ALL ELECTRIC T BUCKET

Hey, perhaps the battery life issues will negate the annoying window rattling bass.... lol... just looking for a win.

 

What?

 

LOL !!!

 

If I ever owned a electric bucket the first thing I would add to it would be a nice stereo so I could play a recording of a blower motor whining... other than that I would never own an electric bucket. Stupid idea and very un-nostalgic...jmho

 

HOLY COW !! My thread is getting a whole ship load of responses. I think i struck a nerve.......LOL !!

 

Well what do you think, it's like asking what do you think about Tr...... ? There
are going to be a whole lot of opinions !!!!!

 

BTW, welcome, Edwin! What is your T-bucket project look like?

 

So you have!
The following was sent to me by a chassis manufacturing company that I have been friends with for many years. Just so you will know he is in my age bracket and I'm 76. I don't know who wrote it but is every interesting and worth your time to read. Let the comments begin!
George



What is a battery?

I think Tesla said it best when they called it an Energy Storage System. That's important.

They do not make electricity – they store electricity produced elsewhere, primarily by coal, uranium, natural gas-powered plants, diesel-fueled generators or minerals. So, to say an Electric Vehicle (EV) is a zero-emission vehicle is not at all valid.

Also, since forty percent of the electricity generated in the U.S. is from coal-fired plants, it follows that forty percent of the EVs on the road are coal-powered, do you see? If not, read on.

Einstein's formula, E=MC2, tells us it takes the same amount of energy to move a five-thousand-pound gasoline-driven automobile a mile as it does an electric one. The only question again is what produces the power? To reiterate, it does not come from the battery; the battery is only the storage device, like a gas tank in a car.

There are two orders of batteries, rechargeable, and single-use. The most common single-use batteries are A, AA, AAA, C, D. 9V, and lantern types. Those dry-cell species use zinc, manganese, lithium, silver oxide, or zinc and carbon to store electricity chemically. Please note they all contain toxic, heavy metals.

Rechargeable batteries only differ in their internal materials, usually lithium-ion, nickel-metal oxide, and nickel-cadmium. The United States uses three billion of these two battery types a year, and most are not recycled; they end up in landfills. California is the only state which requires all batteries be recycled. If you throw your small, used batteries in the trash, here is what happens to them.

All batteries are self-discharging. That means even when not in use, they leak tiny amounts of energy. You have likely ruined a flashlight or two from an old, ruptured battery. When a battery runs down and can no longer power a toy or light, you think of it as dead; well, it is not. It continues to leak small amounts of electricity. As the chemicals inside it run out, pressure builds inside the battery's metal casing, and eventually, it cracks. The metals left inside then ooze out. The ooze in your ruined flashlight is toxic, and so is the ooze that will inevitably leak from every battery in a landfill. All batteries eventually rupture; it just takes rechargeable batteries longer to end up in the landfill.

In addition to dry cell batteries, there are also wet cell ones used in automobiles, boats, and motorcycles. The good thing about those is, ninety percent of them are recycled. Unfortunately, we do not yet know how to recycle single-use ones properly.

But that is not half of it. For those of you excited about electric cars and a green revolution, I want you to take a closer look at batteries and also windmills and solar panels. These three technologies share what we call environmentally destructive embedded costs.

Everything manufactured has two costs associated with it, embedded costs and operating costs. I will explain embedded costs using a can of baked beans as my subject.

In this scenario, baked beans are on sale, so you jump in your car and head for the grocery store. Sure enough, there they are on the shelf for $1.75 a can. As you head to the checkout, you begin to think about the embedded costs in the can of beans.

The first cost is the diesel fuel the farmer used to plow the field, till the ground, harvest the beans, and transport them to the food processor. Not only is his diesel fuel an embedded cost, so are the costs to build the tractors, combines, and trucks. In addition, the farmer might use a nitrogen fertilizer made from natural gas.

Next is the energy costs of cooking the beans, heating the building, transporting the workers, and paying for the vast amounts of electricity used to run the plant. The steel can holding the beans is also an embedded cost. Making the steel can requires mining taconite, shipping it by boat, extracting the iron, placing it in a coal-fired blast furnace, and adding carbon. Then it's back on another truck to take the beans to the grocery store. Finally, add in the cost of the gasoline for your car.

A typical EV battery weighs one thousand pounds, about the size of a travel trunk. It contains twenty-five pounds of lithium, sixty pounds of nickel, 44 pounds of manganese, 30 pounds cobalt, 200 pounds of copper, and 400 pounds of aluminum, steel, and plastic. Inside are over 6,000 individual lithium-ion cells.

It should concern you that all those toxic components come from mining. For instance, to manufacture each EV auto battery, you must process 25,000 pounds of brine for the lithium, 30,000 pounds of ore for the cobalt, 5,000 pounds of ore for the nickel, and 25,000 pounds of ore for copper. All told, you dig up 500,000 pounds of the earth's crust for just one battery."

Sixty-eight percent of the world's cobalt, a significant part of a battery, comes from the Congo. Their mines have no pollution controls, and they employ children who die from handling this toxic material. Should we factor in these diseased kids as part of the cost of driving an electric car?" And the Chinese just bought most of these mines!

I'd like to leave you with these thoughts. California is building the largest battery in the world near San Francisco, and they intend to power it from solar panels and windmills. They claim this is the ultimate in being 'green,' but it is not! This construction project is creating an environmental disaster. Let me tell you why.

The main problem with solar arrays is the chemicals needed to process silicate into the silicon used in the panels. To make pure enough silicon requires processing it with hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, nitric acid, hydrogen fluoride, trichloroethane, and acetone. In addition, they also need gallium, arsenide, copper-indium-gallium- diselenide, and cadmium-telluride, which also are highly toxic. Silicone dust is a hazard to the workers, and the panels cannot be recycled.

Windmills are the ultimate in embedded costs and environmental destruction. Each weighs 1688 tons (the equivalent of 23 houses) and contains 1300 tons of concrete, 295 tons of steel, 48 tons of iron, 24 tons of fiberglass, and the hard to extract rare earths neodymium, praseodymium, and dysprosium. Each blade weighs 81,000 pounds and will last 15 to 20 years, at which time it must be replaced. We cannot recycle used blades. Sadly, both solar arrays and windmills kill birds, bats, sea life, and migratory insects.

There may be a place for these technologies, but you must look beyond the myth of zero emissions. I predict EVs and windmills will be abandoned once the embedded environmental costs of making and replacing them become apparent. "Going Green" may sound like the Utopian ideal and are easily espoused, catchy buzzwords, but when you look at the hidden and embedded costs realistically with an open mind, you can see that Going Green is more destructive to the Earth's environment than meets the eye, for sure.

If this had been titled... "The Embedded Costs of Going Green," would you have read it? Please share if you wish.

 

Floyd-Wow! I’ve read about a lot of this myself. Not as in depth with respect to all the various chemicals used. Please pardon my tin foil hat but it does make me wonder if there’s an ulterior motive here. I’ve found that not many people don’t consider the other factors as listed here and are surprised when you tell them about them. Small scale solar or wind generation seems viable but like many other things once you expand it exponentially that’s when it appears to be not so much.

 

Great thread Donny Ray! You’ve got everyone talking and thinking about it!

 

Well now... sense you did open this general subject I have another little food for thought. For what it's worth have at it!

Pipelines vs. Trains vs. Cargo Ships



THIS WILL GIVE YOU AN IDEA HOW STUPID THE PEOPLE RUNNING THIS
COUNTRY INTO THE GROUND REALLY ARE!!!

And never forget who controls the trains in the USA, that’s right,
Warren Buffet !!!!!!!!!


Pipelines vs. Trains vs. Cargo Ships


Someone with a sharp mind and the capacity to do a lot of research spent time putting some numbers together:

1 Train has 100 cars, 2 engines, and weighs 27,240,000 LBS

1 Train carries 3,000,000 gallons of oil.

1 train uses 55.5 gallons of diesel per mile.

It takes 119,000 gallons of diesel to go 2150 miles from Hardidsy, AB to Freeport, TX.

Keystone pipeline was to deliver 34,860,000 gallons of oil per day.

It would take 12 trains and 1,428,000 gallons of diesel to deliver that amount. PER DAY!

521,220,000 gallons of diesel per year.

The oil will still go to market with or without the pipeline.

By stopping the pipeline, billions of gallons of diesel will be wasted and polluted needlessly.

Does that make you feel good?

Stop the Tar Sands altogether? Then we must ship the oil from the overseas sandbox.

1 large oil tanker can haul 120,000,000 gallons of oil.
1 boat takes 15 days to float across the Atlantic.

1 boat uses 63,000 gallons of fuel PER DAY, that is about 1 million gallons of the most polluting type of fuel in the world PER TRIP.*(See below)

Or take 3.5 days of Keystone Pipeline to move the same amount of oil with a fraction of the pollution.

In international waters, ship emissions remain one of the least regulated parts of our global transportation system. The fuel used in ships is waste oil, basically what is left over after the crude oil refining process. It is the same as asphalt and is so thick that when cold, it can be walked upon. It's the cheapest and most polluting fuel available, and the world's 90,000 ships chew through an astonishing 7.29 million barrels of it each day, or more than 84% of all exported oil production from Saudi Arabia.

Shipping is by far the biggest transport polluter in the world. There are 760 million cars in the world today, emitting approx. 78,599 tons of Sulfur Oxide (SOx) ANNUALLY. The world's 90,000 vessels burn approx. 370 million tons of fuel per year, emitting 20 million tons of Sulfur Oxide. That equates to 260 times MORE Sulfur Oxide being emitted by ships than the WORLD's ENTIRE CAR FLEET. One large ship alone can generate approx. 5,200 tons of sulfur oxide pollution in a year, meaning that 15 of the largest ships now emit as much SOx as the world's 760 million cars

Eliminate all gas-consuming cars and diesel vehicles?

Worldwide car gas consumption is 403,583,712,000 gallons a year. That's Billion.

Worldwide oil consumption is 1,500,000,000,000 gallons a year. That's Trillion.

It takes 2.15 gallons of oil to make 1 gallon of gasoline/petrol and 0.6 gals of diesel.

So it takes 867,704,980,800 gallons of oil to run the world's cars, most diesel vehicles for a year, and some ships

That leaves 632,295,019,200 gallons of oil for other uses.

Passenger vehicles are only a very small percentage of the problem. If emissions are the problem, why not just capture them at the exhaust? Create an industry to clean exhaust instead of crushing an entire industry and building a completely untested, replacement industry?

So are we willing to dramatically increase mining to get all the minerals necessary to make all these batteries and electric motors? Mining is far worse for the environment than oil extraction.

Killing Keystone was glibly decided by EMOTIONAL IDIOTS WITHOUT BRAINS!
DESTRUCTIVE and ON PURPOSE!

 

Ran across this and thought some of you might enjoy it.

And we think we are so mart at times!

Just A Car Guy: the Owen Magnetic Transmission, a electric hybrid car's motor generator really, of 100 years ago

Just A Car Guy: Thanks to Robert L for the box of books!

 

There are many inventions that have been stifled to protect the monopoly that big business, big government holds.

 

You mean big business/ government is playing us? Darn them! I would use stronger language but I don’t want the web mistress to holler at me!

 

You need to be hollered at by the web mistress

 

Tucker comes to mind for me...

 

Don't forget the DeLorean. I'm surprised Tesla is still solvent .

 

Well, PG, we'll just have to agree to disagree on your analysis. That said, I love your T-bucket and wish you lived within cruising range of my house! And this pic from NTBA Springfield Nats brings back memories . . .