India Aims To Make Every Car Electric By 2030 In Bid To Tackle Pollution (independent.co.uk)
India's energy minister has unveiled plans for every car sold in the country to be powered by electricity by the year 2030. "The move is intended to lower the cost of importing fuel and lower costs for running vehicles," reports The Independent. From the report: âoeWe are going to introduce electric vehicles in a very big way," coal and mines minister Piyush Goyal said at the Confederation of Indian Industry Annual Session 2017 in New Delhi. "We are going to make electric vehicles self-sufficient... The idea is that by 2030, not a single petrol or diesel car should be sold in the country." Mr Goyal said the electric car industry would need between two and three years of government assistance, but added that he expected the production of the vehicles to be "driven by demand and not subsidy" after that. "The cost of electric vehicles will start to pay for itself for consumers," he said according to the International Business Times. "We would love to see the electric vehicle industry run on its own," he added. An investigation by Greenpeace this year found that as many as 2.3 million deaths occur every year due to air pollution in the country. The report, entitled "Airpocalypse," claimed air pollution had become a "public health and economic crisis" for Indians. It said the number of deaths caused by air pollution was only "a fraction less" than the number of deaths from tobacco use, adding that 3 percent of the country's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was lost to the levels of toxic smog.
If only you were to put that much effort to provide running water, electricity and sanitation to the more than 600 million Indian citizens who lack it, the rest of the world would start taking you seriously.
Electric cars are fine and dandy, but we still need to produce electricity to power them. Where will that come from? Solar and wind would be the best source as they pollute the least; nuclear is a good option if you're using more modern plant designs. Natural gas might actually be worse in terms of CO2 emissions. Coal would be the worst case scenario; the smoke contains all sorts of pollutants not emitted by modern gasoline engines.
Finding God in a Dog
India just opened the largest solar plant in the world and it only took 8 months to build. Much faster to install solar than anything else. (Coal plants take years and nuclear takes forever)
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/...
India expects to install 10 GW of solar this year:
https://cleantechnica.com/2017...
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
The main issue is cost. As long as battery car costs more than gas car, it will be difficult to persuade them to buy electric. Second major issue access to charging outlets. Most people park on the street or in apartment car parking spaces. So unless price comes down a lot electric cars will not gain traction there. But, if the imminent inevitable battery technology break through comes through, then they will switch to electric in a hurry. They will find ways to have metered outlets in car parking spaces and even the streets. Third issue is the frequent power cuts and brown outs.
In fact Tesla's wall battery for residential uses will be more attractive to them. Almost all the homes have a couple of truck lead-acid batteries fully charged to run the fridge, a couple of lights, and the TV during the powercuts. Now a days I see ads for "inverter air conditioners". Air conditioners designed to run on AC power generated by the inverter from a 12 v battery. The wave form is a crudely chopped square wave, and it is brutal on the motors. But these aircon motors are designed to handle it.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
The current Li-ion batteries installed in cars such as the Tesla should last at least 10 years. Of course, they haven't been in the cars 10 years yet but some cars have traveled over 200,000 miles with less than 10% degradation.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
The energy from burning fossil fuels comes from combining hydrocarbons (chains of carbon and hydrogen) with oxygen in the air to form CO2 and H2O (primarily). Both CO2 and H2O are at a lower energy state than the original hydrocarbon, and thus their formation gives off energy.
Natural gas (CH4) gives you 1 CO2 + 2 H2O. 2 water for each carbon dioxide molecule generated.
Gasoline consists mostly of alkenes and cycloalkenes.
So gasoline only generates 1.25 or fewer water molecules for each carbon dioxide molecule, compared to natural gas at 2 water molecule for each carbon dioxide molecule.
Natural gas produces the most water per CO2 atom of any hydrocarbon, meaning burning it generates the most energy per CO2 atom emitted of any hydrocarbon. Or put another way, for a given amount of energy generated, natural gas does it with the least CO2 emissions of any hydrocarbon (because a greater portion of its energy comes from forming water). Environmentalists just try to badmouth it because they wanted us to switch to renewables, and instead we switched to a cleaner fossil fuel.
Methane (natural gas) is actually about 10x more potent a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. So if you're not gonna burn natural gas to generate energy, you're better off just burning it to convert it into carbon dioxide. Before oil prices rose above about $30/bbl, it wasn't worth it to capture the methane which came up the wells with the petroleum (methane requires high pressure or cryogenic storage). So we were just burning a lot of it without trying to capture its energy. At least now we're using that energy.
Except like a Prius (but unlike, say, a Leaf), a large battery EV like a Tesla (or a GM Bolt) doesn't need to hit the ends of its capacity. In fact, a Tesla experiences very few cycles (relatively speaking) since the battery is so large. You seem to think that a small battery electric car will last longer than a large battery electric car, but the reality is the opposite (although both the Volt and Prius are special cases as they are plug-in hybrids).
Electric car batteries are designed to last for the entire life of the vehicle, like over 200,000 miles. At some point, I suppose you'd need to replace a car engine, too. Same deal. Car engine is recycled. Electric car battery is recycled.
India will get it done because the materials in car batteries are worth recycling. It's the same reason we don't put car engines in a landfill but instead we scrap them.
India has nuclear power, too. And electric cars (especially with large batteries) are good at smoothing over variable renewables since drivers can charge when power is cheapest (just like people fill up their cars where gas is cheapest).
And even coal (if burned far from the city and with good scrubbers) beats an asthma-inducing and smog-filled city. A coal power plant also can be run very efficiently. If you include the energy cost needed to refine gasoline, then a good, supercritical steam, multi-stage coal power plant charging an electric car may even have fewer CO2 emissions than a conventional gasoline powered vehicle.
But India is also close to the equator, which means more sunshine and less seasonal variation in sunlight (northern Germany and the UK are actually terrible for solar for this reason).
Coal would be the worst case scenario; the smoke contains all sorts of pollutants not emitted by modern gasoline engines.
I'm not sure how many more times it needs to be said, but one coal plant is far preferable to the equivalent energy generated in many thousands of small inefficient engines. Extra bonus points for the coal plant not being in the city centre.
Switching from diesel to 100% coal powered ICE is still a net win for people, but the reality is not going to be 100% coal powered so it's only really a question of how much better it can get, not if it will be better.