A simple search of the 'net will answer the question far better than this attack on Shellenberger. It will show that rare earth minerals can be used in PV panels as doping elements. Interestingly enough it is especially Perovskite PV cells which seem to benefit from the use of these additives [1,2]:
(1) Recently, use of rare earth (RE) ions doped nanomaterials in PSCs, has been identified as an effective means to address the aforementioned issues by expanding the range of absorption spectra minimizing the non-absorption loss of solar photons, enhancing light scattering and improving operational stability.
(2) Rare earth ion doped nanomaterials can be used in perovskite solar cell to expand the range of absorption spectra and improve the stability due to its up conversion and down conversion effect. This article reviews recently progress in using rare earth ion doped nanomaterials in mesoporous electrodes, perovskite active layers, and as an external function layer of perovskite solar cell.
That's just in the lab. If you buy PV modules right now the cells will not be doped with rare earth elements. And almost everything demonstrated in the lab doesn't progress beyond there (which is fine; that's how technology R&D works.)
I think the closest one could come to making the "REE in solar" claim make sense would be decoloring agents for the glass. Cerium could be used for this, but I think manganese is cheaper.
Back of the napkin math, 63,000 gallons of gasoline per day. 33kWh of energy in each gallon of gasoline. Internal combustion approximately 33% efficient at turning that energy into propulsion while batteries and electric motors are ~90% efficient. A Tesla megapack stores 3,854 kWh and weighs 84,000 lbs.
63000*33*.33/(3854*0.9)*84000 = 16,782,563 lbs or ~7,600 metric tons worth of batteries for 1 day's worth of "electric fuel"
You do not like fuel cells? Ammonia/methan/pure hydrogen do not have the fuel density like diesel, but it is still very managable. Possibly even better all in all im terms of weight, as you need less fuel.
Yeah, but there are standard ways to slice the pie. An equivalent approach would be comparing multiple Ford vehicles to Tesla’s entire lineup. They are about as similar to one another as Ford’s trucks are.
I can add about 50 miles of range overnight on a standard 120V outlet which is more than enough most of the time. For longer trips back-to-back, a 220V circuit would be really nice to fully re-charge overnight but its absolutely not necessary.
Bumper height plays a far bigger role in pedestrian fatality than hardness of the vehicle shell. Cybertruck's bumper is significantly lower than pretty much every other pickup truck out there.
If you have a house, or apartment with access to a L1 or L2 charger, charging at home should cover 100% of your local trips and any longer trips, you'll inevitably pass by a Tesla supercharger in Sequim, Forks, Seattle, Tacoma, Burlington, Cle Elum, etc.
The fuel savings are dramatic in Washington with our low-cost electricity and relatively high gasoline prices. For example, I pay $0.11/kWh and EVs get 3-4mi/kWh. so thats about 3 cents per mile travelled.
Assuming 30mpg and $4/gallon, that's 13 cents per mile travelled or more than 4 times the cost per mile. And there are plenty of ICE vehicles that get less than 30mpg and gasoline is often more expensive than $4/gallon
Indeed. Washington is the state where EVs have the most advantage. A while back I did a comparison between a Chevy Bolt EV and similar non-hybrid ICE cars. EV wins on energy costs per unit distance whenever G/E > 9.4, where G is the cost of gas in $/gal and E is the cost of electricity in $/kWh.
G/E is around 36 right now in Western Washington.
Even in the state with the lowest G/E, Hawaii, G/E > 11 so EV wins.
warranty 5 years on this one. theoretically even if breaks 1 day more than 5 years, there is no recourse so why assume it will last 15? tesla offers 10 years warranty on their powerwall so they are confident it will work at least for 10 years.
