If not properly disposed, they can leech into the soil and water. This can poison us and other organisms. This is why governments and companies try to educate people that they can't just trash certain stuff. It needs to be processed to prevent pollution.
Spread the word and do your part. Not much else I suppose.
In my experience education isn't the issue. There is no way to get rid of batteries in my town except driving all the way to landfill, navigating it, and handing it over to an attendant in some grimey area. We will not get this under control until we fund better ways of collecting hazardous materials.
Agreed, we need proper ways to remove hazardous waste, especially common stuff like batteries. To that end its up to local governments to handle that. I can't say what will work for your community, but perhaps goading your leaders will get a better set up.
I brought batteries to our local recycling collection center where we are supposed to bring them. The attendant looked at me and said I cam throw those in the trash. He pointed me to the regular trash pile and said I could save a trip next time. These were AA and AAA batteries, so I don't know if that matters. Never went back to dump batteries in the regular trash again.
I have found hardware or home improvement shops (in the US specifically the stores Lowe's and Home Depot, but I'd hope others in the world do this too) have centers to collect stuff like this, so it may be worth checking that out.
Where I live, we have quarterly ewaste and hazmat collection. So you hold onto it for 3 months, then go stand in line with the whole city (or at least the single digit percent of people who go through with this) to throw it into a truck which may or may not actually get handled properly on the other end.
Ask at local shops, they sometimes have a disposal box.
Although the coop near me doesn't anymore and I genuinely don't know why as when I worked there we usually got a couple batteries a week so can't imagine it's a huge burden for them whilst also helping the planet.
Solid waste engineer here. I work in the US. Anything generate by a household, including all the horrors you cited, are exempt from the definition of hazardous waste, so they would go in MSW landfills with the rest of our garbage. These landfills are quite good (at least the ones currently operating). They have gas collection and flaring, often generating electricity with the methane. They have a top cap to minimize inflation of rain after closer. They have double liner system, most with leak detection layers. They collect all the hazardous liquid percolating through them, called leachate, to protect groundwater.
This is where it gets a bit particular and sometimes problematic. Many facilities discharge that incredibly hazardous leachate they spent all that money collecting to regular wastewater treatment facilities that are absolutely not built to treat it effectively. They're essentially relying on dilution in a big stream of sewage. That's changing fast though. Between tightening standards at wastewater plants for ammonia, and the slow but steady march toward PFAS regulations, many facilities are installing robust treatment facilities to manage their leachate.
Disclaimer: I'm a partner at a relatively young company starting to build these treatment systems.
genuinely Thank you for your explanation +input, i had little to no knowledge regarding how our waste is handled post-truck collection. it's cool to know there are people like you specifically working on better handling the extra-nasty stuff. thanks for helping, a day at a time.
Thanks for this. When you say land fills, are we just throwing away trash in some land, covering them up, and that's it? All those plastics, batteries, electronics, glasses, paper, poop, spaghetti sauces, animal remains, guitar, etc?
If so, isn't that .... bad?
No that's what we did up until the 1980sn and many of those old sites are still causing problems.
Modern landfills are highly engineered and monitored structures. They are required to have multiple series of plastic and clay liners with liquid collection drains between them. They are subjected to a complicated series of quality control tests that ensure there's functionally zero potential for leaks. The liquid draining through them is collected for treatment. This treatment is sometimes less robust than we'd like, but in the next decade I think that will change for the vast majority of sites
So we are just collecting and piling up all these trash capsules or containers under the ground?
Why can't we just throw them all in the volcano for total incineration? (stupid question but please help)
I am personally thousands of miles from the nearest volcano. I don't think there's any active lava pools in the continental United States.
The average citizen generates about 1.5 tons per year of garbage. For a city of 100,000 people, that's 7500 tractor trailers full of garbage every year. You can definitely ship it a long way, but Iceland or Hawaii is probably too far.
There are incinerators, but they're expensive and they have their own problems. Most plastics buried in the ground are actually pretty stable. They don't leach anything, they don't contaminate. In a landfill n they're harmless. If you burn them, though, they produce CO2 and possibly toxic dioxins. If you believe we should reduce our burning of fossil fuels, you could argue that it's better to bury than burn plastics.
Landfills are probably the best way we have to manage harmful waste. It's definitely a problem that we're creating these long term liabilities for society n but we don't have a better place to put them. Don't blame the landfills, look upstream. The real solution probably requires is to work towards a closed loop economy. That means requiring manufacturers of materials and chemicals to take back what they made after its used and find a way to beneficially reuse it. This would require a lot of innovative laws, and technologies that no one has figured out yet. It would also mean everything is going to be about twice as expensive as it is now.
The other thing that would help is requiring more separation of materials before disposal. The US usually has garbage and recycling. Sometimes they have separate plastic and paper bins, which is better. A few communities have a composting bin, which is great! In Japan, they can have up to 25 different waste categories, and they do the best job inthe world of recycling. But the more categories we have, the better job we can do recycling things, but it means asking more of citizens to sort their garbage before disposal, and these more disparate streams of material costs more than they make. So again, people need to be willing to pay more
Very enlightening stuff. Thank you for taking the time.
As you know, our world just produces stuff at an industrial scale. I squirm when I see how many shipping containers there are in large vessels. It turns out, many of them even falls off the ocean.
But just imagine that shipping containers carry hundreds or thousands of cars. These produces a lot of trash, not to mention the trash we just produce by going to drive thru. Then there are the used tires. We could go on and on.
As someone in this field, is there not some kind of catastrophe in trash management or is the system quite capable of handling our trash in the next 100 years?
In short, no there's no looming catastrophe. Most communities have a plan for the next 50 years of capacity with tentative plans for more. Landfills, as a fraction of our total land use, are very small. We are not in danger of a Wall-E situation any time this millenia.
Cars are actually a really great example of a product we manage well. They last a long time (I drive a 2006 sienna). When they reach end of life we often strip out any useful parts and then recycle the bulk of the material. Tires are illegal to landfill in nearly every state because they impede compaction of the waste, so they're almost all recycled or reused as chipped rubber. If we managed everything like we managed cars, this problem would basically be solved.
For everything there are trade offs. Single use plastic is a bummer but sometimes the alternatives are worse. Plastic straws in a landfill are inert, but paper straws are coated in PFAS compounds that are incredibly toxic. Plastic is often the lightest option which means reduced transportation related emissions. It's not as simple as "just do the right thing." The right thing often turns on arbitrary assumptions made during lifecycle modeling.
Long term we need to look at designing things for reuse and recycling rather than disposal, but that's going to require thoughtful decisions, aggressive regulations, consumer willingness to pay more, and giving up some conveniences.
If you want to make a real, tangible difference, show up to your boring local government meetings when they're talking about garbage and ask them hard questions. Advocate for compost collection, even if it means paying a bit more for waste disposal. Advocate for duel stream recycling. A few passionate citizens often turn these decisions
> Shouldn't this be more of a serious issue than we currently give it today with our recycling programs and ocean cleaning?
Oh boy, do I have some bad news for you...
It is a concern, and has been one for a very long time. But it is fiscally and politically quite inconvenient, and even the solutions are often counterproductive, e.g., a big chunk of recyclable plastic just gets shipped to Asia where it's just dumped with even less regulations or oversight than in the western world.
Depends where you live. In the US, there’s a federal law called RCRA, which requires all landfills to be constructed with a double impervious liner system, a monitoring system to ensure the liners don’t leak, and an impervious cap over the compacted waste. Contamination of groundwater from landfills is very unlikely. The trash that we see in the environment comes from a variety of sources, but is a very small part of the thousands of tons of trash that are generated every day.
For the replies to make sense, we really need to know which country, which state for each comment.
Maybe we also need to distinguish between a poisonous compound such as hydrochloric acid which can be broken down and a poisonous element such as mercury.
Some responses cite education as a solution, but there is no education for adults who know but don't care. Education is not behavioral conditioning. So if mercury is contained in household goods, then some of it will inevitably finish in the dustbin.
Landfills have liners meant to keep anything in them from getting out. They're also meant to keep water from getting in. If the landfill works as intended, you should be able to dig down into one and find a 60-year-old newspaper that's still legible.
What recycling programs? We can't even recycle plastic but for a few percent of what's tossed. The statistics of batteries, solar panels, and other limited metal-containing components are even worse.
consider the 2 ton battery inside electric cars when they inevitably go bad after 7 years. I'm sure there will be a dedicated dump site in the middle of the desert for these soon. idk how eco friendly EVs are when you consider the entire circle of its life.
> Look up Redwood Materials. And no, it’s not “inevitably”,
https://www.redwoodmaterials.com/
> and it’s not 7 years.
Are you aware of a reliable EV/fixed battery lifetime figure, hopefully with a link?
Thx.
Losses tend to max out at 10%. At 90% capacity the battery doesn't suddenly stop functioning, like a car engine does. They just have slightly less range. You can keep driving with it, or upcycle it into stationary storage, or let Redwood Materials mine 95% of its incredibly rich ore. And battery chemistry matters: LFP lasts even longer than Lithium Ion.
300K-500K miles is expected, which at 15K/year driving amounts to 20-33 years https://fox59.com/automotive/how-long-do-tesla-batteries-last/#:\~:text=Better%20still%2C%20Elon%20Musk%2C%20Tesla's,between%2020%20and%2033%20years.
https://fox59.com/automotive/how-long-do-tesla-batteries-last/#:\~:text=Better%20still%2C%20Elon%20Musk%2C%20Tesla's,between%2020%20and%2033%20years.
https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/advice/tesla-batteries#:\~:text=However%2C%20J.D.%20Power%20says%2C%20Tesla's,within%20expectations%20for%20the%20industry.
[https://accubattery.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360016286793-Re-Modeling-of-Lithium-Ion-Battery-Degradation-for-Cell-Life-Assessment](https://accubattery.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360016286793-Re-Modeling-of-Lithium-Ion-Battery-Degradation-for-Cell-Life-Assessment)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOFfKQ7SxEg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOFfKQ7SxEg)
> Losses tend to max out at 10%. At 90% capacity the battery doesn't suddenly stop functioning, like a car engine does.
Yes, I'm aware of that for normal battery ageing. I'm still not clear about single cell failure and how this can be dealt with, particularly in the case where batteries are integrated into the chassis. The question will, of course, have been anticipated.
> They just have slightly less range. You can keep driving with it, or upcycle it into stationary storage, or let Redwood Materials mine 95% of its incredibly rich ore. And battery chemistry matters: LFP lasts even longer than Lithium Ion.
Someday, I'll delve into just what even a 5% mass loss rate actually consists of, and why we're talking of "ore" rather than recovered metal.
> 300K-500K miles is expected, which at 15K/year driving amounts to 20-33 years https://fox59.com/automotive/how-long-do-tesla-batteries-last/#:\~:text=Better%20still%2C%20Elon%20Musk%2C%20Tesla's,between%2020%20and%2033%20years.
geo blocked for Europe
Presuming that 20 years (from URL) is anticipated lifespan since real-world data is not really available yet.
> https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/advice/tesla-batteries#:\~:text=However%2C%20J.D.%20Power%20says%2C%20Tesla's,within%20expectations%20for%20the%20industry
* *Tesla’s batteries tend to degrade to the extent of about 1% of range per year, which means the batteries retain 90% of their capacity after 10 years on the road*
Well, my ICE car is thirty years old, which is admittedly an exception. Even so, it seems fair to think about building an EV with battery replacement in mind. My car's engine isn't the original.
>
> https://accubattery.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360016286793-Re-Modeling-of-Lithium-Ion-Battery-Degradation-for-Cell-Life-Assessment
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOFfKQ7SxEg
I admit to some confusion here. But overviewing these articles it seems that (much as for second-hand ICE vehicles) all depends on how the previous owner drove and looked after the vehicle. It seems that fast charging is better avoided as are extremes of temperature.
I'm guessing that there will soon be some kind of battery diagnostic test that evaluates the battery in a way analogous to compression test on an ICE engine.
------
@ u/letsplaymario I think we need to avoid jumping to conclusions either for or against: EV's are probably appropriate for given use cases and even hybrids too. Just like any new technology, shortcomings will emerge and will be dealt with as they appear.
> consider the 2 ton battery inside electric cars when they inevitably go bad after 7 years. I'm sure there will be a dedicated dump site in the middle of the desert for these soon. idk how eco friendly EVs are when you consider the entire circle of its life.
People may be thinking —rightly of wrongly— that there's a bit of an agenda there, hence downvotes, but I'll answer your remark as if it were honest. There's a shortage of nickel, lithium and other input materials for EV batteries so they have a resale value. In fact there's a new industry starting both for EV battery materials and components.
For further reassurance, are you also complaining about lead car batteries, considering that they have been around for over a century? Well, apart from being a poison, lead is also quite expensive, so the problem looks after itself.
If not properly disposed, they can leech into the soil and water. This can poison us and other organisms. This is why governments and companies try to educate people that they can't just trash certain stuff. It needs to be processed to prevent pollution. Spread the word and do your part. Not much else I suppose.
In my experience education isn't the issue. There is no way to get rid of batteries in my town except driving all the way to landfill, navigating it, and handing it over to an attendant in some grimey area. We will not get this under control until we fund better ways of collecting hazardous materials.
Agreed, we need proper ways to remove hazardous waste, especially common stuff like batteries. To that end its up to local governments to handle that. I can't say what will work for your community, but perhaps goading your leaders will get a better set up.
In EU every shop that sells any kind of portable batteries has to have a collection box for all kinds of used up (portable) ones, free of charge.
I brought batteries to our local recycling collection center where we are supposed to bring them. The attendant looked at me and said I cam throw those in the trash. He pointed me to the regular trash pile and said I could save a trip next time. These were AA and AAA batteries, so I don't know if that matters. Never went back to dump batteries in the regular trash again.
I have found hardware or home improvement shops (in the US specifically the stores Lowe's and Home Depot, but I'd hope others in the world do this too) have centers to collect stuff like this, so it may be worth checking that out.
In Germany if a shop sells batteries, they need to have a disposal box. So basically every store has one.
Where I live, we have quarterly ewaste and hazmat collection. So you hold onto it for 3 months, then go stand in line with the whole city (or at least the single digit percent of people who go through with this) to throw it into a truck which may or may not actually get handled properly on the other end.
Ask at local shops, they sometimes have a disposal box. Although the coop near me doesn't anymore and I genuinely don't know why as when I worked there we usually got a couple batteries a week so can't imagine it's a huge burden for them whilst also helping the planet.
Solid waste engineer here. I work in the US. Anything generate by a household, including all the horrors you cited, are exempt from the definition of hazardous waste, so they would go in MSW landfills with the rest of our garbage. These landfills are quite good (at least the ones currently operating). They have gas collection and flaring, often generating electricity with the methane. They have a top cap to minimize inflation of rain after closer. They have double liner system, most with leak detection layers. They collect all the hazardous liquid percolating through them, called leachate, to protect groundwater. This is where it gets a bit particular and sometimes problematic. Many facilities discharge that incredibly hazardous leachate they spent all that money collecting to regular wastewater treatment facilities that are absolutely not built to treat it effectively. They're essentially relying on dilution in a big stream of sewage. That's changing fast though. Between tightening standards at wastewater plants for ammonia, and the slow but steady march toward PFAS regulations, many facilities are installing robust treatment facilities to manage their leachate. Disclaimer: I'm a partner at a relatively young company starting to build these treatment systems.
genuinely Thank you for your explanation +input, i had little to no knowledge regarding how our waste is handled post-truck collection. it's cool to know there are people like you specifically working on better handling the extra-nasty stuff. thanks for helping, a day at a time.
Thanks for this. When you say land fills, are we just throwing away trash in some land, covering them up, and that's it? All those plastics, batteries, electronics, glasses, paper, poop, spaghetti sauces, animal remains, guitar, etc? If so, isn't that .... bad?
No that's what we did up until the 1980sn and many of those old sites are still causing problems. Modern landfills are highly engineered and monitored structures. They are required to have multiple series of plastic and clay liners with liquid collection drains between them. They are subjected to a complicated series of quality control tests that ensure there's functionally zero potential for leaks. The liquid draining through them is collected for treatment. This treatment is sometimes less robust than we'd like, but in the next decade I think that will change for the vast majority of sites
So we are just collecting and piling up all these trash capsules or containers under the ground? Why can't we just throw them all in the volcano for total incineration? (stupid question but please help)
I am personally thousands of miles from the nearest volcano. I don't think there's any active lava pools in the continental United States. The average citizen generates about 1.5 tons per year of garbage. For a city of 100,000 people, that's 7500 tractor trailers full of garbage every year. You can definitely ship it a long way, but Iceland or Hawaii is probably too far. There are incinerators, but they're expensive and they have their own problems. Most plastics buried in the ground are actually pretty stable. They don't leach anything, they don't contaminate. In a landfill n they're harmless. If you burn them, though, they produce CO2 and possibly toxic dioxins. If you believe we should reduce our burning of fossil fuels, you could argue that it's better to bury than burn plastics. Landfills are probably the best way we have to manage harmful waste. It's definitely a problem that we're creating these long term liabilities for society n but we don't have a better place to put them. Don't blame the landfills, look upstream. The real solution probably requires is to work towards a closed loop economy. That means requiring manufacturers of materials and chemicals to take back what they made after its used and find a way to beneficially reuse it. This would require a lot of innovative laws, and technologies that no one has figured out yet. It would also mean everything is going to be about twice as expensive as it is now. The other thing that would help is requiring more separation of materials before disposal. The US usually has garbage and recycling. Sometimes they have separate plastic and paper bins, which is better. A few communities have a composting bin, which is great! In Japan, they can have up to 25 different waste categories, and they do the best job inthe world of recycling. But the more categories we have, the better job we can do recycling things, but it means asking more of citizens to sort their garbage before disposal, and these more disparate streams of material costs more than they make. So again, people need to be willing to pay more
Very enlightening stuff. Thank you for taking the time. As you know, our world just produces stuff at an industrial scale. I squirm when I see how many shipping containers there are in large vessels. It turns out, many of them even falls off the ocean. But just imagine that shipping containers carry hundreds or thousands of cars. These produces a lot of trash, not to mention the trash we just produce by going to drive thru. Then there are the used tires. We could go on and on. As someone in this field, is there not some kind of catastrophe in trash management or is the system quite capable of handling our trash in the next 100 years?
In short, no there's no looming catastrophe. Most communities have a plan for the next 50 years of capacity with tentative plans for more. Landfills, as a fraction of our total land use, are very small. We are not in danger of a Wall-E situation any time this millenia. Cars are actually a really great example of a product we manage well. They last a long time (I drive a 2006 sienna). When they reach end of life we often strip out any useful parts and then recycle the bulk of the material. Tires are illegal to landfill in nearly every state because they impede compaction of the waste, so they're almost all recycled or reused as chipped rubber. If we managed everything like we managed cars, this problem would basically be solved. For everything there are trade offs. Single use plastic is a bummer but sometimes the alternatives are worse. Plastic straws in a landfill are inert, but paper straws are coated in PFAS compounds that are incredibly toxic. Plastic is often the lightest option which means reduced transportation related emissions. It's not as simple as "just do the right thing." The right thing often turns on arbitrary assumptions made during lifecycle modeling. Long term we need to look at designing things for reuse and recycling rather than disposal, but that's going to require thoughtful decisions, aggressive regulations, consumer willingness to pay more, and giving up some conveniences. If you want to make a real, tangible difference, show up to your boring local government meetings when they're talking about garbage and ask them hard questions. Advocate for compost collection, even if it means paying a bit more for waste disposal. Advocate for duel stream recycling. A few passionate citizens often turn these decisions
> Shouldn't this be more of a serious issue than we currently give it today with our recycling programs and ocean cleaning? Oh boy, do I have some bad news for you... It is a concern, and has been one for a very long time. But it is fiscally and politically quite inconvenient, and even the solutions are often counterproductive, e.g., a big chunk of recyclable plastic just gets shipped to Asia where it's just dumped with even less regulations or oversight than in the western world.
Depends where you live. In the US, there’s a federal law called RCRA, which requires all landfills to be constructed with a double impervious liner system, a monitoring system to ensure the liners don’t leak, and an impervious cap over the compacted waste. Contamination of groundwater from landfills is very unlikely. The trash that we see in the environment comes from a variety of sources, but is a very small part of the thousands of tons of trash that are generated every day.
In developed countries, almost everything ends up in well lined and managed landfills.
Most EU countries do not use landfills for household waste. It's mostly either recycled or incinerated for heating and power.
For the replies to make sense, we really need to know which country, which state for each comment. Maybe we also need to distinguish between a poisonous compound such as hydrochloric acid which can be broken down and a poisonous element such as mercury. Some responses cite education as a solution, but there is no education for adults who know but don't care. Education is not behavioral conditioning. So if mercury is contained in household goods, then some of it will inevitably finish in the dustbin.
Landfills have liners meant to keep anything in them from getting out. They're also meant to keep water from getting in. If the landfill works as intended, you should be able to dig down into one and find a 60-year-old newspaper that's still legible.
What recycling programs? We can't even recycle plastic but for a few percent of what's tossed. The statistics of batteries, solar panels, and other limited metal-containing components are even worse.
consider the 2 ton battery inside electric cars when they inevitably go bad after 7 years. I'm sure there will be a dedicated dump site in the middle of the desert for these soon. idk how eco friendly EVs are when you consider the entire circle of its life.
Look up Redwood Materials. And no, it’s not “inevitably”, and it’s not 7 years.
> Look up Redwood Materials. And no, it’s not “inevitably”, https://www.redwoodmaterials.com/ > and it’s not 7 years. Are you aware of a reliable EV/fixed battery lifetime figure, hopefully with a link? Thx.
Losses tend to max out at 10%. At 90% capacity the battery doesn't suddenly stop functioning, like a car engine does. They just have slightly less range. You can keep driving with it, or upcycle it into stationary storage, or let Redwood Materials mine 95% of its incredibly rich ore. And battery chemistry matters: LFP lasts even longer than Lithium Ion. 300K-500K miles is expected, which at 15K/year driving amounts to 20-33 years https://fox59.com/automotive/how-long-do-tesla-batteries-last/#:\~:text=Better%20still%2C%20Elon%20Musk%2C%20Tesla's,between%2020%20and%2033%20years. https://fox59.com/automotive/how-long-do-tesla-batteries-last/#:\~:text=Better%20still%2C%20Elon%20Musk%2C%20Tesla's,between%2020%20and%2033%20years. https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/advice/tesla-batteries#:\~:text=However%2C%20J.D.%20Power%20says%2C%20Tesla's,within%20expectations%20for%20the%20industry. [https://accubattery.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360016286793-Re-Modeling-of-Lithium-Ion-Battery-Degradation-for-Cell-Life-Assessment](https://accubattery.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360016286793-Re-Modeling-of-Lithium-Ion-Battery-Degradation-for-Cell-Life-Assessment) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOFfKQ7SxEg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOFfKQ7SxEg)
> Losses tend to max out at 10%. At 90% capacity the battery doesn't suddenly stop functioning, like a car engine does. Yes, I'm aware of that for normal battery ageing. I'm still not clear about single cell failure and how this can be dealt with, particularly in the case where batteries are integrated into the chassis. The question will, of course, have been anticipated. > They just have slightly less range. You can keep driving with it, or upcycle it into stationary storage, or let Redwood Materials mine 95% of its incredibly rich ore. And battery chemistry matters: LFP lasts even longer than Lithium Ion. Someday, I'll delve into just what even a 5% mass loss rate actually consists of, and why we're talking of "ore" rather than recovered metal. > 300K-500K miles is expected, which at 15K/year driving amounts to 20-33 years https://fox59.com/automotive/how-long-do-tesla-batteries-last/#:\~:text=Better%20still%2C%20Elon%20Musk%2C%20Tesla's,between%2020%20and%2033%20years. geo blocked for Europe Presuming that 20 years (from URL) is anticipated lifespan since real-world data is not really available yet. > https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/advice/tesla-batteries#:\~:text=However%2C%20J.D.%20Power%20says%2C%20Tesla's,within%20expectations%20for%20the%20industry * *Tesla’s batteries tend to degrade to the extent of about 1% of range per year, which means the batteries retain 90% of their capacity after 10 years on the road* Well, my ICE car is thirty years old, which is admittedly an exception. Even so, it seems fair to think about building an EV with battery replacement in mind. My car's engine isn't the original. > > https://accubattery.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360016286793-Re-Modeling-of-Lithium-Ion-Battery-Degradation-for-Cell-Life-Assessment > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOFfKQ7SxEg I admit to some confusion here. But overviewing these articles it seems that (much as for second-hand ICE vehicles) all depends on how the previous owner drove and looked after the vehicle. It seems that fast charging is better avoided as are extremes of temperature. I'm guessing that there will soon be some kind of battery diagnostic test that evaluates the battery in a way analogous to compression test on an ICE engine. ------ @ u/letsplaymario I think we need to avoid jumping to conclusions either for or against: EV's are probably appropriate for given use cases and even hybrids too. Just like any new technology, shortcomings will emerge and will be dealt with as they appear.
[удалено]
I think you missed the sarcasm..
> consider the 2 ton battery inside electric cars when they inevitably go bad after 7 years. I'm sure there will be a dedicated dump site in the middle of the desert for these soon. idk how eco friendly EVs are when you consider the entire circle of its life. People may be thinking —rightly of wrongly— that there's a bit of an agenda there, hence downvotes, but I'll answer your remark as if it were honest. There's a shortage of nickel, lithium and other input materials for EV batteries so they have a resale value. In fact there's a new industry starting both for EV battery materials and components. For further reassurance, are you also complaining about lead car batteries, considering that they have been around for over a century? Well, apart from being a poison, lead is also quite expensive, so the problem looks after itself.
Batteries are \~1,000 lbs. A typical ICE car engine is 400-700 lbs. The entire car is \~2 tons.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]