Alfa Romeo Forums banner
1 - 20 of 49 Posts

·
Moderator
2015 Chevy (Holden) SS, 1989 Milano (Shankle Sport), 1991 164S
Joined
·
17,133 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Saw in the news today that Fiat says they will be all electric by 2030, with no gas powered engines.

I wonder if that will include the Alfa Giulia/Stelvio cars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
894 Posts
I think we will not see Giulia/Stelvio family in the production by 2030.
Both models are almost 6 years old, they have to live no more than 3-4 years.

Sent from my motorola one vision using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,366 Posts
Never going to happen. The whole idea of converting our road transport fleet to electricity is a non starter.

There's no way to build enough generating capacity, of all kinds, to supply the necessary power when necessary.

By 2030 all this CAGW nonsense will be history.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,405 Posts
Saw in the news today that Fiat says they will be all electric by 2030, with no gas powered engines.

I wonder if that will include the Alfa Giulia/Stelvio cars.
Its whats going to happen. The times are a changing, get out of the way if you can't lend a hand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,366 Posts
So are flying cars, predicted in the 1950's.

Ten years seems like a long time but believe me it isn't.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
351 Posts
That's a good goal to work for, just have to build a better electrical grid to handle that usage and all of the housing needs without rolling blackouts. Just means more gas for our alfa s too👍🙃🤯
 

·
Premium Member
1988 Spider Quadrifoglio
Joined
·
278 Posts
Grid demand won't be as high as people seem to think. You're thinking about it in terms of how you refuel an IC car.
Look at it this way:
  • The national fleet will not be rapid charging all at once.
  • The majority of recharges will be under lower current, over night, at home.
  • Most electric cars connected to the grid will not be recharging from a full discharge.
  • Once charged, their batteries can contribute to evening out the grid while they're plugged in.
The biggest upgrade to the grid is the implementation of smart systems rather than pure capacity.

On top of that, solar and wind farms can be thrown up very rapidly. They're mostly prefabbed and modular and need far less support infrastructure in comparison to the legacy power stations.

So the goal IS achievable. Even if we miss the deadline, at least there will be significant forward progress.

On top of all this, we don't really need to electrify rural fleets, at least not immediately. They're a relatively small and insignificant source of carbon.
 

·
Moderator
2015 Chevy (Holden) SS, 1989 Milano (Shankle Sport), 1991 164S
Joined
·
17,133 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Large semi truck are high percentage polluters across the country, and good candidates for be4ing electric. Waiting for Tesla to start selling their version of an electric semi tractor unit.

Hydrogen powered might also be a good candidate, although hydrogen has it's own problems, ie, burning it creates nitrogen oxides, which are significantly more damaging to the atmosphere as compared to carbon.
 

·
Moderator
2015 Chevy (Holden) SS, 1989 Milano (Shankle Sport), 1991 164S
Joined
·
17,133 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 · (Edited)
One fellow reported in the local newspaper that his son drove his Tesla 3 from Seattle to LA in less than 24 hours, averaging 60 mph. The trick evidently was to reduce charging time to less than 100% between charging stations, thus reducing total time on the trip.

Friend of mine has done the same with his Tesla X, driving from Vancouver, BC to Boise, Idaho.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,405 Posts
And without sounding melodramatic, all this stuff is really still in its embryonic stage. The technology available in 2030 will far exceed 2021. Like when there was a move away from external combustion engines it is an interesting moment in time.
 

·
Premium Member
1988 Spider Quadrifoglio
Joined
·
278 Posts
The hydrogen powered trucks would use hydrogen fuel cells to produce electricity to drive the wheels. No combustion at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,366 Posts
Try converting the total amount of gallons of gasoline consumed annually into KwH
Then use that number to calculate how many power plants need to be built to generate that kind of electrical power capacity. Then you'll see the size of the problem.

Rapid charging is irrelevant to the fundamental problem. Forget about wind and solar, never going to provide enough reliable power for existing requirements let alone converting transport to electrical power.

Hydrogen is a dead end as far as we can tell. The only economical way to make it is by processing natural gas to take out the carbon. Apart from that being just a silly idea it also, currently, generates as much CO2 as burning the natural gas directly.

CNG makes more sense than hydrogen or electricity, although energy density is very poor compared to liquid hydrocarbons like diesel or gasoline.

Meanwhile, we have people driving electric cars on electricity generated by burning coal.

EV are just a dumb idea. Period. Time will show this.
 

·
Premium Member
1988 Spider Quadrifoglio
Joined
·
278 Posts
Try converting the total amount of gallons of gasoline consumed annually into KwH
Let's do it! Here's a quick spreadsheet I threw together based on available data. Now this is more of degree-of-magnitude "back of the envelope" calculation, so it's not going to be exact. However, it does demonstrate the point that generation is not a problem.
1689553

If anyone finds an error please let me know.
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
1988 Spider Quadrifoglio
Joined
·
278 Posts
The amount of misinformation out there about moving away from fossil fuels is proportional to the shear dollar value of the industry, and the number of folks trying to make a living out of it. Battery electric vehicles are the near term future. Hopefully at some point we can come up with a transportation solution that gets rid of private automobiles as primary transportation entirely.
 

·
Moderator
2015 Chevy (Holden) SS, 1989 Milano (Shankle Sport), 1991 164S
Joined
·
17,133 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
" Hopefully at some point we can come up with a transportation solution that gets rid of private automobiles as primary transportation entirely"

Hopefully? What a bummer that would be. Part of having individual transportation such as private vehicles gives many a needed sense of freedom to explore. Yes, there are those who live in huge cities and don't have a vehicle, living their lives almost completely within, but that lifestyle is not for everyone. Just my opinion, having enjoyed such freedom.
 

·
Premium Member
1988 Spider Quadrifoglio
Joined
·
278 Posts
What a bummer that would be.
I meant as primary daily means of transportation, for commuting and errands and the like. All that tedious driving in traffic, the absurd gridlock of single occupant vehicles... It would be great if cars were a luxury, not a necessity like they are now.

But who knows. We might all end up back in caves a few decades from now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,366 Posts
Let's do it! Here's a quick spreadsheet I threw together based on available data. Now this is more of degree-of-magnitude "back of the envelope" calculation, so it's not going to be exact. However, it does demonstrate the point that generation is not a problem.
View attachment 1689553
If anyone finds an error please let me know.
Don't see a column for the number of additional power plants required. Got a number for that? And forget expanding solar and wind. There's not enough real estate for that.

It also looks to me like you're using those goofy GGE magic numbers. Do I see an adjustment for generation and transmission losses? An adjustment for the necessary grid stability factor so often ignored by greenies thinking solar or wind power is feasible. It's not.

I especially don't see the location for another James Bay sized hydro project.

Canada is about the size of California, electricity wise. We also export a lot of electricity to the USA. Try the calculation for all 50 states. Or 48 even. Try doing the same for the UK or Germany.

And we haven't even got to the problem of how to fuel all those power plants. An EV gets about 20km/t of coal when converted to electrical power, back of the envelope estimate you understand.

If we stop using fossil fuels we won't necessarily be living in caves but the sustainable population of humans will be halved.
 

·
Premium Member
1988 Spider Quadrifoglio
Joined
·
278 Posts
I used a thermal efficiency of 30% for the IC cars. In reality they are much less than 20% due to drivetrain losses, so the energy required column is higher than it needs to be. According to the World Bank website, distribution and transmission losses in Canada between the 1960s and 2014 hovered between 6% - 10%.

Coal is being phased out rapidly, both in Canada and the US. Sometimes it's being replaced by natural gas, sometimes renewables. Thermal plants will be with us for a long time yet, but they'll shrink in number and become cleaner overtime.

Total energy production in Canada in 2018 was 641 TWh. To power electric cars, generation would have to increase by less than 300 GWh per year. To put that in perspective, the Site C dam currently under construction in BC is expected to produce 5000 GWh annually. Just one of the new giant wind turbines going up in Europe at the moment can generate more than 8 MW, or 70 GWh annually.

Grid stability is not so big an issue as is having the right amount of power available in the right place. Rapid chargers, especially along our long and remote highways are a challenge. In the cities, it's not so bad - like I said earlier, not everyone will charge their cars at the same time, and a relatively small number will be rapid charging at any one time.

You are correct in that in some jurisdictions, driving a BET offers no benefit in CO2 emissions. Alberta, Saskatchewan, and NWT are especially bad, as they power their grids mostly with fossil fuels. This is a handy guide:

https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/data-a...-vehicles-hybrids-gasoline-vehicles-emit.html

In the above link if you look at AB, SK, NWT, you might be less impactful if you drove a small car or a hybrid vs, say, a Tesla Model S. In BC, MB, ON, QC, you are WAY ahead with an electric car.

Finally, it's only the SALE of NEW IC cars that's ending. No one has talked about banning them outright yet. The electrical fleet will probably replace most of the IC fleet through incentives and attrition, over years.

I'm not an environmental activist, nor am I morally opposed to oil and gas. Oil powers the world at the moment, and it has enabled a huge amount of progress. But I would have to be willfully, stubbornly, in denial to not see the impact it's having. It's time to move on to something better.
 

·
Moderator
2015 Chevy (Holden) SS, 1989 Milano (Shankle Sport), 1991 164S
Joined
·
17,133 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
"I meant as primary daily means of transportation, for commuting and errands and the like"

Agreed, we already have lilght rail, subways, buses, taxis, Uber, etc, but still have to have something to haul what you may buy. Can't see carrying a couple of bags of groceries on public trans, or lumber or gardening supplies. If you live in the suburbs, cars are what you need for your lifestyle.
 

·
Premium Member
1988 Spider Quadrifoglio
Joined
·
278 Posts
I agree it's a giant bummer. But when I take a step back and really look at what we're doing with an objective eye, it's hard not to realize maybe somethings gotta give. Maybe battery electric cars will be the methadone of private car ownership.

Anyways this is all very gloomy... back to talking about happy old death traps.

I understand the new Fiat 500 electric is actually quite good. But I bet it doesn't make you giggle like an Abarth 500.
 
1 - 20 of 49 Posts
Top