3 ms·
>mining, smelting, etc the chassis Perhaps chassis costs (meaning carbon costs of making the chassis) are roughly comparable between ICE and EVs, so I suppose
by natch 5y ago
>mining, smelting, etc the chassis
Perhaps chassis costs (meaning carbon costs of making the chassis) are roughly comparable between ICE and EVs, so I suppose there was no need to focus on this in the report.
>and engine parts, it seems that those are acquired
Tesla motors are wound and made from scratch from raw materials on site. This data point would not be in favor of ICE cars, for the reasons you mention. Batteries on the other hand do increase the carbon cost and that's why EVs start off behind ICE cars at the start of their lifetime, catching up in terms of lower carbon used only after some period of use.
>Finally, the 24.8MPG number they cite is pretty large
They go by real world consumption, not manufacturer claims. Remember VW Dieselgate? Credibility is not a given in ICE circles. But you have a good point it's probably more about the EU/US difference here with US cars being gas hogs, due to size and possibly the impact of different emissions equipment in some states.
>Regardless, the discussion wasn't about replacing an ICE car with an electric
OK. It was one line, not so much a discussion, but it did come from you to be fair, so although I didn't read it that way, you get to decide. Still, I believe the comparison makes most sense against an EV, although it may not have been what you had in mind. If one cares enough about carbon to even make the comparison, and to try to defend the position that driving an older car is better for the environment, it doesn't make much sense to ignore the cars that are indeed better.
>clear history of greatly exaggerating various good news.
SpaceX and Tesla are legitimately doing great as far as I can see. Which good news were you talking about?
- tsimionescu 5y agoI fully agree that, IF you buy a new car, you should buy an EV, at least in most places (in my country, EV infrastructure is really behind, so EVs are almost entirely relegated to city cars). My point was more about whether you should change your current ICE with a new car, and even more so, I was defending someone who was caring for their old ICE instead of buying a new ICE for 20 years (if you look further up the comment thread, this was the discussion I was chiming in on). In the EU at least, there has been constant pressure not to do this on environmental grounds, and I believe this has been misguided (perhaps EVs will indeed change that). > SpaceX and Tesla are legitimately doing great as far as I can see. Which good news were you talking about? They are doing good, but they constantly promise far more - Tesla Cybertruck, Tesla Semi, "FSD" (Elon promised in ~2018 that "very soon" you would be able to let your Tesla work as a robotaxi when you don't need it and recoup its cost within a year from all the money it would make!), solar tiles. SpaceX has similarly claimed fantastic schedules that they are far from, fantastic price cuts for orbital flight (they claim Spaceship will be at least 50x times cheaper than the cheapest option so far), that they will offer commercial earth-to-earth space flights in the near future, and that they will maintain a fleet of 40k satellites, larger than all the current number of satellites combined. SpaceX also has a history of lying to the FAA and EPA about their launch schedules and environmental risks (not talking about CO2 here, but rocket debris in protected swamp lands).