6 ms·

Why should they? What sort of emissions do electric vehicles have? I suspect you'll say that generating electricity causes emissions, which is only true in some

Why should they? What sort of emissions do electric vehicles have? I suspect you'll say that generating electricity causes emissions, which is only true in some cases

ecnahc515 7y ago
One of the bigger arguments is also in the production itself can be not very eco-friendly, eg: creating the batteries themselves.
- rovr138 7y ago
  That’s not a commute issue though. Not saying it’s okay, but it’s a valid statement.
- georgespencer 7y ago
  You are exactly right. People have a tendency to discount the production of the non-emission-generating thing in the first place. The energy and emissions required to build something like this is non-trivial. It should be mandated that if you want to appeal to green-fingered consumers with your marketing, you have to state the emissions deficit from which your product operates and how many years it would take to recover from it with typical usage.
  - mikepurvis 7y ago
    Okay, I'll play: what is the "emissions deficit" of a small electric scooter? Even combined with mass transit, surely the power consumed is miniscule compared with driving alone in a car, and the car is many times the initial manufacturing cost in metal parts, motors, even batteries. I commute in the summer on a Boosted Board, which uses most of the 99Wh battery to go one way (8km). My electricity in Ontario is largely nuclear and hydro, but say it's the worst case scenario and all the power comes from gas— the emissions from consuming 0.1kWh is ~35g CO2: https://canadianenergyissues.com/ontario-power-stats/ https://canadianenergyissues.com/ontario-power-stats/ https://www.google.com/search?q=240+tons+%2F+602+MWh+in+g+per+99Wh https://www.google.com/search?q=240+tons+%2F+602+MWh+in+g+pe... This is a far cry from what it would be driving that same distance in my Mazda 5, which would be a little under a litre of fuel (21MPG -> 11.2 L/100km), or 2.3kg of CO2, a 65x difference. It's possible you're coming from a place of legitimate care, but honestly your comment sounds a lot like concern trolling to me. If there's anything out there which needs an "emissions deficit" sticker to help dissuade conscientious purchasers, lets start with private automobiles.
    - georgespencer 7y ago
      > what is the "emissions deficit" of a small electric scooter? I'm sure it's unintentional but it's not clear to me what you're asking. So a range of possible answers: 1/ I don't know because they don't tell us what it is. 2/ It's the sum total amount of emissions directly caused by its production divided by the number of units produced. See also: carbon offsetting on planes. 3/ It's a number greater than zero and given that the electric scooter in question does not appear to be obviously replacing a car but walking or cycling, it's a meaningful question to ask. > Even combined with mass transit, surely the power consumed is miniscule compared with driving alone in a car, and the car is many times the initial manufacturing cost in metal parts, motors, even batteries. This is totally true, but I don't think it's anything to do with my point, which is: > It should be mandated that if you want to appeal to green-fingered consumers with your marketing, you have to state the emissions deficit from which your product operates and how many years it would take to recover from it with typical usage. I don't disagree with anything you say about your Boosted Board being better for the environment than your Mazda 5. But it's nothing to do with my point. > but honestly your comment sounds a lot like concern trolling to me. I legitimately care that people are allowed to market goods as being environmentally friendly or "low emissions" without having to substantiate the emissions which go into their manufacture. Especially when they seem to me to be marketed as an alternative to cycling or walking, which seem to be obviously low-emission. > If there's anything out there which needs an "emissions deficit" sticker to help dissuade conscientious purchasers, lets start with private automobiles. Again you're not really arguing the point, but sure, I think this is a good idea (?). Especially for cars marketed as environmentally friendly but which come at a significant creation cost.
- village-idiot 7y ago
  This is true when you compare similar sized vehicles. If an electric scooter is replacing a car, not an unreasonable assumption in the US, then the emissions savings will be massive.
  - loco5niner 7y ago
    > If an electric scooter is replacing a car, not an unreasonable assumption in the US This is an unreasonable assumption.
    - village-idiot 7y ago
      Agree to disagree then.
ravenstine 7y ago
Because most electricity still comes from natural gas and coal. Nuclear energy still produces nuclear waste which has to go somewhere. Unless someone is relying purely on wind or solar, which is rare, they're still creating pollution by-proxy when they're charging their electric vehicle. You can't call it "zero emissions" when the emissions are just out of sight and out of mind.
- droussel 7y ago
  I live in Quebec which is 100% hydro, thus clean.
  - EpicEng 7y ago
    If only the entire world's population lived in Quebec.
    - v64 7y ago
      Moving Day would be nuts.
- atemerev 7y ago
  Nuclear waste is not emissions, it doesn’t contribute to climate change and is low in volume. It still contains enough energy to be reused in breeder reactors (this is why long-term waste burial projects are meaningless — we’ll dig in back in less than 100 years and use as fuel).
EpicEng 7y ago
>I suspect you'll say that generating electricity causes emissions, which is only true in some cases I think you meant "the majority of cases".

Why should they? What sort of emissions do electric vehicles have? I suspect you'll say that generating electricity causes emissions, which is only true in some cases

ecnahc515 7y ago

One of the bigger arguments is also in the production itself can be not very eco-friendly, eg: creating the batteries themselves.

rovr138 7y ago
That’s not a commute issue though. Not saying it’s okay, but it’s a valid statement.
georgespencer 7y ago
You are exactly right. People have a tendency to discount the production of the non-emission-generating thing in the first place. The energy and emissions required to build something like this is non-trivial. It should be mandated that if you want to appeal to green-fingered consumers with your marketing, you have to state the emissions deficit from which your product operates and how many years it would take to recover from it with typical usage.
- mikepurvis 7y ago
  Okay, I'll play: what is the "emissions deficit" of a small electric scooter? Even combined with mass transit, surely the power consumed is miniscule compared with driving alone in a car, and the car is many times the initial manufacturing cost in metal parts, motors, even batteries. I commute in the summer on a Boosted Board, which uses most of the 99Wh battery to go one way (8km). My electricity in Ontario is largely nuclear and hydro, but say it's the worst case scenario and all the power comes from gas— the emissions from consuming 0.1kWh is ~35g CO2: https://canadianenergyissues.com/ontario-power-stats/ https://canadianenergyissues.com/ontario-power-stats/ https://www.google.com/search?q=240+tons+%2F+602+MWh+in+g+per+99Wh https://www.google.com/search?q=240+tons+%2F+602+MWh+in+g+pe... This is a far cry from what it would be driving that same distance in my Mazda 5, which would be a little under a litre of fuel (21MPG -> 11.2 L/100km), or 2.3kg of CO2, a 65x difference. It's possible you're coming from a place of legitimate care, but honestly your comment sounds a lot like concern trolling to me. If there's anything out there which needs an "emissions deficit" sticker to help dissuade conscientious purchasers, lets start with private automobiles.
  - georgespencer 7y ago
    > what is the "emissions deficit" of a small electric scooter? I'm sure it's unintentional but it's not clear to me what you're asking. So a range of possible answers: 1/ I don't know because they don't tell us what it is. 2/ It's the sum total amount of emissions directly caused by its production divided by the number of units produced. See also: carbon offsetting on planes. 3/ It's a number greater than zero and given that the electric scooter in question does not appear to be obviously replacing a car but walking or cycling, it's a meaningful question to ask. > Even combined with mass transit, surely the power consumed is miniscule compared with driving alone in a car, and the car is many times the initial manufacturing cost in metal parts, motors, even batteries. This is totally true, but I don't think it's anything to do with my point, which is: > It should be mandated that if you want to appeal to green-fingered consumers with your marketing, you have to state the emissions deficit from which your product operates and how many years it would take to recover from it with typical usage. I don't disagree with anything you say about your Boosted Board being better for the environment than your Mazda 5. But it's nothing to do with my point. > but honestly your comment sounds a lot like concern trolling to me. I legitimately care that people are allowed to market goods as being environmentally friendly or "low emissions" without having to substantiate the emissions which go into their manufacture. Especially when they seem to me to be marketed as an alternative to cycling or walking, which seem to be obviously low-emission. > If there's anything out there which needs an "emissions deficit" sticker to help dissuade conscientious purchasers, lets start with private automobiles. Again you're not really arguing the point, but sure, I think this is a good idea (?). Especially for cars marketed as environmentally friendly but which come at a significant creation cost.
village-idiot 7y ago
This is true when you compare similar sized vehicles. If an electric scooter is replacing a car, not an unreasonable assumption in the US, then the emissions savings will be massive.
- loco5niner 7y ago
  > If an electric scooter is replacing a car, not an unreasonable assumption in the US This is an unreasonable assumption.
  - village-idiot 7y ago
    Agree to disagree then.

ravenstine 7y ago

Because most electricity still comes from natural gas and coal. Nuclear energy still produces nuclear waste which has to go somewhere. Unless someone is relying purely on wind or solar, which is rare, they're still creating pollution by-proxy when they're charging their electric vehicle. You can't call it "zero emissions" when the emissions are just out of sight and out of mind.

droussel 7y ago
I live in Quebec which is 100% hydro, thus clean.
- EpicEng 7y ago
  If only the entire world's population lived in Quebec.
  - v64 7y ago
    Moving Day would be nuts.
atemerev 7y ago
Nuclear waste is not emissions, it doesn’t contribute to climate change and is low in volume. It still contains enough energy to be reused in breeder reactors (this is why long-term waste burial projects are meaningless — we’ll dig in back in less than 100 years and use as fuel).

EpicEng 7y ago

>I suspect you'll say that generating electricity causes emissions, which is only true in some cases I think you meant "the majority of cases".