New EV Battery factory in Kansas needs a coal plant to run

VW, volkswagon, electric vehicle. ID.3

By Jo Nova

For some reason wind and solar power will not be powering a new EV battery factory in Kansas. Instead the sudden extra demand for electricity will be met by keeping an old coal-fired plant running.

Environmentalists are not happy. Wait ’til they realize no one even knows if EV’s will reduce carbon dioxide at all.

EV Battery Factory Will Require So Much Energy It Needs A Coal Plant To Power It

Kevon Killough, Cowboy State Daily

A $4 billion Panasonic electric vehicle battery factory in De Soto, Kansas, will help satisfy the Biden administration’s efforts to get everyone into an EV. It also will help extend the life of a coal-fired power plant.

The Kansas City Star reports that the factory will require between 200 and 250 megawatts of electricity to operate. That’s roughly the amount of power needed for a small city.

Naturally, to make something utterly pointless takes a lot of taxpayer money and Panasonic will receive $6.8 billion from the Inflation Reduction Act, which will, quite possibly, increase emissions and create inflation too.

As Mark Mills said it takes 250 tons of material to make one EV. All that energy has to come from somewhere:

To match the energy stored in one pound of oil requires 15 pounds of lithium battery, which in turn entails digging up about 7,000 pounds of rock and dirt to get the minerals needed—lithium, graphite, copper, nickel, aluminum, zinc, neodymium, manganese, and so on. Thus, fabricating a typical, single half-ton EV battery requires mining and processing about 250 tons of materials.

It was all foreseeable. Europe, with more renewable energy, lost most factories for solar panels years ago, and is in the process of losing wind, batteries and EV’s.  This week, Volkswagen cut EV production in Germany as demand “craters”.

ht/ John Connor II and RobB

EV photo by Vogler

 

9.8 out of 10 based on 79 ratings

74 comments to New EV Battery factory in Kansas needs a coal plant to run

  • #
    David Maddison

    EV’s primarily displace the CO2 emissions from the vehicle to another place, for both manufacture and their running. They don’t eliminate them, not that CO2 is a problem anyway (but the claim is that CO2 is causing global “meltdown”). EVs, by and large, are coal-powered vehicles.

    361

  • #
    Ronin

    Good news for that Kansa City coal fired power station and its workers.

    310

  • #
    Kalm Keith

    It’s 2023, we are at the “Apex” of human civilisation, and for some reason are now heading in a new, more modern, more egalitarian direction; towards an ugly self destruction.

    Any scientist can quickly demolish the cornerstone of the “atmospheric CO2 is dangerous” theme, and similarly, any real, uncorrupted engineer can expose the litany of misrepresentations that are used to support the use of so called “Renewables”; but officially, there is total silence.

    We, the trusting gullibles, are being led to the precipice, and in the West; Britain, USA, Europe and Australia, many have been so badly damaged and injured that they can’t even get to that precipice.

    This nicely sums it up.

    “Naturally, to make something utterly pointless takes a lot of taxpayer money”.

    What’s behind this ugly situation; has somebody been reading Sun Tzu’s Art of War?

    330

    • #
      David of Cooyal in Oz

      “…has somebody been reading Sun Tzu’s Art of War?”
      Well, yes. The Chinese are adepts.
      Too complex for western military experts.
      And western politicians…

      251

    • #
      Gerry, England

      I think Western civilisation peaked at the end of the last century and it has been downhill ever since.

      20

  • #
    Steve

    Interesting story a friend reported from Canada:
    All the ‘Maid of the Mist’ tourist boats in niagara were changed to electric drives, ‘recently’. They have to recharge every trip, about every hour. Because of this the niagara falls Authority has had to completely overhaul its electric supply infrastructure, at huge costs.
    This green sh*t is the gift that keeps giving.

    310

  • #
    Peter Fitzroy

    Transitioning will take time, just like the replacement of horses used in agriculture in USA for example

    Of course, like with other long term events like climate change, the effects are not immediate, and wishing they were shows a lack of understanding.

    241

    • #
      Popeye26

      Peter F links to CSIRO 🙂 🙂 – you know, the institution that was once a world leading premier scientific organisation earning respect from across the globe.

      “How fast is the climate changing?”

      “While our climate has always changed, it is now changing at a rate that is unprecedented for many thousands of years and is due to human activities that emit greenhouse gases into the air.”

      What utter PIFFLE!!

      The CSIRO knows NOTHING about geologic time and until they do will continue to get it wrong (just like EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE CLIMATE “MODELS”) and be on the wrong side of history, as are you Peter.

      Cheers,

      362

      • #
        Richard C (NZ)

        >CSIRO: “[Climate] is now changing at a rate that is unprecedented for many thousands of years”

        What you get when you use fast response thermometers to measure the latest years and ultra-slow response proxies to measure the “thousands of years”.

        240

      • #
        Jaye

        When Larry Marshall first took over as CEO of the CSIRO in 2015, he was going to get rid of the climate scientists, because: “If the science is settled, why do we need you?”

        Howls of outrage! Strikes threatened! Writing to the Times mooted!

        The government made him back down and he directed those scientists to study how to mitigate climate change instead of whether or not it was happening.

        He should have stuck to his guns and fired the lot.

        220

      • #
        Peter Fitzroy

        then a link should be easy, but you did not provide one.

        Climate models are accurate

        See it is not hard

        010

        • #

          As I demonstrated a decade ago. They were flat out 100% incorrect, beyond the bounds. The answer is: The IPCC 1990 FAR predictions were wrong

          Have the 1990 IPCC predictions been proved completely, unarguably and utterly wrong? Yes.

          They predicted that if our emissions stayed the same, temperatures would rise by 0.3 C per decade, and would be at the very least 0.2, and the most 0.5. Even by the most generous rehash of the data, the highest rate they can find is 0.18 C per decade which is likely an overestimate, and in any case, is below the very least estimate, despite the world’s emissions of CO2 continuing ever higher.

          Climate Scientist Matthew England called that “very accurate”. Since when did 0.18 = 0.3? (Shall we call it “climate maths”, or just call it wrong?) The IPCC had a whole barn wall to aim at, and a battalion of government funded gold plated AK-47s to hit the target, but they still missed.

          120

          • #
            Peter Fitzroy

            Got anything later, you should not that I could not find anything in the last few years which supports your position

            07

            • #

              Only 57 posts on Climate Models. What flavour of failure do you need?

              For 15 years every single model predicted warming that didn’t happen. For 15 years all that extra energy supposedly did nothing. It paused and they don’t know why. Even if the world warmed (by chance) after that, it doesn’t change the fact that 15 years of energy went missing. Thou shalt not create nor destroy energy. Wrong is wrong. Physics is the same now as in 2012.

              You have nothing. Not even the decency to admit you were wrong.

              100

    • #
      Ronin

      Revisiting ancient technology like windmills and battery cars which were around in the 1800’s long before the IC engine sputtered into life shows that indeed it does take a long time.

      180

    • #
      Ronin

      “wishing they were shows a lack of understanding.”

      The only lack of understanding is that shown by those who don’t realise all this gloom and doom is predicated on models, you know those things with garbage in, garbage out. and the lack of understanding that climate has always changed and always will, and that there is nary a damn thing puny mankind can do about it.

      171

    • #
      David Maddison

      A “transition” to primitive, random, diffuse, expensive wind energy is a retrograde step back to the time before Thomas Newcomen invented the first practical steam engine in 1712 and wind, animal and human power was rapidly abandoned.

      Mankind progressed until the National Socialists reinvigorated the idea of wind power as documented by Rupert Dawall in Green Tyranny – Exposing the Totalitarian Roots of the Climate Industrial Complex

      (As well, the National Socialists imposed their censorious totalitarian and racist ideas the Left are reimposing now.)

      Also see http://en.friends-against-wind.org/realities/how-renewables-and-the-global-warming-industry-are-literally-hitler

      110

      • #
        David Maddison

        Where have you seen the following before?

        It was written by none other than National Socialist inventor Dr. Franz Lawaszeck. (SEE my link above.)

        His ideas are STILL being promoted by the Left.

        Wind power, using the cost-free wind, can be built on a large scale. Improved technology will in the future make it no more expensive than thermal power. This is technically and economically possible and opens up a quite new life-important type of power generation. The future of wind is no longer small windmills, but very large real power plants. The wind towers must be at least 100 m [330 ft] high, the higher the better, ideally with rotors 100 m [330 ft] in diameter. This kind of high cage mast is already built in the shape of high radio masts.

        70

    • #
      Dave in the States

      If doesn’t happen soon, while the public is still ambivilent-not really aware of the implications, it never will. And rightly so.

      Lasting “transitions” come by way of winning the day in a free market.

      40

    • #
      Harves

      So it’s science without evidence? If we just wait long enough there is bound to be some evidence … any decade now, right Peter? Just like all those other doomsday prophesies and second comings of Christ.
      Straight out of the “How to start a cult” handbook.

      71

    • #
      R.B

      Agricultural colleges, county agents, and tractor manufacturers spent the next 20 years urging farmers to buy tractors and get rid of their draft animals. Millions of farmers complied. By 1950 the use of horses and mules for farming had all but disappeared, except in a few localized areas. During the late 1940s and early 1950s farm equipment manufacturers stopped building horse-drawn equipment, leaving horse farmers no choice but to make do by repairing and rebuilding old implements, along with adapting tractor machines for use behind horses

      What utter gibberish, once more. My father was one of those who bought a vineyard long enough ago that it was still worked by a horse (old fellow who was barely working it). He bought a tractor as soon as he could. As tight as they come, he held off buying a rack shaker and still did it by hand until he bought more property to justify the purchase, then a second hand one. As tractors were taken up as it was an economically an advantage, second-hand equipment for those using horses must have been piling up.

      Only an idiot who thinks farmers kick off a native then makes lots of money could have written that rubbish.

      40

      • #
        old cocky

        There was one reason, and one reason only. They couldn’t afford not to.

        Farming is a Red Queen’s Race. You have to run as fast as you can to stay still. Commodity prices reduce in real terms, and labour costs rarely decrease. The end result is that each person has to produce more, and that requires fertiliser and bigger equipment.
        Of course, the increased production reduces that commodity’s price in real terms, so each person has to produce more…

        A similar thing applies to transporting those commodities. Imagine still having to bag wheat and take it to the nearest railway siding with a horse and dray or team and wagon. Then the navvies load the rail wagons by hand, and the steam train takes it to port where it is loaded into the ship by hand.

        10

        • #
          old cocky

          One of the practicality aspects of broad acre farming is that during sowing and harvest, you typically run 2 12-hour shifts. The machinery is fuelled, lubricants and coolant checked, tyres checked, etc in the paddock during the shift change.

          Top of the line current tractors and harvesters are in the 500 kW range, although they doesn’t work at rated power the whole time – maybe 60% on average. During that 30 minute shift change, enough fuel needs to be added for the next shift. That’s in the 3.5 MWh range, more in heavy going.

          20

      • #
        old cocky

        The first three paragraphs aren’t too bad, even if they do leave out the 18th century work in the UK and the 19th century innovations in Australia.

        00

  • #
    Neville

    We should all thank Mark Mills and other energy experts for pointing out the obvious lunacy about EVs and the entire TOXIC W & S madness.
    But it still amazes me that most people haven’t got a clue about the EV and ICE comparisons and the idiotic claims that we must buy EVs ASAP to help save the planet.
    Of course the value per dollars value of these TOXIC disasters would be a joke if it wasn’t so serious.
    And you can’t tow a boat or a caravan or a trailer any distance at all. And who wants to risk charging these dangerous disasters in your garage at night?

    260

    • #
      Lawrie

      The whole scam from the beginning of the AGW crusade was reliant on ignorance. People did not know the facts and the media made sure they never found out. Schools did not teach history but did teach half truths and untruths so that a whole generation is unable to even discuss the global warming/climate change realities and possible solutions. We have been lied to by politicians, bureaucrats and every government scientist who should forever be banned from the science community.

      220

      • #
        Richard C (NZ)

        >“People did not know the facts and the media made sure they never found out

        From yesterday:

        CREATING A BLUEPRINT FOR MEDIA TRANSFORMATION
        500+ News and media partners
        2,000,000,000 Reach of our partners
        57 Countries represented

        “Climate issues are real, and what we will provide are real facts from real scientists so people can make choices and decisions for themselves.” [Al Roker, NBC]

        Covering Climate Now
        https://coveringclimatenow.org/

        Best Practices for Climate Journalism

        11. Do not platform climate denialists

        Platforming climate deniers in an effort to “balance” our coverage not only misleads the public, it is inaccurate. In the year 2023, there is simply no good-faith argument against climate science. And if one accepts the science, one cannot deny the need for rapid, forceful action. Stories or op-eds that dispute the scientific consensus, or ridicule climate activism, don’t belong in news outlets. Where climate denialism cannot be avoided — if it comes from the highest levels of government, for example — responsible journalistic framing will make clear that it is counterfactual, if not rooted in bad faith. See: CCNow’s ‘It’s Scientists Who Call it a Climate Emergency’

        In New Zealand: Stuff, the NZ Herald, TVNZ, Newsroom and The Spinoff.

        Around the globe includes: Agence France-Presse, Bloomberg, CBS, The Times of India, The Guardian, Vice and national public TV broadcasters in a Sweden, Italy and the US.

        Only Australian outlet I recognize is #13 DeSmog on this 2019 list.

        140

    • #
      David of Cooyal in Oz

      Headline to an ABC story this morning:
      ” As Australia’s electric vehicle market expands ‘exponentially’, is our EV infrastructure ready for the challenge? – ABC News ”

      My reaction:
      It’s all just so easy:

      ” For most people, it’s actually pretty easy, if you’re one of the approximately 70 per cent of Australians who has access to off-street parking, it’s as simple as plugging your car in for a few hours and leaving it to charge. ”

      Just make sure your garage is 50 metres away from your house, and 50 metres from any neighbours, and the car is suspended over a swimming pool while charging. And you’d better stay awake watching while it’s charging.

      Safe and effective again.

      https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-29/nsw-electric-vehicle-charging-australia/102907702

      Cheers
      Dave B

      240

      • #
        Forrest Gardener

        The safe and effective slogan should hang around bureaucratic and political necks like a millstone.

        It would test all credibility to try to use it again. I wonder what slogan the powers that be will come up with next time.

        100

  • #
    David Cole

    if the “experts” are so determined to make us go green the rules should state ‘EV batteries can only be built using green energy” The cost of this enterprise would make sure no one could afford EVs. How terrible !

    170

    • #
      Raving

      Quebec has loads of green energy. Use it to make batteries rather than selling it to American power utlities.

      That environmentalist are furious is ridiculous.

      40

  • #
    Richard C (NZ)

    It’s irony day today.

    Irony Of The Day: California Regulations Boost Diesel Truck Orders

    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/irony-day-california-regulations-boost-diesel-truck-orders

    [WSJ] The technology underpinning electric vehicles is still developing, they say, and the zero-emission trucks are triple the cost of diesel trucks, while the vehicles and charging stations are in limited supply. “I have to think every trucker in California is doing all they can to get as many pre-mandate trucks in place as they possibly can,” said Kenny Vieth, president of ACT Research.

    Production of the [electric] vehicles is so limited and the cost and complexity of running the trucks so high that there are fewer than 150 zero-emission trucks in service at the Southern California ports today, said Matt Schrap, CEO of the Harbor Trucking Association trade group. The most advanced of those trucks, say trucking executives, can’t travel more than a few hundred miles between charges, so they can only run short trips between ports and nearby rail yards and warehouses.

    The electric trucks themselves are also proving a problem. Nikola and Volvo Trucks North America this summer recalled trucks because of defective parts thought to pose a fire risk. Jim Gillis, president of port trucker Pacific Drayage Services, said he is on his third recall since receiving six Volvo electric trucks in January. Gillis said that when a diesel truck needs repair it is usually in the shop for three to four days. When a $400,000 electric truck is recalled it is usually out of action for longer. “That’s an expensive asset to lose for three to four weeks,” he said.

    “There are many of us in the drayage industry that run our trucks 400 plus miles a day,” Cory Peters, chief financial officer of Best Drayage, a trucking company based in the Central Valley, told the board. “Currently, there is no zero-emission truck available today that can make that trip. You are requiring that all new drayage trucks be zero emissions starting in less than nine months from now. This will have a devastating effect on Central Valley shippers who rely on getting their goods to the rest of the world.”

    140

  • #

    Microsoft Looking to Use Nuclear Reactors to Power Its Data Centers

    Hyper-scale companies like Microsoft are always considering novel methods for powering (and cooling) their data centers. These data centers need to be located in geologically stable regions, with ample power and water supplies to keep them cool and allow them to run nonstop, as well as grow with future demands. This has become an issue lately, with power grids failing in some regions due to excessive use caused typically by heat waves. Microsoft is looking to avoid this potential issue by taking its data centers off the grid entirely. Instead, it’ll have its own grid powered by a small nuclear reactor.

    As “TechPowerUp” notes, these so-called small modular reactors are much smaller than existing nuclear power plants, which allows them to be positioned right next to the data center. This adjacency mitigates any issues relating to power transmission over long distances. Companies like Microsoft are also looking for ways to shift to clean power for their data centers.

    https://www.extremetech.com/energy/microsoft-looking-to-use-nuclear-reactors-to-power-its-data-centers

    120

    • #
      Pete of Charnlop

      But but but… Budgie Bowen says that nuclear is stupidly expensive. Surely MS wouldn’t choose that over a windmill?

      71

    • #
      Forrest Gardener

      Hmmm. Just thinking out loud about the core criticism of nuclear power being that bombs can be made using much the same technology.

      If you combine the right batteries with the right nuclear power it just might lead to spectacular fireworks for Microsoft.

      Not that anybody would wish any harm to come to Microsoft.

      81

  • #
    Neville

    AGAIIN this short video by Alex Epstein covers so much of their stupid responses to their so called climate crisis that I’d challenge anyone to dispute any of his points.
    He is certainly correct that we don’t have a climate crisis but we do have an energy crisis.
    Just look up the data since 1900 from OWI Data.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEFmVgjdLfs

    111

  • #
    Honk R Smith

    Has any of this ever been about “reducing carbon dioxide”?
    Asking for a friend.

    91

  • #
    Philip

    I saw a number plate on a Tesla:

    NIL CO2

    Looks like it should read:

    250 TON

    100

  • #
    • #
      Philip

      First class. You have to give it to Elon at times.

      His recent affects upon the world make an argument for a monarchical ruler over democracy. Democracy is providing us with Biden Inc., while one strong man has taken over NASA and recently de-triggered WW3.

      Something to think about at least.

      51

    • #
  • #
    Ross

    So the market for battery powered vehicles in Europe ( and maybe also US) is “cratering”. Which means they will be looking for alternative sucker markets to sell the damn things. Which is countries like Australia. Expect these companies to be almost giving them away, particularly to the fleet managers. Because it is the fleets that drives our market in particular. Very soon every company rep and public servant will be driving a Tesla.

    80

  • #
    Billy Bob Hall

    It would be way more efficient to actually have a coal powered steam car – Like the old Stanley Steamer.
    A Stanley Steamer had a record 127mph run as early as 1906.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Motor_Carriage_Company

    60

  • #
    RickWill

    If there were more woke people, the cost of diesel would be less. Please stop buying Hilux diesels.

    Come on Aussies, get with the program – buy an EV to reduce my diesel price.

    Singapore distillate stocks are 31% down on average for this time of year. That does not bode well for DOWNWARD PRESSURE ON PRICES. In fact. globally, distillate stocks are at record low.

    The consolation prize is the knowledge that the French are paying equivalent of AUD3.29 per litre. However it would be a bit better if I was paying US price around AUD1.84 per litre. Even better in Russia where diesel costs AUD1.03 per litre. Slightly less than half what I am looking at now.

    Russians could probably use diesel for household heating as well as burning it in their cars. They will need heating soon.

    70

  • #
    Raving

    Goos news. Less Quebec hydro energy for the US, more for the local battery plant

    He said Quebec’s unique access to 100 per cent renewable energy and raw materials made it the ideal base of operations for its first mega-factory outside Europe.

    EV battery giant Northvolt to build multibillion-dollar plant in Quebec

    50

  • #
    Aaron

    The answer my friend,
    is Bowen and the wind,
    the answer is Bowen and the wind.

    Apologies to Bob Dylan…

    50

  • #
  • #
    David Maddison

    If the Left were serious about “carbon” (sic) emissions they would slap a huge carbon tax on EVs due to all the CO2 emissions they generate in their manufacture and use.

    40

  • #
    Neville

    So what sort of drug of preference do our political leaders and our so called scientists etc use before they lecture us on their so called climate crisis and even an EXISTENTIAL Human THREAT?
    I know this is boring to some but Humans only lived to about 35 years for the first 200,000 years of our existence or 99.9% of our time on Earth.
    But in the last 0.1% of our existence life expectancy has soared to 73 years and our population has increased by an extra 7 billion since 1800 and 5.5 billion more people since 1950.
    AGAIN our poorest continent Africa has seen population increase from 227 million in 1950 to about 1460 million today and their life expectancy increased from 36 years in 1950 to 64 years today.
    Obviously our climate today must be very BENIGN or we wouldn’t have recently seen the greatest Human FLOURISHING for the last 200,000 years.
    AGAIN Fossil fuels + Traditional bio-mass have provided 92% of our global Energy since 1950 and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

    50

  • #
    Rick

    Isn’t great when a plan comes together! In this case “plan” is synonymous with “train smash.”

    70

  • #
    Dennis

    Who would pay a premium price for an electric vehicle, waste time locating and using recharging points, put up with lower range and range variation well below theoretical estimated range, be in danger from exothermic reaction inferno fire, with trade-in/resale value much lower than an equivalent internal combustion engine vehicle?

    If the buyer was astute.

    50

  • #

    So doing the maths, a half-a-tonne lithium battery is equivalent to about 38 litres of oil. The magic and efficiency of hydrocarbons. The choice is clear, I will continue to use and, invest in fossil fuels, like oil.

    20

  • #
    Richard Brimage

    I was in Kansas last week. When I left I noticed almost every windmill was dead still. The three or four moving were barely creeping.

    10

  • #

    […] Well, sure, why not, because there’s no way wind and solar will be able to power all the EVs (via Jo Nova) […]

    00

  • #
  • #