30 ms·
Fossil fuel cars get a huge discount for causing pollution and health problems. If other countries subsidized the damage that fossil fuel cars do as much as the
by throwaway12iii 8y ago
Fossil fuel cars get a huge discount for causing pollution and health problems. If other countries subsidized the damage that fossil fuel cars do as much as the USA then I'm sure there would be similar adoption as in the USA too.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- merpnderp 8y agoA brand new Ford Raptor will clean the air in most cities. You'd have to drive that 465HP fuel guzzling toy over 3,887 miles to equal the particulate output of 30 minutes of yard work with a 2 stroke engine. So not as much of a discount as you might have thought.
- mavhc 8y agoIt removes CO2? magic
- jacquesm 8y agoHe wrote 'particulate'.
- wongarsu 8y agoNot CO2, but particulate matter [1]: basically tiny solid particles caused by exhaust, tires etc that stay suspended in the air. They are linked to a range of health issues in the concentrations found in many urban cities. When you hear about cities banning diesel cars or ICE cars or old cars, that's a measure to reduce suspended particulate matter, not CO2. But luckily unlike CO2, particulate matter can be caught by a HEPA air filter. 1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particulates https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particulates
- torpfactory 8y agoIt is true that many cars will clean the air of particulate matter these days. That is the only kind of pollution that a modern ICE car will remove, but it is not the only kind of pollution worth talking about.... CO2, NOx and others are just-as, if not more important and your air filter won't do jack diddly for those.
- microcolonel 8y agoNOx exhaust aftertreatment systems are standard, so a compliant vehicle today will have considerably less NOx in exhaust as well. As for CO2, well, it's not a small chunk, but cars and light trucks account for less than half of transportation sector CO2 emissions; and the transport sector accounts for about 28% of overall CO2 emissions. It's not silly to reduce CO2 emissions in light trucks and cars, but at most reducing those sources would only cut about 15% of U.S. CO2.
- bronson 8y ago"only 15%"? That's huge!
- microcolonel 8y agoKeep in mind, this is in a country where light trucks and SUVs account for a huge proportion of personal vehicles, and where the average age of a car on the road is about twelve years. As the window of vehicle years shifts further, you can expect that proportion to shrink.
- londons_explore 8y agoCitation for exhausts having significantly less NOx than city air?
- microcolonel 8y ago> Citation for exhausts having significantly less NOx than city air? I absolutely, unequivocally, did not say that.
- cannabis_sam 8y agoIt's LITERALLY killing the planet we all depend on, yet you can always depend on car fanatics to justify their pollution. Seriously, sell your car and take the bus.
- dsfyu404ed 8y agoWhile fossil fuel vehicle prices to not account for the long term damage they do to an environment they get anything but a discount for causing pollution. There's thousands of dollars of equipment used to mitigate environmental impact that is included in the sticker price of every new fossil fuel vehicle. Calling that a "discount for causing pollution" when their cost is increased by a need to reduce pollution is absurd. Edit: Lol, down-voted for pointing out that ICE cars are not in fact discounted because they pollute more. The Reddit is strong here today.
- francisofascii 8y agomitigate, but nowhere near eliminate
- YetAnotherNick 8y ago+1. So many people confuse CO2 with pollution. CO2 emission is not a pollution and causes near zero negative effects to human directly in the current concentration or in the most pessimistic prediction for future.
- juliendorra 8y agoStudies show that CO2 reduce cognitive capacities at common indoor level https://thinkprogress.org/exclusive-elevated-co2-levels-directly-affect-human-cognition-new-harvard-study-shows-2748e7378941/ https://thinkprogress.org/exclusive-elevated-co2-levels-dire...
- creato 8y ago> Calling that a "discount for causing pollution" when their cost is increased by a need to reduce pollution is absurd. What if the added costs to ICE vehicles are less than the environmental costs they incur? I'm not saying that's definitely the case or not, but just because ICEs spend money on mitigation doesn't mean they are not still getting a subsidy. You are acting like it is obviously wrong because ICEs do some things to mitigate pollution, which is clearly not obvious.
- dang 8y ago
- sbov 8y agoCars in Norway have a CO2 tax. But EVs get breaks on things not related to CO2 in Norway. According to Tesla's website, you don't have to pay VAT. https://www.tesla.com/no_NO/support/incentives?redirect=no https://www.tesla.com/no_NO/support/incentives?redirect=no Edit: from an old reddit post, it seems like there's a VAT, weight, engine, CO2, N0x tax. In theory, in an 'even playing field', I'm guessing EVs should be paying VAT, weight, and engine taxes. Not completely sure which of these they pay (or if the list is even correct).
- tomcam 8y agoWhat kind of health problems? I was under the impression that the emission standards for the last 40 years or so have been quite stringent.
- thinkcontext 8y agoAir pollution, of which transportation is a huge contributor, kills tens of thousands per years in the US. There are many other effects like asthma which afflict millions. Transportation is certainly a lot cleaner than it was but there's still a lot of improvement that can be done. Below is a link to a basic overview, it can give you hints on where to dig if you are interested in specific studies. https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-vehicles/vehicles-air-pollution-and-human-health/cars-trucks-air-pollution https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-vehicles/vehicles-air-pollution...
- erikpukinskis 8y agoBrake pads are pretty bad, in addition to the auto emissions. Electric vehicles help a lot there too. Are there brake pad emission standards? I don’t know.
- baroffoos 8y agoI just looked up the brake pad emissions. Pretty scary stuff but it seems like it would be trivially solved by some form of containment around the brake and the disc that captures all of the dust. Probably needs laws to enforce it before car makers would add such a thing.
- 05 8y agoRegenerative braking sounds more useful than dust containment (not to say dust containment can’t be cost effective).
- rimliu 8y agoFossil fuels are heavily taxed in Europe, it’s not even funny.
- heyjudy 8y agoExternalities aren't paid by the perpetrator in America because they don't truly believe in personal responsibility.