2 ms·
Admittedly a biased source, but their reasoning seems sensible: https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-greener-think-getting-greener-look-manufacturing/ https://www.te
by SEJeff 8y ago
Admittedly a biased source, but their reasoning seems sensible: https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-greener-think-getting-greener-look-manufacturing/ https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-greener-think-getting-greene...
As the cost of solar + wind + static storage drop, the more renewable energy sources are used to power factories. The more renewable source used to power factories, the greater the impact on the vehicle. In this, Tesla leads the way.
- _red 8y agoIt is helpful that the author quantified some of the issues, however there are many factors involved: * Does the authors CO2 estimates for battery production actually include "mining" or just "assembly"? From reading it, it seems to just include assembly of final components into a battery. * Moving tons of rare-earth minerals from Point A to Point B for battery production requires yet more CO2 output. * Wind + Solar still requires massive batteries somewhere, which still requires massive mining operations. Further, with $40 shale oil now a reality, its getting harder to make the economic case.
- brohee 8y agoWhich rare earth are you talking about, and in which quantity?
- _red 8y agoThose who really care about the environment, know that reuse and recycling are the best approaches. So, you could buy a 15-yr old Toyota or Hyundai, since that carbon footprint already exist. You shouldn't be needlessly creating more deadly CO2. Further, in terms of energy density: solar, wind, coal, natural gas all pack far less joules per gram than petroleum. These are inconvenient truths that unfortunately conflict with the slick marketing messages of your luxury golf cart salesman.