5 ms·
That is true, in many parts of the US it isn't beneficial (for the environment) to replace your vehicle with an EV because of how you produce electricity. In o
by lillecarl 5y ago
That is true, in many parts of the US it isn't beneficial (for the environment) to replace your vehicle with an EV because of how you produce electricity.
In other parts of the world where we can rely on hydro and nuclear for base load and top that off with mostly renewables (and some bad electricity from other countries) an EV purchase would be a net positive within a couple of years if you average 10000km/y.
We're all in situations where our ability to affect emissions are way different, the environment is a political game and some (countries/regions) have made different decisions that have paid of differently.
- seanmcdirmid 5y agoCoal is just what, 20% of the USA's energy mix now? Granted, there are places where coal is much more in use, but the plants are probably more efficient and better at pollution control than a bunch of individual internal combustion engines. Additionally, your vehicle would automatically benefit from any electricity production upgrades (e.g. moving from coal to wind over 10 years), that won't be possible if you run with an ICE. I would love to get an EV but I don't drive enough to justify one. The last time I got gas was a month ago.
- lillecarl 5y agoThe point was replacing an existing functional vehicle in 2021. It would benefit from upgrades to electricity production indeed, but it's a slow progression, so holding off until the vehicle is to be decommissioned might be a net positive. I believe we agree with eachother.
- seanmcdirmid 5y agoDefinitely. There is no sense in upgrading your current vehicle, but it might make sense for your next upgrade (which is my plan, but it might be a decade or so until my current car wears out). There are other reasons not to go EV, like if you live in an apartment or have to deal with on street parking. That issue will take a long time to sort out.