3 ms·
Those numbers are absolutely, sickeningly staggering. 1 litre of petrol produces about 2.3 kg CO2. That means, a bitcoin transaction is the same as burning 163
by NamTaf 6y ago
Those numbers are absolutely, sickeningly staggering.
1 litre of petrol produces about 2.3 kg CO2. That means, a bitcoin transaction is the same as burning 163 litres of petrol. Absolutely insane.
I decided to do some more numbers. It means that driving a Tesla for 25.31 km produces as much CO2 as burning 1 L of fuel from a CO2 equivalence point of view. Put differently, Teslas get 3.95 L per 100 km from a CO2 equivalence point of view. Compare that with, say, a Mazda 6 which apparently uses 9.8 L per 100 km from a very quick search.
From a carbon emissions standpoint, Teslas are about 2.5x as efficient. Reasonable, to be sure, but not the order-of-magnitude difference I might have guessed if I had to take a stab in the dark.
- bildung 6y agoThe electrive article even cites a very optimistic study that assumes a high share of renewables to fill the Tesla. Other studies see quite more modest gains of EVs, e.g. https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/comparative-life-cycle-greenhouse-gas-emissions-over-ten-year-lifetime-of-an-average-mid-size-car-by-powertrain-2018 https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/comparative-l... Edit: In contrast, the gains of public transit vs. individual car commutes are > 7x per km driven, before renewables: http://www.mobilitaet-in-deutschland.de/pdf/infas_Vortrag_ifeuWorkshop.pdf http://www.mobilitaet-in-deutschland.de/pdf/infas_Vortrag_if... , page 18 (German source, sorry, "Bus" == bus, "Bahn" == train)