Embodied energy: 1 million ebike miles on a 90kWh pack.

[Syonyk]

http://syonyk.blogspot.com/2015/11/how-far-can-you-ride-electric-bike-on.html

A truth of modern industrial society is that it takes energy to make things.

Sometimes, that energy is better spent doing things than making the thing to save energy or "be green."

Let's consider a Tesla Model S battery pack. The shiny new one is 90kWh.

How much energy does it take to build a 90kWh pack?

http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2015/05/sustainability-off-grid-solar-power.html makes some claims about lithium battery embodied energy. It claims:

According to the latest LCA's, aimed at electric vehicle storage, the making of a lithium-ion battery requires between 1.4 and 1.87 MJ/wh

How much is that? 1MJ = 0.278 kWh = 278WH.

I'll be nice and use the lower end for Tesla's batteries. 1WH of lithium battery takes ~390WH to produce.

A Model S 90kWh pack, therefore, takes ~35MWh to produce.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1261431-why-batteries-are-too-valuable-to-waste-on-solar-power-integration-and-electric-cars also does some math on the Tesla packs. Their number is 472WH per WH of battery.

Based on an embodied energy of 472 kWhe per kWh of battery capacity, the Tesla's 85 kWh battery pack will have 40,120 kWhe of total embodied energy.

Well, 40MWh is within a reasonable tolerance of my numbers, so I'm happy enough with my back of the envelope calculations.

How far can that 35MWh take an electric bike?

A throttle-based ebike will consume somewhere around 35Wh/mi. So... a million miles. :/

What if we use a pedal assist bike at 15-20Wh/mi? Near as makes no difference, two million miles.

A typical American car travels 12k miles/yr. If you drive for 80 years, that's 960,000 miles.

So... for the energy involved in creating one Tesla Model S battery pack, you can ride an ebike for your whole life.

Ouch.

 

[Deafcat]

yowser.

 

[Chalo]

I've been saying for years now that you can't disregard this factor when comparing e-bikes to pedal bikes.

 

[liveforphysics]

That's hopelessly outdated energy in mfg info (though I don't doubt it was true at some point in time for some old-school factory), for a number of obvious reasons... Modern mfg is all closed loop and when laid out well with modern equipment designs is at least 1 if not 2 orders of magnitude lower energy consumption.

The gigafactory will be entirely self-powered from the solar on it's roof. The vehicles delivering raw materials to process and the vehicles mining the raw materials can(will be eventually) be all electric and charged from solar.

A decade ago when battery mfg was super immature and hack-ish, it was super energy and materials wasteful and polluted nasty solvents like NMP and used nasty toxic heavy metals. After a decade of maturing cell mfg, it's quite a clean and radically lower energy process, and as a result this has been a dominate driver for the price/Wh continuing to drop as we've all enjoyed.

That said, super lightweight streamlined vehicles obviously make more sense than 5,000lbs cars from an energy for transportation perspective. Yet... I just got done driving a P90D with ludicrous mode 30mins ago, and WOW!!! What a beautiful step in the right direction for the giant 5000lbs steel cages to go while we're still at a point where some humans are going to prefer spending there time in transport caged.

ATB,
-Luke

 

[Syonyk]

That's hopelessly outdated energy in mfg info (though I don't doubt it was true at some point in time for some old-school factory), for a number of obvious reasons... Modern mfg is all closed loop and when laid out well with modern equipment designs is at least 1 if not 2 orders of magnitude lower energy consumption.

Ok. What are modern numbers? I doubt you can pull 2 orders of magnitude out of repositioning machines. The raw materials are still the same.

The gigafactory will be entirely self-powered from the solar on it's roof. The vehicles delivering raw materials to process and the vehicles mining the raw materials can(will be eventually) be all electric and charged from solar.

I've seen nothing to indicate the gigafactory will be powered solely from rooftop solar. It's actually quite impossible with any reasonable values for it to produce the expected output from that. There will be a lot of other surrounding renewables. I don't argue that they'll be fully renewable powered, but don't pretend it's just the roof.

A decade ago when battery mfg was super immature and hack-ish, it was super energy and materials wasteful and polluted nasty solvents like NMP and used nasty toxic heavy metals. After a decade of maturing cell mfg, it's quite a clean and radically lower energy process, and as a result this has been a dominate driver for the price/Wh continuing to drop as we've all enjoyed.

Ok. How much energy goes into 1WH of modern lithium battery?

 

[liveforphysics]

I will be in China at a modern major cell mfg next weekend and do my best to find out what the current state of the art processes consume for energy.
Maybe its only a single order of magnitude off, maybe more, I will have the ears of the right folks to ask soon.

ATB,
-Luke

 

[jonescg]

And if you start crunching the numbers on how much energy it takes to produce a *whatever* it all gets mighty depressing. Welcome to modern life - it takes energy.

However the good news is, it takes less energy than it did previously. Western nations are actually buying fewer new cars than ever before (yes, we've passed peak car) and we're using less electricity than ever before due to a combination of energy efficiency, changes in daily routines and solar PV.

Funny thing with manufacturing is that as volume production increases, the costs go from a linear trend to a flat line - basically amounts to material costs. Which means energy costs tend to flatline too.

 

[TheBeastie]

That's hopelessly outdated energy in mfg info..

The gigafactory will be entirely self-powered from the solar on it's roof. The vehicles delivering raw materials to process and the vehicles mining the raw materials can(will be eventually) be all electric and charged from solar.

I have to say I am pretty dubious of this statement.
When I started reading this article the first thing that came to mind in the energy used to create the cell would of been the steel canister that's coated in nickel.

I don't see how the creation of a 18650 or 22700 can be created without the steel canister which would of been created by making steel via coal.
The iron ore to make the steel would probably come from Australia (probably the coal as well). The infrastructure to dig up iron ore and send to China costs billions and then on top I suppose it will be sent via massive electric boats? Its gonna be a long long time before we see that and it will only be done when using all electric is cheaper. As the amount of effort that goes into shipping China iron ore at the cheap price of merely $40 per ton is and still make a profit has probably had more energy and effort put into it then putting a man on the moon, its all I ever hear about watching the business news in Australia. Its definitely utilized the best greediest minds that's for sure.

Here is a video posted 3 years ago showing driver-less trucks and trains moving iron ore.
[youtube]s0RCSX95QmE[/youtube]

 

[Warren]

Electric assist bicycles are not a replacement for pedal bicycles. They should/could be a replacement for cars in many situations. Cars over 100 kilos need to be banned....period.

None of this will happen, of course. We are totally screwed. It was 81F here in central Virginia yesterday, eight degrees warmer than San Diego. I know lots of folks on here are technology evangelists. Many work in high tech industries. You want to believe you are saving us. I wish it were true. The only solution to our problem is fewer of us, doing less, with less, and much more slowly. That's not sexy, or exciting, sorry.

 

[Syonyk]

I will be in China at a modern major cell mfg next weekend and do my best to find out what the current state of the art processes consume for energy.
Maybe its only a single order of magnitude off, maybe more, I will have the ears of the right folks to ask soon.

That would be incredibly useful - thank you! I'd love to update with more accurate numbers for modern processes, but I have yet to find anything particularly concrete. Just a lot of speculation that "it's a lot more efficient."

Electric assist bicycles are not a replacement for pedal bicycles. They should/could be a replacement for cars in many situations. Cars over 100 kilos need to be banned....period.

I won't go so far as to say cars should be banned, but I do agree that ebikes are a useful replacement for shorter range trips (which make the bulk of most people's transportation miles).

I know lots of folks on here are technology evangelists. Many work in high tech industries. You want to believe you are saving us. I wish it were true. The only solution to our problem is fewer of us, doing less, with less, and much more slowly. That's not sexy, or exciting, sorry.

Oh, I'm fully on board. The future is local, and low energy.

Though if you want to see the technology evangelists in full form, check out the difference in reddit comments on my post. The teslamotors has the strongest opposition to the concept of using less energy to get to work. I guess if I'd spent $130k on a car, I'd be pretty upset if someone pointed out how silly it is as a form of transportation as well.

I'm also, apparently, "part of the problem." Somehow. Because I use less energy to get around? I think?

r/ebikes: https://www.reddit.com/r/ebikes/comments/3rq7cr/how_far_can_you_ride_an_electric_bike_on_the/
r/teslamotors: https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/3rq7gn/how_far_can_you_ride_an_electric_bike_on_the/
r/electricvehicles: https://www.reddit.com/r/electricvehicles/comments/3rq8my/how_far_can_you_ride_an_electric_bike_on_the/

 

[liveforphysics]

If you needed to take 4 sick grandmothers somewhere 200miles away in blizard conditions, using a Model S becomes a pretty attractive option.

Likewise, if you have 7 bodies to transport, a Model X becomes more efficient than 7 ebikes for traveling somewhere at speed, because 7 ebikes has much more aero drag as speed increases.

For my own lifestyle, I picked a house 2miles away from my work, and eat a dominantly local grown and always vegan diet, and gave my 4 gas motorcycles and 3 gas cars away. Im still going to get a Tesla P90D (or whatever is faster) when the timing/finances are right. It will be solar charged. After trying the autopilot yesterday on the highway, Im more convinced than ever that this is the most amazing cage experience available.

If someone wishes to have beef with cages, picking the type that spews toxins seems like a better use of ones efforts. Or if motivated by an environmental resources consumed perspective alone, the worlds largest source of pollution and environmental damage is the animal torture/murder industry.

ATB,
-Luke

 

[Syonyk]

You're missing the point, though.

How much energy does it take to produce that P90D, vs how much energy you'll use in a gas car over the rest of it's life, if you use it so rarely? Or a smaller EV, and rent a Tesla for long trips?

If my life literally consists of taking 4 sick grandmothers (wtf? lots of divorce going on?) 200 miles away in a blizzard (which I flat out would refuse to do, even in a Subaru), or hauling 7 people, great. A Tesla might make perfect sense.

My life doesn't. And, based on your description, neither does yours.

If you drive it so rarely, you're very likely to have more embodied energy in your Tesla than you would have used for the rest of your gas car life. Also, about $130k less. That's an awful lot of other things.

My truck gets... oh, about 13mpg. I don't care, because it only gets driven infrequently when I need a truck. That I can't fit it in the parking garage at work is actually a feature to me - it discourages me from being lazy and taking the truck.

Don't get me wrong. I'd love a Tesla. I absolutely refuse to ride in one or (worse) test drive one, because I don't think I'll make my saving throw against one. And then I'd drive it a lot more, because "ooh new car." Also, $130k is a house where I want to live. I just don't think "replacing gas cars with electric cars" is going to make a damned bit of difference in how sustainable our civilization is.

 

[Warren]

Sorry about the sick grannies, but they need an ambulance, not a Tesla.

There is good data showing how many people are in most cars most of the time. This is why we need those self-driving, autonomous pods everyone is talking about now.

I am glad you have cleaned up your act. I did too, forty years ago. Once you get over the car lust you will feel even better. I know it is hard to do. I thought I was over them...until electrics became feasible. Now I fantasize about small, efficient, electric cars all the time...even though I doubt they'll happen.

As for meat, I agree, but I hope you are not opposed to eating insects.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/nov/05/eating-insects-should-part-sustainable-diet-future-report

 

[liveforphysics]

I already have 3 working ebikes, a 150mile range hotrod modded corbin sparrow (which uses less energy per mile than some of my ebikes at speed), and a Rav4 EV modded to have ~120miles of range that seats 5.

They handle perhaps >95% of my non-flying transportation needs.

The Tesla isn't needed from an ultimate perspective, but neither is taking even 1 more breath.

 

[Warren]

Luke,

It sounds like you are saying that life without a Tesla is not worth living. Or that life is pointless anyway, so what the hell. I doubt that is what you meant, or you wouldn't be concerned about abusing animals.

I understand desire. Not long ago I owned 14 bicycles. Each one was built up from parts, or at least modified by me to reflect my own obsessions. I sold off three, but am now back to 12, two of which are electric, and arguably worse for the world than the ones I sold. In my defense, I junked my car, the rationale being the latest electric would replace it for grocery shopping and recycling trips, saving 900 car miles a year. But yes, we all struggle with the idea that our lives will somehow be more meaningful, if only we have more stuff.

 

[liveforphysics]

The Tesla is to pull and power a streamlined tiny home trailer covered in solar pannels for living. I don't need a yard and pool and big house anymore, its a bunch of busy work Im not into doing. Give Rav4 away, give sparrow away, make space for a hotrodded Zero and a pair of ebikes to be carried on the tiny home.

Then if the opportunity manifests, give that setup away and get a clear bottom catamaran and set it up with solar pannels and a GPS autopilot and build a solar spiralina algae culture system sized to sustain myself and wife.

Then give away the boat, and perhaps an electrolysis supplied hydrogen based lighter than air floating home with solar pannel array and electric thrusters with GPS autopilot.

Then give that away and who knows.

Maybe none of it works out, maybe all of it does, Im going to continue enjoying this one moment in the meantime.

ATB,
-Luke

 

[Lurkin]

There seems to be different points being made in this thread.

The first seemed to be - it costs more in energy to make a tesla pack than an ebike. This energy is 'embodied' or costed to the item and thus they have different energy costs.

Is this really a talking point? apples and oranges... so what? both can be produced by solar, both use different amounts of energy in production...

The origin and production methods of the energy is far more of interest. If the energy is produced from an environmentally friendly source, what difference does it make how it is used? Whether Tesla creates their electricity via solar or purchases it from the grid from an environmentally friendly electricity producer (assumed) - using more or less energy is irrelevant as it's source is a non impact.

Picking on a relatively new product is pretty harsh for any form of comparison. In any case, the lifecycle of the battery will improve over time - improved production techniques, electricity sources, recycling methods - it has to start somewhere.

If we were to make a fair comparison, to would be the end to end production and lifecycle of a fossil fuel based car, to a electric Tesla car. I would be very interested to see what you can come up with there as the production techniques of the fossil fuel car should be well developed, yet I'm assuming the amount of fossil energy used by it in production, use and disposal will still be greater than the energy used in the production of a Tesla car.*

*I realise this is full of assumptions. Flame suit on.

 

[wineboyrider]

Anyone notice the price of led lights lately? They have been dropping in price dramatically in the last few years and I am pretty sure the economics of energy consumption has something to do with it. 8)

 

[Syonyk]

There seems to be different points being made in this thread.

The first seemed to be - it costs more in energy to make a tesla pack than an ebike. This energy is 'embodied' or costed to the item and thus they have different energy costs.

Well, I was just trying to point out how much energy is embodied in the 90kWh pack. Converting to ebike range worked out to a rather impressive number, so I went with it. It points out what everyone here already knows, which is that ebikes are insanely efficient.

Is this really a talking point? apples and oranges... so what? both can be produced by solar, both use different amounts of energy in production...

How much of the Model S is produced with solar, right now? How much of the raw materials are produced with solar or wind?

If we were to make a fair comparison, to would be the end to end production and lifecycle of a fossil fuel based car, to a electric Tesla car. I would be very interested to see what you can come up with there as the production techniques of the fossil fuel car should be well developed, yet I'm assuming the amount of fossil energy used by it in production, use and disposal will still be greater than the energy used in the production of a Tesla car.*

I think a Model S takes about 4x the energy to produce as a typical smaller gas burner. I'm not sure about the embodied energy involved in a luxury car. They're generally heavier. Unfortunately, I'm not in a position to have the detailed information I need to figure this out, nor do I care that much about the exact values.

The best option, energy-wise and financially, is to keep an old car on the road and not drive it much.

 

[liveforphysics]

Your vehicle method involves spraying toxic poisons into the one atmosphere we all share.

This is unnecessary. Get rid of all your gas vehicles and you won't be tempted to use them anymore.

Otherwise, best not to judge the folks who have stopped spraying poisons.

 

[Syonyk]

Otherwise, best not to judge the folks who have stopped spraying poisons.

Fine. I'll judge you for having a new vehicle built that otherwise wouldn't be built, when the power grid of most places is so radically carbon heavy that it's worse than driving a gas car, for infrequent amounts of driving, which should be the proper amount of driving done once you've moved most local stuff away from a car.

Just because it has new car smell doesn't mean it wasn't built with a ton of fairly dirty energy.

Tesla plans to use renewable to produce their batteries in the gigafactory. I cannot find anything that says they're using anything other than the normal blend of power currently to actually produce the Model S, nor that they're sourcing carbon free aluminum, or anything along those lines.

 

[liveforphysics]

You're sourcing carbon free gas for your truck?

Do you eat a local vegan diet? Do you pay a small army of diesel powered vehicles to grow food to then be fed to animals to thermodynamically lose ~90% of the caloric energy of that food and poison the watershed with the waste run off before going back on a diesel truck cross country in the form of chopped up carcass bits?

Was your truck made with carbon neutral steel? Is this not still the same atmosphere we enjoy sharing today?

Do you have a path forward to sustainability with your truck and your job and your diet and your lifestyle?

The log of Tesla envy in your eye is personal discontentment.

That said, I agree nobody needs a Tesla, nor any giant cage contraption in a sustainable system. Nobody needs an ebike or running water or internet access either, they are all human luxuries the majority of the world does without.

 

[Lurkin]

There seems to be different points being made in this thread.

The first seemed to be - it costs more in energy to make a tesla pack than an ebike. This energy is 'embodied' or costed to the item and thus they have different energy costs.

Well, I was just trying to point out how much energy is embodied in the 90kWh pack. Converting to ebike range worked out to a rather impressive number, so I went with it. It points out what everyone here already knows, which is that ebikes are insanely efficient.

Is this really a talking point? apples and oranges... so what? both can be produced by solar, both use different amounts of energy in production...

How much of the Model S is produced with solar, right now? How much of the raw materials are produced with solar or wind? check with Tesla....

If we were to make a fair comparison, to would be the end to end production and lifecycle of a fossil fuel based car, to a electric Tesla car. I would be very interested to see what you can come up with there as the production techniques of the fossil fuel car should be well developed, yet I'm assuming the amount of fossil energy used by it in production, use and disposal will still be greater than the energy used in the production of a Tesla car.*

I think a Model S takes about 4x the energy to produce as a typical smaller gas burner.based on what? your comparison above discusses an ebike... My statement is about the end to end lifecycle of a motor vehicle, not just its production energy.... think about the energy used to make petrol, oil, items to reduce its effects, transport inefficiencies just getting fuel from a - b..... I'm not sure about the embodied energy involved in a luxury car. They're generally heavier. So it's less efficient? Who cares if the electricity source is clean? Unfortunately, I'm not in a position to have the detailed information I need to figure this out, nor do I care that much about the exact values.

The best option, energy-wise and financially, is to keep an old car on the road and not drive it much.

We are now confusing vehicle type, energy efficiency, energy source, impact on the environment and lastly, a financial comparison based on guesswork without numbers.....

Keen to see the outcome of your visit to a cell manufacturer Luke!

 

[Warren]

Luke,

What I would like is more info on your Sparrow. Any chance of you doing a thread on it, or filling in data on an EV Album page?

All the enclosed trikes I have seen seem to use 100-150 Wh/mi. Not as impressive as one would hope, and it shows just how hard saving energy is. The Illuminati Seven is seeing 145 Wh/mi, and Mark Bishop is seeing 160Wh/mi on a 2000 Honda Insight.

As someone who works for Zero, and owns a much modified, and improved Sparrow, you are in a terrific position to explain what life with a minimal vehicle could be like.

 

[Syonyk]

You're sourcing carbon free gas for your truck?

Currently? No. My HOA would have a fit if I tried to set up a biodiesel processing chain in my back yard. Where I'm moving in under 6 months to get away from HOAs & such? I quite intend to play with biodiesel, either with a local coop or personally. Though, given the engine I'm running, I may just go straight to a WVO conversion, because it'll burn damned near anything that faintly resembles oil and will burn. I don't have a high pressure common rail system to worry about, and the fuel flows through the heads before it hits the injectors, so it's fairly easy to run on WVO.

Given that I barely drive the truck, and when I do drive it, I'm hauling a good bit in it, I'm not particularly concerned about this. The bulk of my miles are ebike. Notably, I've not purchased a new EV for commuting.

Do you eat a local vegan diet? Do you pay a small army of diesel powered vehicles to grow food to then be fed to animals to thermodynamically lose ~90% of the caloric energy of that food and poison the watershed with the waste run off before going back on a diesel truck cross country in the form of chopped up carcass bits?

Currently? No. Loaded question, but sure. Another reason for moving is to have the space for enough raised bed gardens and greenhouse/aquaponics to mostly feed my family from our land. That which we can't grow ourselves, I intend to trade with people around us for (farm country). I intend to heat the greenhouse with a thermal mass rocket stove in the winter so I can produce fish and vegetables year round (I'm not sure if I'll actually need to run the heater much, but that seems the best option for heating - I can just burn dried biomass I've grown, and then recycle the ash into the compost bins).

Was your truck made with carbon neutral steel? Is this not still the same atmosphere we enjoy sharing today?

Well, it was made with steel, and not aluminum, so there's a lot less energy involved. And my plan for the truck consists of keeping it running for right around the rest of my life (we'll be in an area that doesn't promote rust, and the 7.3 Powerstroke will do half a million miles with some TLC).

Do you have a path forward to sustainability with your truck and your job and your diet and your lifestyle?

See above. The Seattle metro area was a mistake, and is remarkably hostile to anything actually sustainable. Working remotely part time and growing a lot of our own food locally will be a nice improvement.

The log of Tesla envy in your eye is personal discontentment.

Trust me. I have no Tesla envy. I'm buying a house for about the cost of a P85D. I'd rather have the house. And a Tesla does literally nothing to improve my life, in any way.

That said, I agree nobody needs a Tesla, nor any giant cage contraption in a sustainable system. Nobody needs an ebike or running water or internet access either, they are all human luxuries the majority of the world does without.

Well, yes. Since I think we're likely headed towards that low energy future with fewer luxuries, I'm picking the "collapse early and avoid the rush" path to spend hopefully quite a few years working on sutainable systems before they're needed.