Dan5
Member
Another Petersen article out today with LCA stuff.
The LCA that he cited was decent, but then he goes and bastardizes it to meet his needs.
(I don't like the soft science of including economics in with hard science though in the LCA- that shouldn't be in there)
Why does he insist on writing and trying to extrapolate LCAs and doing so incorrectly. I published by response in his article. Some people just do not learn.
The study did the LCA on a weight basis, used a 300 kg battery, if you extrapolate, according to him, you get a much larger impact, BUT the battery would weigh 2400 lbs.
Can't do that. It needs to be the same chemistry to do that, and even if it's different chemistry, you have to account for different impacts related to different types.
The LCA that he cited was decent, but then he goes and bastardizes it to meet his needs.
(I don't like the soft science of including economics in with hard science though in the LCA- that shouldn't be in there)
Why does he insist on writing and trying to extrapolate LCAs and doing so incorrectly. I published by response in his article. Some people just do not learn.
The study did the LCA on a weight basis, used a 300 kg battery, if you extrapolate, according to him, you get a much larger impact, BUT the battery would weigh 2400 lbs.
Can't do that. It needs to be the same chemistry to do that, and even if it's different chemistry, you have to account for different impacts related to different types.