Technology

58303 readers

11 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

China and Norway Lead the World’s EV Switchover (spectrum.ieee.org)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

12 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Globally, according to research by the Rocky Mountain Institute, EVs will comprise two-thirds of the world’s car sales by 2030. However, according to the World Resources Institute, “EVs need to account for 75 percent to 95 percent of passenger vehicle sales by 2030 in order to meet international climate goals aimed at keeping global warming to 1.5 degrees C (2.7 degrees F).”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago (8 children)

I really hate how this goal keeps being stated. When did it become the unchallenged truth that everyone needs to buy an EV? The goal was supposed to be transportation without carbon emissions. That could be solved in so many ways, from maglev trains to wind-powered ships to pedal- or foot-powered commuting. It should be solved with smart infrastructure and transportation strategy, not just more consumption.

There are even multiple ways to power a personal vehicle that don’t have carbon emissions, and some of the most interesting ones are still emerging - hydrogen, ammonia - yet we are forging ahead like battery electric vehicles are the silver bullet to all of our problems. We are not going to fix our world of reckless consumption with more consumption… but we are going to make the shareholders of a few automotive companies very rich. Was that our goal?

[–] [email protected] -3 points 8 months ago (4 children)

Agree. A new EV needs to drive many years to offset the carbon emission during production of said car. The best thing you can do for the environment (if you want to drive a car) is to keep driving the car you already have. Second best it's too but a used car. It's horrendous. We give tax credits to incentives people to buy new conspicuous shit, while punishing those that keep their old, healthy cars.

It's totally Keyser Söze: the biggest trick the car industry pulled was convincing the public new, big EV cars were actually good for the environment.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2022/04/new-ev-vs-old-beater-which-is-better-for-the-environment/

According to a recent Reuters article using a model developed by the Argonne National Laboratory in Chicago, the point at which an EV’s carbon footprint meets and begins to fall below that of a comparable gas vehicle in the United States is at around 13,500 miles. So after an average year of driving, the EV is better for the environment. Beyond that, the gap widens.

As for keeping your current car:

As far as manufacturing goes, the old car is already built, so let’s give it a pass regarding its manufacturing carbon footprint. According to a 2015 Union of Concerned Scientists report, a full-size long-range (265 miles) vehicle had a carbon footprint of about six tons, or 12,000 pounds.

In two years, the EV will have caught up to the used car in terms of ecological footprint. After that, as with new gas cars, an EV surpasses it in efficiency for its entire life cycle.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That's cool. Thanks. It seems i stand corrected. I'll look into it. Still it really shows how bad individual transportation is for the environment.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

Yeah, I agree. I think trains / other stuff would be much better too. Unfortunately, I don't think it's realistic to expect them to be as effective in countries like the US. At least not in the anywhere near future.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (4 replies)