Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I think you got the emissions of a charge cycle mixed up with emissions of battery production per capacity unit.

For the CO2 per 1 kWh capacity, the emissions of battery production are 200 KILOgrams. I got the 200 grams from 200 kg by dividing by a supposed 1000 charge-cycle life of a battery.

So my calculation showed that per 1 kWh power charged/discharged, the emissions come out at 200g per kWh. Which is comparable to using diesel to produce the same amount of power.




"For the CO2 per 1 kWh capacity, the emissions of battery production are 200 KILOgrams."

I don't know if that's true, but if it is, it will be largely due to the CO2 footprint of the grid. Battery manufacturing is energy-intensive.

A battery factory powered by 100% renewable energy, on the other hand, would have a greatly reduced carbon footprint. And producing more batteries enables more renewable energy sources, getting us closer to that goal.

I also believe that in this application (short-haul Norwegian ferry), the expected life of the batteries is far greater than 1000 cycles. These ferries do multiple trips per day, every day, and recharge each time. Since they've been in service since 2015, they will already have a lot more than 1000 cycles on the batteries.


An example of a battery factory powered (eventually) by 100% renewable energy is the Gigafactory using a combination of wind and solar. Even today, it is entirely powered by electricity. It doesn't even have a gas line (as would be common for any large building, especially an industrial one). Its solar roof is eventually going to be 70MW. They've just started installing part of it, and from satellite and aerial imagery it looks like they have a few Megawatts already installed.

And assuming the vast majority of the energy used in battery production is electricity, then the figure for emissions that you used is highly dependent on grid mix. For instance, coal is roughly 1kg of CO2 per kWh. The current US grid is less than half of that (~430grams/kWh by my calculations using data through December 2017). If your study assumed coal power for battery production and assuming the Gigafactory is no more efficient (doubtful), then even today before the solar roof is installed, the CO2 emissions is already closer to ~90kg of CO2 per kWh of capacity. The grid is improving roughly 4% per year, and the Tesla Gigafactory roof and wind turbines coming online should drop that even more.

...especially as the Gigafactory starts buffering its own electrical load with its own batteries to reduce the cost of its grid connection and transportation of the batteries and components is increasingly done with Tesla Semis.

EDIT: Source: https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-gigafactory-1-solar-rooftop-...


I see your point, my mistake. However there are still many arguments to be made for this strategy. First of all, in terms of carbon capture it is much easier to capture carbon at a factory then on a boat, or any mobile vehicle for that matter. Secondly, arguing that diesel is equal is ignoring that diesel needs to be transported to and from the fueling station, and extracted from the ground, this should be factored into it's emissions (I'm not sure how). As far as I know moving electricity is far easier than moving liquid fuel, as long as you are in a preexisting industrial zone.

So I do agree, perhaps on a pure emissions standpoint they may be more equal than most think, however in terms of environmental impact batteries seem to be able to cater to technological advances (carbon capture and better manufacturing with scale) much better than diesel (which you NEED to burn to use).


Refining oil also requires substantial amounts of power. From what I’ve read the power to refine a litre of gasoline e.g. requires as much power as an electric car would need to go the distance 1 litre of gasoline gives you.


If refining 1 liter of gas took the energy potential of 1 liter of gas then we wouldn't be dominated by the petroleum industry... The chemical energy storage in hydrocarbons is stupid efficient compared to the alternatives.

Oil refining is very energy intensive, but gasoline production is highly energy positive. Interestingly: atomic process heat for refining could tae a huge chunk of CO2 off our roadways and also improve oil production numbers significantly (20%-ish).




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: