8 ms·
"Cars will exist and it's way better to have them electric than gasoline." If we're talking about direct air pollution in cities I agree. For climate change,
by ElKrist 7y ago
"Cars will exist and it's way better to have them electric than gasoline."
If we're talking about direct air pollution in cities I agree.
For climate change, I mostly disagree:
With an electrical car you're starting with a CO2 debt for the production of the battery.
Then, if you want to offset this debt, you have to use the car frequently and be in an area where the electricity production does not generate much CO2. There are not many areas like this yet (France, Sweden being the famous examples).
- chewz 7y ago> If we're talking about direct air pollution in cities I agree. What about PM2.5? Do EVs do not use breaks and tires?
- snovv_crash 7y agoRegenerative braking cuts these down a lot.
- raaaaraaaa2 7y agobrakes ? rarely I am sure that tires (in the city where is majority of cars electric) will not cause PM2.5 mayhem :) Also VW prepares this technology : https://www.motor1.com/news/346653/brake-dust-particle-filter-spied/ https://www.motor1.com/news/346653/brake-dust-particle-filte...
- rootusrootus 7y agoTires generate a lot more particulate matter than brakes do, like 95% or so.
- kwhitefoot 7y agoTyres yes, brakes not so much. The brakes are needed only to come to a complete stop, most normal braking is handled by running the motor as a generator to dump the energy back into the battery.
- VBprogrammer 7y agoI sometimes wish people who make this argument would go sit in a sealed room with a running electrical car and then a running petrol or diesel car and tell me which one was the better experience.
- chewz 7y agoI would prefer sitting in a sealed room with my bike.. Always something to tinker with.
- rwmurrayVT 7y agoI think the argument here though is sit in the car with the vehicle's emissions from non-existent to end of life. I do agree that point-source emissions of the electricity being generated is a big advantage. Nothing sucks more than being exposed to vehicle emissions in traffic/city/etc.
- rootusrootus 7y agoWell, to be fair, you need to be sitting in the room during the production of the battery, too ;-)
- ecpottinger 7y agoAs long as you also sit beside the smelter that makes the metal for the engine, drive shaft and gearing.
- rootusrootus 7y agoSure. I'd even allow that you could share that experience with all the steel being smelted for both cars.
- VBprogrammer 7y agoThe pollution from the production of the battery, the steel and the aluminium can occur well away from major population centres. They are centralised and immobile so there is a much better chance that in the future they can utilise more efficient methods or at least capture some of their emissions.
- Arnt 7y agoThe only report I've read about that side issue assumed that producing an ICE/petrol engine and transmission caused no CO₂ emission, or the authors just forgot. Do you know anything about that? What is the CO₂ cost of producing a typical battery+electric engine compared to that of producing a typical transmission, ICE engine and the minor ICE-related parts that electric cars don't need?
- bennyelv 7y agoCitation needed. The literature I've seen suggests that an electric vehicle easily makes back any deficit quite early in its life. An easily digestable version of this calculation is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RhtiPefVzM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RhtiPefVzM
- dogma1138 7y agoNo, it doesn't make up the deficit, it does end up slightly better than a ICE one after the projected life cycle of 12 years. The problem is that unlike ICE cars Teslas are much less likely to be reused for 12 years, as far as other EVs go it's still an open question. If the only two options are an ICE or an EV, it's likely better to have an EV despite the likelihood of PCO2E being underestimated in the supply chain especially when it comes to rare earths. But if the option is to have an EV or no car and use public transportation or communal transport the latter is always better.
- jacobush 7y agoIf anything, electric cars have the potential to last incredibly long. Combine with composite or aluminum body and the body won't rust away on an otherwise perfectly fine car.
- vvanders 7y agoYeah, I'm confused as well. Generally in a 10+ year old car you're looking at possible transmissions issues(or engine depending on the brand, hello Subaru). We're just about to crack 100k mi and 5 years on our EV with no sign of stopping. From a power train perspective swapping motors is dead simple and you have no transmission. I still see good capacity at ~91k. There are electronics/accessories that will fail but that's no different on an ICE.
- rootusrootus 7y agoAnecdata aside, the average car gets taken off the road around 11-12 years due to body rot, not drievtrain problems. EVs are unlikely to be immune to that.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- bni 7y ago> With an electrical car you're starting with a CO2 debt for the production of the battery. In what way is this bigger than the production of the many components needed in a gasoline car? Internal combustion engine (as an example) is not exactly CO2 natural to manufacture either.
- dsfyu404ed 7y ago>In what way is this bigger than the production of the many components needed in a gasoline car? Internal combustion engine (as an example) is not exactly CO2 natural to manufacture either. He literally said "for the production of the battery". Don't build a strawman. It's pretty well accepted that batteries are environmentally dirty to make. An ICE drivetrain and electric drivetrain sans motor are both big lumps of metal. I'm not sure what the difference is between the carbon footprint per pound of copper vs steel (both cars are gonna have a lot of aluminum but I'm assuming they're within an order of magnitude of even). In either case the manufacturing carbon footprint it pennies compared to the energy required to move the damn thing its whole life (except in the obvious case of the electric an in an area where electricity is low/zero cabon). I suspect the EV is going to be just barely more carbon heavy to manufacture simply because tech is at a point where the EV needs to place a much higher priority on weight (because it has the heavy battery to compensate for by being light everywhere else and reducing weight increases range) and that priority will result in different part choices throughout the car and that is where the extra carbon will come from (e.g. forged aluminum control arms and rims vs stamped steel). Obviously the EV is far superior to the ICE vehicle in operation so it would make that back quickly.
- bni 7y agoI also was talking about the _production_ of the component. Not sure what you mean. In any case if there is some comparison made between CO2 footprint of _production_ of an EV vs gasoline car, I would love to read that.
- bni 7y agoThere was some info in Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_aspects_of_the_electric_car#Environmental_impact_of_manufacturing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_aspects_of_the_e... So production CO2 impact is bigger (no only because of the battery) but total lifecycle is somewhat less than gasoline. Best option is obviously no car produced.
- jason46 7y agoAlso, what about disposing the battery when it reaches its end of life.