our beloved aged Lss' and carbon footprint

[Malc]

so guys, who's for determining the carbon footprint of a brand new build ecofriendly all electric or whatever embracing car vs a vs running our old ladies and NOT buying a brand new EV or Hybrid and scrapping ( sorry I'm swearing ) our monster but beautiful Lss'  ............... basically, I guess I'm asking,  where's the carbon saving by not using our existing petrol cars ?

someone somewhere must have done this exercise in deciding it's beneficial for the whole planet, well us in the UK anyway , to have brand new cars and scrapping petrol

Malc

[ambermarine]

I wrote a comment on this subject a few years ago when the question was first raised,it is a safe estimate that even destroying(recycling) the car creates a bigger carbon footprint than the footprint of its use is over a 4k miles per annum for ten years based on the emmisions the LS400 has.

So the carbon footprint of replacing with an eco friendly car does not even  figure in calculations because it is massive just from the manufacturing angle.

The downside for us who own these vehicles is that some academic being paid by the green lobby will produce figures that eventually will pursuade our politicians that compulsory scrapping of all large petrol engined cars (just because they are) is the way forward.

[i-s]

The CO2e footprint to produce a typical new car is about 5.6t. An EV with a large Battery is around 8.8t CO2e, so the EV begins with a 3.2t CO2e deficit. (https://www.lowcvp.org.uk/assets/workingdocuments/MC-P-11-15a Lifecycle emissions report.pdf)

UK grid electricity average for 2019 was 189g/kWh (https://electricinsights.co.uk/#/dashboard?period=1-year&start=2019-01-01&&_k=l8pyik), and an EV typically returns between 3 and 4 miles per kWh. Using 3.5 mi/kWh, we get a true emission level of 34g/km. 

An older petrol LS400 returning an (optimistic!) 25mpg emits 270g/km (https://www.eta.co.uk/2010/02/22/calculating-a-cars-co2-emissions-from-its-mpg/)

Thus, for every mile driven the  LS emits 236g/km more CO2. 

In 10000 miles driven the LS emits 3.77t of CO2 MORE than the EV does. 

In other words, the production deficit of the EV is gone in less than 10000 miles compared to an older LS. In 30000 miles the EV has covered its entire production and running emissions compared to an LS that we assume 0 production cost for as a car that already exists. Also note that CO2 emission of electricity production is rapidly decreasing, as is CO2 emission of producing EVs. 

This is to say nothing of the carbon footprint of refining (11% on top) or transporting fossil fuel, nor the carbon footprint of the other consumables (eg engine oil, spark plugs, oil filters, air filters, transmission fluid, etc). 

 

[rich1068]

Started a similar discussion here a little while ago.

I'm quite convinced that by running older motors I have less of an impact than my neighbours who change their superficially "clean" motor every two or three years. 

But then I would say that wouldn't I...?

[Cotswold Pete]

The theory sounds fine until we see  the damage being done to the environment in Peru where Lithium is derived from brine salts, and the water and air pollution created is just different polution to bite us (or Pervians) on the backside.

Even though I have an LS, I think driving any car is not good for the environment, and would really love to have a job where I could walk to work, or even consider using public transport.

I live 12 miles from work, but public transport would take me 3 hours each way.

Banning cars from city centers is (IMHO) necessary, and even EVs should be banned, as they generate road wear and tyre particulate and fine metal dust, which I would think is not good for the lungs.

One thing is that car body panels need furnaces to create enough heat to produce the steel/aluminium and that heat (as far as I know) can only be gained from coal, so we would still be spewing out masses of carbon as we replace (and recyle) old metal body parts, and surely plastic body panels is a bit of a nightmare for future generations.

The dichotomy of owning an old luxury barge that does 11,000 miles a year. I know I am a seasoned hypocrite who loves visting the wilds of the Lake District having poured pollution all the way up the M5 to do so (but catching a train is way too expensive and cycling would be plainy mad - and my wife would expire before we got to Twekesbury👻).

So in conclusion whatever the academics say, there are no easy answers, and the answers of todays scientists will create challenges for future scientists.

[Malc]

ah right, I think I understand now 

so who's up for giving me an interest free non repayable £25k  ( loan ?? ) to buy my nice brand new eco friendly EV  ?

so's it's enabling me to become an eco warrior, in a very friendly way   ............  on someone else's budget please of course

All ( gifts ?  )  gratefully accepted and I will gladly give you my Ls400 to takeaway and in an environmentally friendly way destroy

Thank you

Malc

[ambermarine]

1 hour ago, i-s said:

The CO2e footprint to produce a typical new car is about 5.6t. An EV with a large battery is around 8.8t CO2e, so the EV begins with a 3.2t CO2e deficit. (https://www.lowcvp.org.uk/assets/workingdocuments/MC-P-11-15a Lifecycle emissions report.pdf)

UK grid electricity average for 2019 was 189g/kWh (https://electricinsights.co.uk/#/dashboard?period=1-year&start=2019-01-01&&_k=l8pyik), and an EV typically returns between 3 and 4 miles per kWh. Using 3.5 mi/kWh, we get a true emission level of 34g/km. 

An older petrol LS400 returning an (optimistic!) 25mpg emits 270g/km (https://www.eta.co.uk/2010/02/22/calculating-a-cars-co2-emissions-from-its-mpg/)

Thus, for every mile driven the  LS emits 236g/km more CO2. 

In 10000 miles driven the LS emits 3.77t of CO2 MORE than the EV does. 

In other words, the production deficit of the EV is gone in less than 10000 miles compared to an older LS. In 30000 miles the EV has covered its entire production and running emissions compared to an LS that we assume 0 production cost for as a car that already exists. Also note that CO2 emission of electricity production is rapidly decreasing, as is CO2 emission of producing EVs. 

This is to say nothing of the carbon footprint of refining (11% on top) or transporting fossil fuel, nor the carbon footprint of the other consumables (eg engine oil, spark plugs, oil filters, air filters, transmission fluid, etc). 

 

The figures you have quoted are from enviromentalists and a electricity producer in the UK who is trying to use sustainable carbon friendly fuels but they only show part of the problem and are very much inclined towards the green lobby.

I have no doubt that the LS produces more carbon than a EV but that is because there is a thirty year time lapse in technology,aside from that It is still one of the cleanest vehicles in its class and turns out a lot less polution than later diesel and petrol vehicles.

The recycling factor is not shown in these figures and niether is the ongoing consumables that EV 's will require such as tyres and new batteries. 

This is a interesting debate and will tax the minds of many a individual over the coming decade and I for one see the march of the EV as a inevitable conclusion to the burning of fossil fuels but it is not without its negatives.

[BigBoomer]

As a used car buyer (no, I've never had a new car other than company cars, and only ever bought 2 new motorcycles) I will buy an EV when their prices drop to where I can afford one. That car will need to comfortably fit my 6'4" and 29 Stone (hopefully I'll be lighter by then) and give me decent acceleration. So far I only fit in a Tesla Model S and won't be able to afford one of those used for quite some time. If the government tries to take my car away then they will have to compensate me by replacing it with an EQUIVALENT EV, not some pokey little box I don't even fit in. As for carbon emissions, I have no children so have done more for reducing my carbon footprint than most others.

Our pollution problems do not stem only from fossil fuel use, or any of the other stuff that we do. They also stem from there being TOO MANY humans on the planet. The planet coped with a massively dirty industrial revolution in the 19th Century because there were only 1 to 1.6 Billion people on the planet. Now there are nearly 8 Billion and growing rapidly, so that is at LEAST 8 times more carbon released.

[Malc]

and I understand ( from somewhere ) that Toyota are still quite on board with their Hydrogen concept being greener and more friendly and likely to be the forerunner in vehicle propulsion in future times

Also reading, as an aside,  the outgoing Chair of BP advising that in 8 countries in Asia there is still one new coal fired power plant a week coming on stream  ...............  ad infinitum

 

and George, compulsory sterilisation for those non green enthusiasts that won't voluntarily accept their part in reducing future population levels maybe ???  ...  where oh where will the passion for reducing CO2 levels end  😰

Malc

[BigBoomer]

1 hour ago, Malc said:

and George, compulsory sterilisation for those non green enthusiasts that won't voluntarily accept their part in reducing future population levels maybe ???  ...  where oh where will the passion for reducing CO2 levels end  😰

 

Compulsory anything doesn't work. Education is the only way, but too many people just want to bury their heads in the sand and hope it will all go away. <sigh>
Well, it'll be their descendants who will be living on that massively over-populated ruined planet, not mine.

[The-Acre]

Regardless of what environmentalists might say, I grew up in London and remember the constant filth coming from factory chimneys, and the regular pea soupers when you literally couldn't see your hand in front of you, and the smog that used to linger for days.  40 years on the air feels better now than it did then. Driving for me isn't just to get somewhere, it's also a pleasure, and the pleasure for me is driving a big V8 like last week when I wafted down to Cornwall, I won't get that pleasure from electric. That sounds selfish of course, and probably is!

[JamesIS220]

I have a 1996 petrol Volvo 940 2.3 litre auto estate and I wont change that, as for my work, being self employed in property maintenance, it's ideal. Like Volvo estates of old as large, reliable and like the visibility. Vans I don't like as not keen on lack of rear vision and older ones very basic.

It's nearly on 203,000 miles and still works faultlessly. Bad it does 30-33mpg. I definitely think keeping any car on the road as long as possible is a good thing. Manufacturers should build new cars to last 15-20 years and get rid of the age related number plates.

I have recently bought a 2015 Toyota Auris Hybrid estate and after fuel expenses of the 940 it's a revelation. It was empty when I bought it and put £30 worth in at Morrisons and that got me 340 miles as advised by the car. On some journeys managed 63mpg and averaged 55mpg. Apparently better in Summer as batteries work better in warmer weather. I certainly like the silent driving when under 40mph when the electric mode kicks in.

James

[Guest]

Whilst China, India and Donalds mob carry on regardless we may all just ***** in the wind, but sure as eggs are eggs there are far too many of us and if we are to survive with any quality of life in the not too distant future we will have to dramatically reduce our numbers, by natural wastage hopefully but if not it will be done how we always seem to do it by war !

[The-Acre]

Too many of us for what?

[Guest]

1 hour ago, The-Acre said:

Too many of us for what?

For the world to sustain us as we are carrying on, basically slashing and burning as we go along. Simples really !

[Malc]

with they say 40% of the world's CO2 emissions cased by cattle farting and eating the cud then maybe where with some 2/3rds of the global population ( and more ) eating vegetarian diets almost exclusively, we should leave India and China from this equation ...................

China burns lots of coal however, 

India is now building the world's supremist humungous solar power plants ever and there's a retro-fit programme for ALL Govt buildings to have solar panels

where's the thinking on this for the UK and other western nations ?

methinks it's maybe not India you mention as being a major cause of crap air from their society  ....  although burning crop stubble is a terrible indictment albeit totally banned by the Govt there

It's far from being just the motor vehicle that's the cause of CO2 issues, but it is the easiest to bang on about to ***** most people off

Malc

[runsgrateasanut]

2 hours ago, Malc said:

with they say 40% of the world's CO2 emissions cased by cattle farting and eating the cud then maybe where with some 2/3rds of the global population ( and more ) eating vegetarian diets almost exclusively, we should leave India and China from this equation ...................

 

Malc

I thought I'd ask Google if Vegetarians f**t more than Meat eaters and this is what I read " Apparently, it's because of all the beans they eat. ... This leads to an increase in certain bacteria in the lower intestine to break down the beans, which produces large amounts of hydrogen, nitrogen and carbon dioxide gas."

 

Also "

Methane production per KG (of body weight) in a vegetarian is probably higher than that of a cow, since the digestive system of a human is not adapted for fermentation of vegetation (like a cow’s)

So is going Veggy greener?

[ambermarine]

Just to put a myth to bed here the methane that a bovine animal emits is from the mouth because the digestive system excretes waste matter from the rear and the gases are expelled from the first and second stomach back to the mouth as the contents are regurgated to be chewed again(cud).

[The-Acre]

1 hour ago, ambermarine said:

Just to put a myth to bed here the methane that a bovine animal emits is from the mouth because the digestive system excretes waste matter from the rear and the gases are expelled from the first and second stomach back to the mouth as the contents are regurgated to be chewed again(cud).

One thing is for certain, the methane that constantly comes from our dog's rear end trumps it all!

[Malc]

do leave Trump out of it pleeeeease  

Malc

[Cotswold Pete]

6 hours ago, runsgrateasanut said:

Vegetarians f**t more

Having been a veggie to 30 years, the f**ting comes from too much chocolate and beer. I only eat beans in moderation (on toast with an egg, for a late weekend breakfast)

[runsgrateasanut]

5 hours ago, Cotswold Pete said:

Having been a veggie to 30 years, the f**ting comes from too much chocolate and beer. I only eat beans in moderation (on toast with an egg, for a late weekend breakfast)

Aren't eggs verbotten to Veggies?  Mind you my Daughter also is a Veggie and eats Eggs.

[rich1068]

You're thinking of vegans.

[Malc]

so if we  turn vegetarian and not eat beans then we are individually allowed to run our Lss' with impunity  .......  having offset the carbon emissions of our 4ltr V8s with cabbage. cucumber and lettuce etc  

Malc

[The-Acre]

5 minutes ago, Malc said:

so if we  turn vegetarian and not eat beans then we are individually allowed to run our Lss' with impunity  .......  having offset the carbon emissions of our 4ltr V8s with cabbage. cucumber and lettuce etc  

Malc

Please sir, can't I have both? I had such a lovely steak and mushroom pie yesterday!