4 ms·

Here's a couple links, one a paper from McGill tying green energy and political power, and an article from National Geographic saying "Two-thirds of young adult

Here's a couple links, one a paper from McGill tying green energy and political power, and an article from National Geographic saying "Two-thirds of young adults (aged 18 to 34) say they’re inclined to vote for a political candidate who supports cutting greenhouse gas emissions and increasing financial incentives for renewable energy". https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629617303468 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221462961... https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/great-energy-challenge/2014/poll-finds-generation-gap-on-energy-issues-as-millennials-voice-climate-concerns/ https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/great-energy-...

bmitc 6y ago
Thank you the links. I will read them in more detail, but at first glance, they don't address what I am asking. If you look at an EV versus ICE car in isolation, the EV is definitely greener. However, if we look at the whole system and process of electric energy production, gas production, battery production and disposal, etc., I have not seen analyses that compare which is actually greener. I would love to be pointed to this, as I have tried to find it! As far as I can tell from my searching, they are essentially overall the same, except that the effects are spread around in time and place. Now, I can assume that there is a tacit argument that putting more electric vehicles on the road increases the demand for clean energy because electric vehicles tax electricity production heavier, which is not that green now. However, are electric cars really the primary driving factor for clean electricity production? Actual clean energy production is obviously extremely important. Also, I don't understand how continually building more and more cars gets us to a cleaner future. I imagine whenever self-driving cars arrive, we'll all just be sitting in packed streets. That doesn't feel necessarily cleaner or futuristic.
- bryanlarsen 6y ago
  ? I have not seen analyses that compare which is actually greener. I would love to be pointed to this, https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/cleaner-cars-cradle-grave https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/cleaner-cars-cradle-grave In summary, it takes about 18 months of driving before an the reduced gasoline emissions compensates for the increased manufacturing emissions. > I imagine whenever self-driving cars arrive, we'll all just be sitting in packed streets. Agreed. So many people think that self-driving cars are going to reduce congestion, an argument I don't buy. They'll make congestion much worse IMO.
  - bmitc 6y ago
    Thanks for the link! That's the first time I've seen an analysis like that in terms of the time it takes for a crossover event. It'll take longer to read through their full report. Although, it does exclude the environmental impact of the battery disposal problem, at least in the summary article. And yea, I'm not looking forward to the self-driving "utopia". I feel it's solving the wrong problems and will create wholly new problems.
- yazaddaruvala 6y ago
  I've previously heard Elon answer this question. The biggest blocker with reducing Carbon emissions was the whataboutism of consumer car use (i.e. decentralized carbon emissions). Migrating all consumer cars to electric gets rid of that whataboutism. Now we can focus on the real Carbon emitters: 1. There are few car manufacturers, there are many car users. Its easy to scrutinize and regulate car manufacturers through Carbon credits, or some future system so they offset /eliminate the Carbon emission. Similar efforts, like a Carbon tax on gasoline, were shot down previously (in general; there were some passed) for "penalizing consumers" (i.e. no longer an insurmountable issue because mass migration to electric cars are now seen as inevitable). 2. Electricity production is relatively consolidated (solar's decentralization is already a move toward "green energy" so I'll skip its impact). Given the consolidation of energy production, its again easy to use regulation or consumer bargaining power to sift production to "green energy". In conclusion, while there is valid debate about "Are car factories and electricity production really carbon beneficial compared with ICE cars?", there is no debate that "having solved the decentralized carbon emissions problem (i.e. previously a technology limitation), the next step to improve centralized, large scale factories and electricity production is simple (i.e. an ROI calculation for those companies - e.g. given a factory is already in Texas and active during daylight hours, is it cheaper to produce cars using solar?)".
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- pletsch 6y ago
  My mistake, I misunderstood your question, I was showing that there is more of a movement in general towards shifting to green energy. I'm not aware of any studies that show a comparison of emissions.

bmitc 6y ago

Thank you the links. I will read them in more detail, but at first glance, they don't address what I am asking. If you look at an EV versus ICE car in isolation, the EV is definitely greener. However, if we look at the whole system and process of electric energy production, gas production, battery production and disposal, etc., I have not seen analyses that compare which is actually greener. I would love to be pointed to this, as I have tried to find it! As far as I can tell from my searching, they are essentially overall the same, except that the effects are spread around in time and place. Now, I can assume that there is a tacit argument that putting more electric vehicles on the road increases the demand for clean energy because electric vehicles tax electricity production heavier, which is not that green now. However, are electric cars really the primary driving factor for clean electricity production? Actual clean energy production is obviously extremely important. Also, I don't understand how continually building more and more cars gets us to a cleaner future. I imagine whenever self-driving cars arrive, we'll all just be sitting in packed streets. That doesn't feel necessarily cleaner or futuristic.

bryanlarsen 6y ago
? I have not seen analyses that compare which is actually greener. I would love to be pointed to this, https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/cleaner-cars-cradle-grave https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/cleaner-cars-cradle-grave In summary, it takes about 18 months of driving before an the reduced gasoline emissions compensates for the increased manufacturing emissions. > I imagine whenever self-driving cars arrive, we'll all just be sitting in packed streets. Agreed. So many people think that self-driving cars are going to reduce congestion, an argument I don't buy. They'll make congestion much worse IMO.
- bmitc 6y ago
  Thanks for the link! That's the first time I've seen an analysis like that in terms of the time it takes for a crossover event. It'll take longer to read through their full report. Although, it does exclude the environmental impact of the battery disposal problem, at least in the summary article. And yea, I'm not looking forward to the self-driving "utopia". I feel it's solving the wrong problems and will create wholly new problems.
yazaddaruvala 6y ago
I've previously heard Elon answer this question. The biggest blocker with reducing Carbon emissions was the whataboutism of consumer car use (i.e. decentralized carbon emissions). Migrating all consumer cars to electric gets rid of that whataboutism. Now we can focus on the real Carbon emitters: 1. There are few car manufacturers, there are many car users. Its easy to scrutinize and regulate car manufacturers through Carbon credits, or some future system so they offset /eliminate the Carbon emission. Similar efforts, like a Carbon tax on gasoline, were shot down previously (in general; there were some passed) for "penalizing consumers" (i.e. no longer an insurmountable issue because mass migration to electric cars are now seen as inevitable). 2. Electricity production is relatively consolidated (solar's decentralization is already a move toward "green energy" so I'll skip its impact). Given the consolidation of energy production, its again easy to use regulation or consumer bargaining power to sift production to "green energy". In conclusion, while there is valid debate about "Are car factories and electricity production really carbon beneficial compared with ICE cars?", there is no debate that "having solved the decentralized carbon emissions problem (i.e. previously a technology limitation), the next step to improve centralized, large scale factories and electricity production is simple (i.e. an ROI calculation for those companies - e.g. given a factory is already in Texas and active during daylight hours, is it cheaper to produce cars using solar?)".
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
pletsch 6y ago
My mistake, I misunderstood your question, I was showing that there is more of a movement in general towards shifting to green energy. I'm not aware of any studies that show a comparison of emissions.