Carbon footprint to produce vs ICE

Aptera Community Aptera Discussions Carbon footprint to produce vs ICE

Aptera Community Aptera Discussions Carbon footprint to produce vs ICE

  • Carbon footprint to produce vs ICE

  • Curtis Cibinel

    Member
    October 11, 2021 at 1:23 pm

    Given the aptera is 1/2 the weight of most cars I’m wondering how its carbon footprint to produce compares. One classis anti-EV argument is that if the grid is dirty and the vehicle takes more energy to produce that it will take a long time to break even with ICE so just drive the current car into the ground. I suspect given the overall weight, small battery (40 kwh will almost certainly be the most popular option), low amount of aluminum/steel and responsibly sourced interior materials (some kind of hemp + resin as I recall) that the Aptera might be lower carbon to make than ICE even on day 1.

    PS: Not talking about long term energy usage. The ICE vs EV argument is fairly weak at the best of times.

  • my_discord_number_is_0328 bloody stupid

    Member
    October 11, 2021 at 8:56 pm

    some essential electric battery isnt being recycled mass scale and tech that does exist doesnt allow for materials to be used at teh same preformance level as non recycled mined from the ground material.rather preserve teh material for when we can fully recyle it at no losses, so it lasts far longer than they do now. theres also electric grid overload that cause charging schedule conflicts espeicallly in high electric car population density on top on usual grid demands and consumerisms contribution to demands.

    being lightweight also helps road infrastructure lifetime, less maintainece emissions and tax paid cost. tires (which are made of mostly petrol and plastics and emit toxic fumes when friction burned, and some of it doesn’t get recycled) last longer, and same with friction brake pads last longer live until battery problems are fixed, this freepiston, liquid rotary, nissan e power approach, etc directly powering motor and small battery is probably best balance. i wonder is turbine could be added to continue the burn after piston for cleaner burn and more energy profit. maybe partial air pressure regen can support the electrics by storing pressure in spaces of car otherwise unused maybe by a bag like solution spread through spaces in chassis especially with reverse engineering that electric muscle fiber thing, also piezoelectrics etc. b/c its electric drive, the powertrain can be timeless ready for swaping out with whatever energy storage tech wins ex. different elctric battery +capacitor, hydrogen laser cassette or putty,

    its also most appealing to customer for “dont have too goto gas station” convenience for most trips and no range anxiety for uncommon long trips without paying money and weight cost of big battery (handling less agile). with right marketing, you can get the electric only people to appreciate this balance. you can get drive enjoyers to appreciate it with still instant torque, weight distribution, plus range extender can be and to sound interesting if done right at least theoretically with sound chamber manipulation (pedal position pushing/pulling sound chamber valves or something). the regen battery can be precharged by revving at stoplight for a quicker acceleration or when approaching a high torque cornering situation. engine map can be made linear to serve customer who demands it without making a separate drivetrain system b/c its better to sell a still more low lifetime emissions car than lose to competition thats doesn’t care about emissions beyond laws. see engineering explained videos on combustion and electric vs combustion, and hydrogen.

    little funny fact: toyota is combusting hydrogen and says theyll even make production model. they do usually do things they say theyll do .

  • Patrick Liebknecht

    Member
    December 28, 2021 at 9:28 am

    A bigger issue with the push to “electric” everything

    China. That’s right. China.

    China controls 85% of the rare earth minerals that we the USA need to make electric everything, including wind turbines.

    That’s why there is such a hard push from the current administration to Build China back better and richer

    The push to electric means we are 85% in debt to China for the minerals we need to do this…

    That’s a huge strangle hold on our country.

    We can mine for rare earth minerals here , but do you really think the Sierra club is going to permit that ???

    • John Malcom

      Member
      December 28, 2021 at 10:24 am

      I believe the yet bigger push than China are the actions all need to take to remediate global warming. For this to happen in the vehicle segment all must expedite the change to electric or hydrogen powered vehicles. At present, China leads the world followed by Europe in this effort. We in the US are trying to play catch up. The barrier in the US is not the availability of rare earth metals, it is the government and to some degree the publics resistance to converting from ICE transportation to more environmentally friendly modes of transportation

      • Lou Verner

        Member
        December 28, 2021 at 11:06 am

        Agree John. We in US also have to overcome years of misinformation from fossil fuel industry regarding reality of climate change. While current demands for lithium, cobalt, etc do pose current constraints on battery production and have significant negative environmental impacts, I’m confident continued progress on alternative battery configuration will ultimately resolve both issues.

      • Patrick Liebknecht

        Member
        January 6, 2022 at 12:52 pm

        Until you can get China , India and other countries to do 1/2 of the reduction to carbon emissions , the USA might as well be wizzing in the wind.

        China is burning coal like there is NO tomorrow and if Greta thornberg is correct. There is no tomorrow.

        So , that being said. Remember if it wasn’t for climate change we would still be living in rocky lava dinosaur land

  • George Hughes

    Member
    December 28, 2021 at 11:06 am

    Curtis:

    I think you’re on to something with this. While there are environmentally challenging aspects of any tech, Aptera’s choice of a composite monocoque chassis/body – basically plastic construction where three or four panels are glued together and filled with some foam that becomes rigid on curing.

    The composites are handled as generally ‘regular temps’ … i.e. you don’t need massive heat generation to melt an aluminum concoction that is formed into a metal component under tremendously high pressures and temperatures in Tesla’s mega-press.

    All the energy used to melt, inject and create the finished components is avoided in the Aptera process.

    If you follow Monro at all, you know that Tesla’s big advantage over traditional car makers is that it is going the mega-press route (with its heat and energy use) instead of the traditional approach of making hundreds of smaller parts, assembling the parts (often using energy intensive welding of parts into larger components, and ultimately, you dip and paint the parts which, regardless, will ultimately rust and or just fall apart.

    The threat of the Chinese is not their apparent corner on the rare earth metals market, but their adoption of techniques that dramatically drop the cost of producing the vehicle by following the path forged by Tesla… i.e. designing aggressively for fewer parts and streamlined assembly of traditional steel-bodied autos.

    The Chinese advantage over western automakers is they don’t have the ‘legacy’ relationships and parts suppliers for ICE cars that are a feature of the production approaches in the traditional industry. Suppliers including steel, parts manufacturers, often have their product ‘adapted’ to an American designed car or truck with the manufacturer ignoring the question, is there better, more elegant way to combine the parts, eliminate parts, etc. Just watch some Monro Live analysis to see this aspect.

    <font face=”inherit”>But the point is, all these companies from China to Detroit to </font>Wolfsburg<font face=”inherit”> retain their use of stamped and forged steel for construction. By definition, this traditional approach to the fabrication of transportation uses massive amounts of energy to refine the iron ore, turn it into steel, forge that steel, press and stamp the steel and ultimately, use multiple welding robots to piece together hundreds of small parts into chassis and body components. </font>

    It is obvious that the approach of Aptera, which eschews welding robots, uses metal parts sparingly (suspension members, motor casting, etc.) and is assembled by two workers who glue the car together with state of the art structural adhesives, avoids massive energy using processes for fabrication of the body components and their attachment.

    Anyway, Curtis, the Aptera has a carbon footprint from its production that is probably one-tenth that of a traditional constructed metal-bodied vehicle.

    • Lou Verner

      Member
      December 28, 2021 at 11:12 am

      Great summary – thanks George!

    • my_discord_number_is_0328 bloody stupid

      Member
      January 6, 2022 at 1:10 pm

      aptera handmade long lasting approach is better for everything from sustainability to emssions to local jobs over automated globalism treating people less, etc but it doesnt work with the current buisness model of sellling new cars that dont last as long b/c batteyr degradation or b/c noone knows to change their oil on their turbo tight piston wall car, plus cultural over reliance on materialism. migt be able to argue for carbon fiber invlvement to some extent given weight cuts for energy cost over time of use and more durability maybe repairablility too given its stronger material.

      can rent car charge per use or sell ownership but also incentivize car sharing similar to what tesla said theyd do when self driving is completed. probably problem is people arnt demanding such things, they are arnt willing to pay that way and are convinced they need a new SUV every 8 years or something

    • Curtis Cibinel

      Member
      January 6, 2022 at 2:43 pm

      1/10th the carbon for the body vs traditional metal build is a very bold claim. The battery is likely far and away the largest aspect for the aptera’s carbon footprint and the shortest range models minimize this substantially. Obviously the exact footprint is speculation (and tricky to calculate) but it is plausible that the base aptera could be less than an average ICE car on day 1. Frequently charts looking at this separate the car body from the battery and consider ICE or EV essentially equal for the body. Aptera’s unique construction could get us to an amazingly green starting point.

      PS: Still crossing my fingers for a LFP-based Aptera by the time my reservation rolls around (approx 14,000th in line – ordered in September). I’ll take the car with either but LFP has lower carbon footprint, less human rights issues (ie cobalt), longer life and will happily charge to 100%. The tradeoff is ~50-100lb of extra weight and associated loss of ~1-3% of energy efficiency.

Viewing 1 - 4 of 4 replies

or to reply.

Original Post
0 of 0 posts June 2018
Now