4 ms·

> zero-emission I wouldn't call emitted-somewhere-else zero-emission. Zero emission is deciding not to take the trip.

by spodek 10y ago

m_mueller 10y ago
That depends on your grid. Electricity in quite a few countries is effectively zero emission, thanks largely to hydro and nuclear power, increasingly also solar and wind.
- adventured 10y ago
  > Electricity in quite a few countries is effectively zero emission Isn't the reality that that is the case with extremely few nations? I'm not aware of more than a few that can claim to be at zero emissions on electricity.
  - m_mueller 10y ago
    Found a good source [2] on this and made a spreadsheet, so look for yourself [1]. There's a second sheet attached that shows the countries with below <30% fossil fuel in the electricity mix for a better overview. [1] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16K4gNhy_AN8Eg4Ov3z7pF_dgON1oObkHQ8Px5I73Hvc/pubhtml# https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16K4gNhy_AN8Eg4Ov3z7p... [2] https://www.eia.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/iedindex3.cfm?tid=2&pid=alltypes&aid=12&cid=regions&syid=2008&eyid=2012&unit=BKWH https://www.eia.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/iedindex3.cfm?tid=2&p... Edit: Have a look at Norway - they could burn their own oil cheaply, but they are a bit smarter than that. Noteworthy is also Brazil - before someone comes in and says you need to have a fully developed rich economy to do this. Edit2: Friendlier view link.
- scott_karana 10y ago
  Hydro isn't exactly zero emission either. What do you think happens when a dam is created, and kills tree life? What do you think the underwater vegetation emits as it decomposes? Sure, once the back filled area is thoroughly decomposed, you're at 0 ongoing emissions, but there's a big divot needing to be repaid already. (And that's to say nothing of loss of habitat, arable/liveable land, etc.)
  - m_mueller 10y ago
    I think this misses the point. With that thinking virtually everything produces carbon emissions - the question is how much, and what is it a function of. Hydroelectric (which doesn't just include dams btw.) may have a positive CO2 balance, but it doesn't scale linearly with the amount of electricity you produce from it. The same goes for all other renewables. Battery manufacturing is trickier - it does scale its footprint with number of miles driven (because it has a limited service life), but I'd assume the term has a fairly low multiplier compared to directly burning gasoline to get ahead. So my point is: The devil is in the details, blanket claims like "X is bad because CO2" doesn't really help. "Zero emission" may be a bad approximation, but I'd postulate that if you live in a place with very low fossil energy mix and use a car that has negligible direct and indirect emissions for each mile driven, you can claim "Zero emission" - otherwise the term becomes rather useless.
ollie87 10y ago
Zero emission at the tailpipe. Plus even the most filthy coal power stations are more efficient than your current petrol/diesel car.
codeulike 10y ago
Its easy to buy renewable energy to charge your Tesla if thats what you want to do. http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/ http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/

> zero-emission I wouldn't call emitted-somewhere-else zero-emission. Zero emission is deciding not to take the trip.

by spodek 10y ago

> zero-emission I wouldn't call emitted-somewhere-else zero-emission. Zero emission is deciding not to take the trip.

That depends on your grid. Electricity in quite a few countries is effectively zero emission, thanks largely to hydro and nuclear power, increasingly also solar and wind.

adventured 10y ago
> Electricity in quite a few countries is effectively zero emission Isn't the reality that that is the case with extremely few nations? I'm not aware of more than a few that can claim to be at zero emissions on electricity.
- m_mueller 10y ago
  Found a good source [2] on this and made a spreadsheet, so look for yourself [1]. There's a second sheet attached that shows the countries with below <30% fossil fuel in the electricity mix for a better overview. [1] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16K4gNhy_AN8Eg4Ov3z7pF_dgON1oObkHQ8Px5I73Hvc/pubhtml# https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16K4gNhy_AN8Eg4Ov3z7p... [2] https://www.eia.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/iedindex3.cfm?tid=2&pid=alltypes&aid=12&cid=regions&syid=2008&eyid=2012&unit=BKWH https://www.eia.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/iedindex3.cfm?tid=2&p... Edit: Have a look at Norway - they could burn their own oil cheaply, but they are a bit smarter than that. Noteworthy is also Brazil - before someone comes in and says you need to have a fully developed rich economy to do this. Edit2: Friendlier view link.
scott_karana 10y ago
Hydro isn't exactly zero emission either. What do you think happens when a dam is created, and kills tree life? What do you think the underwater vegetation emits as it decomposes? Sure, once the back filled area is thoroughly decomposed, you're at 0 ongoing emissions, but there's a big divot needing to be repaid already. (And that's to say nothing of loss of habitat, arable/liveable land, etc.)
- m_mueller 10y ago
  I think this misses the point. With that thinking virtually everything produces carbon emissions - the question is how much, and what is it a function of. Hydroelectric (which doesn't just include dams btw.) may have a positive CO2 balance, but it doesn't scale linearly with the amount of electricity you produce from it. The same goes for all other renewables. Battery manufacturing is trickier - it does scale its footprint with number of miles driven (because it has a limited service life), but I'd assume the term has a fairly low multiplier compared to directly burning gasoline to get ahead. So my point is: The devil is in the details, blanket claims like "X is bad because CO2" doesn't really help. "Zero emission" may be a bad approximation, but I'd postulate that if you live in a place with very low fossil energy mix and use a car that has negligible direct and indirect emissions for each mile driven, you can claim "Zero emission" - otherwise the term becomes rather useless.

ollie87 10y ago

Zero emission at the tailpipe. Plus even the most filthy coal power stations are more efficient than your current petrol/diesel car.

codeulike 10y ago

Its easy to buy renewable energy to charge your Tesla if thats what you want to do. http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/ http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/