own ballance.
 
gweiller said:
Theoretical possible, and EVs are a nessesary part of it. You can use it to drive to church too if you dont like waking. All energy used for mining and manufacturing can be renewable, evan metal reduction can use green hydrogen. So the only nessecary fossile fuel left is for lubricants and the nylon shirt of the sales person and they can be replaced too. The point is, it is wrong to attribute CO2 emmisions to the EVs, rather to the processes that actually produce it. You might as well apportion the waste produced by all your anchestors to your own ballance.
Click to expand...
Walking? Are you mad? With all the chromium involved in producing leather 😋

Kendall Jenner Sips Tea GIF
 
Watched this podcast a couple of weeks back and parts of it are very relevant to this thread, so watch it all if you want to, but you must see Robert Llewellyn rant about the panorama programme on the BBC Condemning BEVs very good podcast by Robert but the rant starts at about 27:00 minutes into it and for around 10/15 minutes, and within the whole thing there are other points as to why EVs are greener than ICE vehicles so have a watch
Les


1639917469364.jpeg
 
Last edited:
How about the big fat elephant in the room. (Eating all the low hanging fruit)

  • Personal ownership of cars needs to stop.
- add to this that BEVs aren’t the answer to reduce the use of natural resources and reduce carbon, but until the next big thing it’s a stop gap. Will the answer be hydrogen and autonomous swarm software controlled taxis and electric slot car commercial lorry trains. And for flight - the return of the blimp.
  • elephant in the room 2 - (I’m ducking here) we need a huge reduction in the global population
 
Electrickery said:
How about the big fat elephant in the room. (Eating all the low hanging fruit)

  • Personal ownership of cars needs to stop.
- add to this that BEVs aren’t the answer to reduce the use of natural resources and reduce carbon, but until the next big thing it’s a stop gap. Will the answer be hydrogen and autonomous swarm software controlled taxis and electric slot car commercial lorry trains. And for flight - the return of the blimp.
  • elephant in the room 2 - (I’m ducking here) we need a huge reduction in the global population
Click to expand...
I will agree on personal ownership of cars in bigger cities. A few of my colleagues in Manchester don't drive and have no need to drive. Where I live though it's a different story, public transport is abysmal. Autonomous taxis might work but not for those living rurally. Working from home needs to be the norm. Covid has proven it's possible for many of us. I'm much happier avoiding a 35-mile commute. reduction is great, i don't think elimination is possible.

2nd point. We (in the uk) already have a reducing population......without migration. In fact, the whole developing world is in the same boat. Africa, and much of Asia are a different matter however.

ourworldindata.org

More than 8 out of 10 people in the world will live in Asia or Africa by 2100

Most of the world’s population growth over the next century is expected to come from Africa.
ourworldindata.org ourworldindata.org
 
Support us by becoming a Premium Member

Latest MG EVs video

New EVs from MG: MG S9 & MG9 plus hot topics from the forums
Published
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom