Comments by "remliqa" (@remliqa) on "Dark Records" channel.

  1.  @Flea1959MarketJordans  You do know that switching to electric vehicles actual do have a positive effect on the envirmanst vs keeping using fossil fuels, right? EV are a success story while tis is an abject failure.
    2
  2.  @LostShipMate The environmental impact of lithium mining is still far less than the impact of fossil fuel extraction . At least with battery, once the material have been extracted they will stay in the battery for 20-30 years before been recycled at the end of their life, whereas you need to continually extract oil for your car for the rest of your life. Furthermore multiple independent studies/research have shown that even the worse case scenario where all the electricity needed to for an EV came solely form coal burning power plants, the EV would still be less polluting than a gasoline or diesel car within their lifetime.
    2
  3.  @TheEDFLegacy  Hydrogen is far worse for the environment than battery and is closer to fossil fuel in their ecological impact. This is due to a the horrible efficiency of the hydrogen cycles. On top of that they are far more expensive, cost more and is harder to set up than the network for true electric car and offer less performance. Hydrogen have it place in some application like steel production and energy storage, but using them for consumer vehicle is as dumb as tyre dumping in the ocean.
    1
  4.  @ChopsWildRide  What EV are you driving. Tesla batteries for example last longer than the the average of a gasoline or diesel cars.
    1
  5. ​ @JebAlert  Your estimate of battery life is false. Tesla recently released the number (that was validated by third parties) for their battery life that show that the average battery degradation for their car after 250 thousand miles is around 20%.
    1
  6. @higgsbonbon I don't know any smart phones that can last for 20-25 years. That is the lifespans of an battery electric car , BTW.
    1
  7.  @Bbfishman  Multiple independent studies/research have shown that even the worse case scenario where all the electricity needed to for an EV came solely from coal burning power plants, the EV would still be less polluting than a gasoline or diesel car within their lifetime. The problem with the grid mean it needed upgrading and more power storage. California problem have existed longer than the current EV adoption, I remember reading about that state's energy problem in the 1990s.
    1
  8. @higgsbonbon What is? Everything I said in this thread so far are verifiable facts . Tesla recently released the number (that was validated by third parties) for their battery life that shows that the average battery degradation for their car after 250 thousand miles is around 20%.
    1
  9.  @TheGuruStud  Current gen EV last as long if not longer than internal combustion engine vehicles.
    1
  10. @higgsbonbon Tesla recently released the number (that was validated by third parties) for their battery life that show that the average battery degradation for their car after 250 thousand miles is around 20%.
    1
  11. @higgsbonbon While the environmental effects of lithium mining is bad, it is still less than the damage of continuous fossil fuel extraction and burning to sustain the an internal combustion engine vehicle (ICEV) for the rest it lifespan. At least with battery, it is a one time upfront cost. When battery in an EV finally unusable in 30-40 year (EV batteries have second life that after been used by BEV for 20 years) they can be recycled.. Everything else you said (plastic and proprietary, impossible to replace parts like the arbitrary computer systems) is also applicable to ICEV , so when EV still pulls ahead in that regards.
    1
  12. @higgsbonbon It seem you haven't been paying attention to EV news. There are many companies that have sprung up in the EV battery recycling business .For Example JB Straubel (one of Tesla's founder) have started his own an EV battery recycling company that is dealing with end of life Tesla battery and have reached out to other auto manufacturer. While Tesla is the pioneer with end of life plan for their batteries, other companies such as Ford and GM already announced their own version of such initiative. Ironically enough, because there is currently huge market for second hand EV batterie (either form old EV or totalled ones) that there isn't enough battery to recycle. This will change in the future.
    1
  13.  @Gamersunite2506  Ah, the classic" the guy must be a shill because I don't like the facts he is saying and I can't refute them at all" approach . You must be popular with your teachers at school .
    1
  14.  @Gamersunite2506  Firstly ,kindly quote the parts where I ever accuse anyone here of spreading propaganda? I dare you . I guess every accusation is an admission. Secondly, BEV are a suitable replacement for ICEV when it comes to environmental impact. BEV have been factually proven to be less damaging to the planet than ICEV. The only lie here the the myth that a BEV is as polluting if not worse than ICEV. Again is have been factually proven that this myth is not true. Thirdly, the so called exploit against consumer are not limited to BEV. This applies to ICEV as well, take a look of John Deere's diesel powered farm equipment . This is a common corporate greed problem , not a uniquely BEV one. Finally, instead of blindly accusing me of being a shill because you don't like the facts I'm putting out here. Why don't you try to rebut my arguments or offer counterpoints, something any person who isn't arguing in bad faith can do.
    1
  15.  @Gamersunite2506  Firstly ,kindly quote the parts where I ever accuse anyone here of spreading propaganda? I dare you . I guess every accusation is an admission. Secondly, BEV IS a suitable replacement for ICEV when it comes to environmental impact. BEV have been factually proven to be less damaging to the planet than ICEV. The only lie here the the myth that a BEV is as polluting if not worse than ICEV. Again is have been factually proven that this myth is not true. Thirdly, the so called exploit against consumer are not limited to BEV. This applies to ICEV as well, take a look of John Deere's diesel powered farm equipment . This is a common corporate greed problem , not a uniquely BEV one. Finally, instead of blindly accusing me of being a shill because you don't like the facts I'm putting out here. Why don't you try to rebut my arguments or offer counterpoints, something any person who isn't arguing in bad faith can do.
    1
  16.  @Gamersunite2506  Firstly ,kindly quote the parts where I ever accuse anyone here of spreading propaganda? I dare you . I guess every accusation is an admission. Secondly, BEV IS a suitable replacement for ICEV when it comes to environmental impact. BEV have been factually proven to be less damaging to the planet than ICEV. The only lie here the the myth that a BEV is as polluting if not worse than ICEV. Again is have been factually proven that this myth is not true. Thirdly, the so called exploit against consumer are not limited to BEV. This applies to ICEV as well, take a look of John Deere's diesel powered farm equipment . This is a common corporate greed problem , not a uniquely BEV one. Finally, instead of blindly accusing me of being a shill because you don't like the facts I'm putting out here. Why don't you try to rebut my arguments or offer counterpoints, something any person who isn't arguing in bad faith can do.
    1
  17.  @Gamersunite2506  Firstly ,kindly quote the parts where I ever accuse anyone here of spreading propaganda? I dare you . I guess every accusation is an admission. Secondly, battery electric vehicle IS a suitable replacement for ICEV when it comes to environmental impact. BEV have been factually proven to be less damaging to the planet than ICEV. The only lie here the the myth that a BEV is as polluting if not worse than ICEV. Again is have been factually proven that this myth is not true. Thirdly, the so called exploit against consumer are not limited to BEV. This applies to ICEV as well, take a look of John Deere's diesel powered farm equipment . This is a common corporate greed problem , not a uniquely BEV one Finally, instead of blindly accusing me of being a shill because you don't like the facts I'm putting out here. Why don't you try to rebut my arguments or offer counterpoints.
    1
  18.  @Gamersunite2506  Firstly ,kindly quote the parts where I ever accuse anyone here of spreading propaganda? I dare you . I guess every accusation is an admission. Secondly, Battery Electric Vehicle IS a suitable replacement for ICEV when it comes to environmental impact. BEV have been factually proven to be less damaging to the planet than ICEV. The only lie here the the myth that a BEV is as polluting if not worse than ICEV. Again is have been factually proven that this myth is not true. Thirdly, the so called exploit against consumer are not limited to BEV. This applies to ICEV as well, take a look of diesel powered farm equipment right to repair . This is a common corporate greed problem , not a uniquely BEV one. Finally, instead of blindly accusing me of being a shill because you don't like the facts I'm putting out here. Why don't you try to rebut my arguments or offer counterpoints, something any person who isn't arguing in bad faith can do.
    1
  19.  @Gamersunite2506  Kindly quote the parts where I ever accuse anyone here of spreading propaganda? I dare you . I guess every accusation is an admission. Battery Electric Vehicle IS a suitable replacement for ICEV when it comes to environmental impact. BEV have been factually proven to be less damaging to the planet than ICEV. The only lie here the the myth that a BEV is as polluting if not worse than ICEV. Again is have been factually proven that this myth is not true. The so called exploit against consumer are not limited to BEV. This applies to ICEV as well, take a look of diesel powered farm equipment right to repair . This is a common corporate greed problem , not a uniquely BEV one. Finally, instead of blindly accusing me of being a shill because you don't like the facts I'm putting out here, why don't you try to rebut my arguments or offer counterpoints. This is something any person who isn't arguing in bad faith can do.
    1
  20.  @Gamersunite2506  It seem rebutting your post triggered some sort of YouTube auto mod yeet feature . Lets try this again and see which part triggered that : Firstly ,kindly quote the parts where I ever accuse anyone here of spreading propaganda? I dare you . I guess every accusation is an admission.
    1
  21.  @Gamersunite2506  Secondly, BEV are a suitable replacement for ICEV when it comes to environmental impact. BEV have been factually proven to be less damaging to the planet than ICEV. The only lie here the the myth that a BEV is as polluting if not worse than ICEV. Again is have been factually proven that this myth is not true.
    1
  22.  @Gamersunite2506  Thirdly, the so called exploit against consumer are not limited to BEV. This applies to ICEV as well, take a look of John Deere's diesel powered farm equipment . This is a common corporate greed problem , not a uniquely BEV one
    1
  23.  @Gamersunite2506 Fourth and finally, instead of blindly accusing me of being a shill because you don't like the facts I'm putting out here. Why don't you try to rebut my arguments or offer counterpoints, something any person who isn't arguing in bad faith can do.
    1
  24.  @Gamersunite2506  Secondly, battery electric vehicles IS a suitable replacement for internal combustion engine when it comes to environmental impact. They have been factually proven to be less damaging to the planet than fossil fuel cars . The only lie here the the myth that they are as polluting if not worse than internal combustion engine . Again is have been factually proven that this myth is not true
    1
  25.  @Max-mj4bc  There' re plenty of safe way to recycles EV batteries. As I aid before multiple companies have sprung up to tackle this problem and some manufacturers such as Tesla already have solid end of life plan for their electric vehicles.
    1
  26.  @Nostradumlbass  Those EV batteries can last for more than 30 to 40 years before they become useless . But if you mean how long before the degradation on those batteries make them less useful for EV, then that would be around 20-25 years, pretty much the same lifespan of current gasoline and diesel cars. EV is a solution to internal combustion engine ass they are better for the environment .
    1
  27.  @ikkebang7058  Firstly , cobalt is also used in the process of refining crude oil , so your average ICE car probably used more cobalt in their lifetime than an EV. Secondly , while the mining of material such as cobalt and manganese is very destructive, their overall impact is still less than the negative effects or oil extraction . Remember, you only need to mine material for the batteries once, but you need to pump oil for the rest of an ICE's life. Thirdly, manufacturers are trying to solve these problems by either sourcing their material more ethically or reducing the use of such material in their cell chemistry. Some design such as LFP (whci is already widely used in EV) and sodium batteries don't even use cobalt or manganese
    1
  28.  @15thobserver  Yes, fossil fuels . You know, gasoline/petrol , diesel and natural gas.
    1
  29.  @CampingforCool41  We will never eliminate the want for personal vehicle like cars and motorcycles. the best we can do is replace their more polluting engine with cleaner one like EV.
    1
  30.  @wannabecarguy  EV is still better for the environment than gasoline or diesel powered cars.
    1
  31.  @OOTurok  This is just factually wrong. Firstly , multiple independent studies/research have shown that even the worse case scenario where all the electricity needed to for an EV came solely form coal burning power plants, the EV would still be less polluting than a gasoline or diesel car within their lifetime. Secondly, your calculations is wrong on so many level . For starter coal power plants have an overall efficiency of 35-38% which is is lower than natural gas powered plants. On top of the gasoline engine have an average efficiency of 25% and have a maximum theoretical efficiency of 28%, much lower than your 40% claim. Furthermore you are confusing the efficiency of power plants with the efficiency of internal combustion engine for vehicle . Foer power plant this mean how much of the energy is converted to electricity whereas as for ICE it means how much of the energy can be used to move the car. For example an electric motor for an EV have an efficiency of around 85-95%.
    1
  32.  @OOTurok  Your math is still wrong again .At around 8-15% at maximum transmission loss (efficiency of 85-92%) , the amount of energy lost is the grid is very, very low to the point it is insignificant .85%(worst case scenario) of 35-38% still man that 32.3 % of electricity from the coal plants reached consumer . For gas-powered plants , 85%vof 60% resulted in 51%. Not bad number at all If you want to talks about power line transmission lost, then you also must account the power cost of transporting the fuel from the refinery to your local gas station and into your gas tank. If you are smart enough to google those number than you would also be smart enough to know that because of the low efficiency of internal combustion vehicles, it is more efficient to burn gasoline or diesel in a power plant generator to power an EV than to directly burn them in your engine. There are many engineering channel on YouTube that explain why EV motor are far more efficient than ICE. Again this is a fact that is confirmed by multiple peer reviewed studies.
    1
  33.  @OOTurok 5 My 85% number is based on the transmission lost that YOU agreed to be 15% (100-15), I could use the 92% grid efficiency if I used the 8% grid lost . We both know that 38% is the average efficiency for coal power plant hence the final efficiency number is 32%. Even if we go for the lower number of 35% efficiency (for coal) then the final number is still 30% and not 24% that you claim.
    1
  34.  @ikkebang7058  My point is EV is still a better choice and less destructive for the environment than using gasoline and diesel power vehicles. It is not a perfect solution but still far better the thing it sought to replace.
    1
  35.  @OOTurok  No, you are wrong gain . The 8-15% number the totals amount of that is lost in pushing those power from plant to home. This include those lost resistance of conductor and step up and stepping down from transformers (1-2% lost here alone ) . I don't know here you pull that additional 20% lost from . Furthermore I don't understand why are you bringing as reasoning to why ICE is better than EV. Using coal efficiency is irrelevant because there is no such thing as coal powered car to compare them with
    1
  36.  @OOTurok  Firstly, I still don't know where you pull that 20% number as I don't see any publication ever using that figure and phrase.. Secondly, you still haven't answered as to how and why this make ICE better than EV.
    1
  37.  @Nostradumlbass  No , those test also includes data for EV sold and used in colder climates such as the Nordic countries and Canada. Let not forgets that the world record for longest miles (over 1.5 million km) was set by a German guy and he drove his car all over Europe. While it is true that battery loses charge easier in colder temperature , this can be somewhat mitigated with thermal regulation and adaptive driving behaviour. Earlier EV that doesn't have this feature such as the Nissan Leaf do suffer as their battery life is infamously abysmal, but newer EV all have some version of thermal regulation for their batteries.
    1
  38.  @Nostradumlbass  This is where you are wrong again . I'm not talking about lab testing , I'm talking about data the was gathered from real life user of EV. The German guy with the 1.5 million km Tesla was merely a Tesla user (he said he'll be switching to Lucid for his next EV) . The 20% degradation for 250 thousand miles number was data gathered form real world Tesla user. Current gen of EV have been around for more than a decade (both Model S and Leaf are over 10 years old) so we do have plenty of real world data to go around. If you look around you too will found out data about real world performance of various brand of EV in Nordic countries( countries like Norway and Iceland have the highest rate of EV adoption in the world) . You may be an automotive insider but you don't seem to be up to date with EV data and news.
    1
  39.  @Nostradumlbass  My point is we have enough data on cold weather performance of EV because of the high proliferation of EV in those colder Nordic states. Hence why it would be comparable for any countries with extended harsh winters . I don't see why NA would be different . As for that Tesla data (I actually misspoke , the average degradation after 250K miles is 12%, not 20% based on their released statement ), while Tesla didn't disclose the full data, other observation by independent engineers pretty much supported Tesla claim in n that 224 page report. In fact a few years ago (can't remember when but it was pre-Covid) the same prediction was made after they (not Tesla) extrapolated data gathered form Tesla users at that time. The German guy (Hansjörg Gemmingen) didn't just drove his car in Germany, he traveled all across Europe in from Sweden to Spain. That was one of the reason why he had so much mileage. There was even a picture of his Tesla completely covered in thick snow so you can't even say he never took them out in harsh winter. Your point about taking care of his car is also moot as internal combustion engine cars would also suffer short life span if not properly taken care of and exposed to extreme cold weather without protection. In fact ICE vehicle require more protection than an EV (which only required heated battery) in such condition due to the many moving parts and material (lubrications . coolants etc) . This is before accounting foe the fact that battery life is only improving. Just look at the early Leaf or EV1 and compare them to what is available today.
    1
  40.  @OOTurok  Firstly, your argument makes no sense in both physics and electrical engineering . We know how much energy loss from stepping up and stepping down voltage to transfer power and those number were already calculated into transmission loss . Because this have already been factored in we arrive at the 8-15% number, hence why your 20% additive loss came out of nowhere and not found in any accredited publication on electricity. Your ramble about electron in dynamos also don't make sense as those number have also been factored in the energy efficiency output of power generation (where did you think that 38% figure came from?). In other words your math is still wrong. Secondly, as I stated multiple time that multiple independent research and studies into the matter concluded that switching to EV from ICE do indeed reduce pollution even in the worst case scenario in which all energy used to power those EV came solely form coal . Those studies took into account the efficiency , emission and well as energy needed to maintain the logistic network . Therefor your arguments about EV not reducing pollution is factually proven to be incorrect . This is before we account the fact that our grid is only getting cleaner with very passing day . Finally you argument about power production of solar and wind vs filled fuel ignores why we need to switch form fossil fuel in the first place: pollution, health hazards and their contribution to climate change . It doesn't matter that you need 250 Wind Turbines, or 3,750,000 Solar Panels to match the output of 1 single Gas or Steam Turbine when they removed all the negative impact of that one gas steam turbine.
    1
  41.  @moos5221  Not really, my country also fell for the whole "used tyres for corral reef" project last century.
    1
  42.  @moos5221  Malaysia.
    1
  43.  @billybassman21  As I repeatedly said in this thread, except for the power grid issue (which can be solved by simply upgrading the grid) , all the other problem are also presents with internal combustion engine cars. Some such as the car catching fire in the event of accident and pollution from mining is even worse for gasoline cars. EV may not be a perfect solution but it is still solution for the problem posed by ICE vehicle.
    1
  44.  @OOTurok  Your points fall flat based on the fact we CAN'T store energy as fossil fuel. Fossil fuel are sun's energy trapped in chemical form due to Earth's geology in the span of million of years. Human can't replicate that and every attempt we try (ethanol and artificial methane eg ) we got abysmal energy conversion/retention out of them. This is because we can't fight the laws of physics. Of all the energy storage that is available to us, battery is the most efficient . Standard Li-ion battery have a a roundtrip efficiency of 90-95%, which is higher than counterparts like flywheel (less than 90%) pump hydro (80%) or stored hydrogen (50%).Battery is so efficient t that is is more economical and efficient to burn those fossil fuel (gasoline, diesels or natural gas) in power plants to power an EV than to burn them in your engine , but that have to do with internal combustion engine terrible efficiency . Of course the biggest advantage of battery powered electric vehicle is they are far less polluting and have less negative environmental and health impact than fossil fuel (gasoline, diesels or natural gas) vehicle they sough to replace
    1
  45.  @OOTurok  Your are again wrong. The energy efficiency of power plants an the grid and also is based on the amount or energy produce at the plants at how much energy that finally reached and is usable by end consumer . All your mumbo jumbo is irrelevant to this and why no electrical engineer would calculate efficiency' the way you are wrongly doing it. Secondly, you're mis-defining current Climate Change. Unlike those natural Climate Change that take thousand of years to unfold , the current Anthropogenic Climate Change is speed up to just a couple of centuries (some effects seen in just few decades) , the last time that happened was during mass extinction level evet such as asteroid impacts or mega volcano eruption . Every accredited and peer reviewed studies include those done by NASA, & NOAA concluded that humans are the main contributors due to increase of greenhouse gases emission (CO2, methane etc) . Remember these are gases that have been trapped in the Earths for million of years . Planting forest won't help much if at all as long as the sources of those carbon emission are still in place. This is where EV came in: As land based transportation contributes to more than 30% or greenhouse gas emissions, removing them by switching to EV is a good head start. This also remove all the pollution and health hazard of burning petroleum based fossil fuel in your engine. Furthermore it still does not matter that Solar and wind requires more land footprint than a fossil fuel power plants as long as they can eliminate the negative environmental and health impact of those plants. I need to remind you that solar and wind can be installed in place nit suited for forest such as on rooftops, on open seas and deserts.
    1
  46.  @mushyroom9569  Again, multiple independent studies/research have shown that even the worst case scenario where all the electricity needed to for an EV came solely from coal burning power plants, the EV would still be less polluting than a gasoline or diesel car within their lifetime.
    1
  47.  @mushyroom9569 You can google them. I can't linked them here because for some reason outside source get blocked or auto yeeted. Their finding include the total emission from mining of material to disposing of them at the end of their lifetime.Wile battery EV produce more pollution in the production phase compared to an ICE, that is just one upfront cost compared to the the ICE still constantly polluting all their life as you need to extract and burn fossil fuel to power them forever . That is before accounting foe a fact that our grid is getting greener. For example an EV driven in place where most of their power is from cleaner source such as Norway or beat would beat their ICE counterparts in just a few years . For Norway that stage is reached before the EV crossed 10,000 km in mileage. The laws of thermodynamics actually dictate that is is better to burn fossil fuel in power plants (even gasoline and diesel ) to power an EV than using them in your engine because of how inefficient internal combustion engine is. HINT: fossil fuel plants can use better, nor efficient methods such as combined cycle rather the the abysmal ICE.
    1
  48.  @OOTurok  Yu obviously don't know what "storing energy" means. Explain to me: how did you convert electrical power into petroleum fuel ? HINT: YOU CAN'T .
    1
  49.  @isaac6077  I dare you to elaborate on what you claim I got wrong.
    1
  50.  @OOTurok  I never seen anyone failed math that badly . Here is a more accurate calculation 1 liter of gasoline contains around 9kwh of energy. The average ICE have an efficiency of 12.5km per liter. This in turn means it only gets 1.3km /kwh. The more efficient diesels on the other hand can get around 1.5 to 2km/kwh In contrast an EV can get around 4-5 km /kwh for most current EV and can go to 7.45km/kwh for more efficient one like Tesla. This clearly show EV are far more efficient than gasoline or diesel powered vehicles.
    1