4 ms·

This isn't limited to EV's. I drive a 20 year old car, my local government is pushing for me to buy a newer one "cos emissions". Which is ridiculous - I drive

by throwaway22032 5y ago

This isn't limited to EV's. I drive a 20 year old car, my local government is pushing for me to buy a newer one "cos emissions". Which is ridiculous - I drive it infrequently enough that the cost of just making the body of a new car and nothing else would outweigh the savings. The endgame seems to basically be that I move out of the city, which would be a massive own goal emissions/energy wise because it's far more costly for me to bop around on my own land miles away from services than it is for me to use my car once or twice a week whilst taking public transport most of the time. Perfect is the enemy of the good.

snarf21 5y ago
This isn't about you specifically. They want old cars to get scrapped so the average emissions goes down even further even quicker. They won't want your car to end up in the hands of someone who will drive it A LOT. Each EV sold is one less ICE sold. The goal is a market of lower emission used cars.
- throwaway22032 5y ago
  Except my car only has about another 5-10T of CO2 in it before everything fails anyway. This makes no sense, the current set of EV's aren't built to last much longer than ICE cars do.
  - outworlder 5y ago
    They will definitely outlast ICE vehicles - except for the battery. We need a better story on that.
    - aliher1911 5y ago
      When people say electric car will outlast ICE what do they mean exactly? I'm driving 10 y.o. Honda and with my usage I think rubber and plastic trims will fall apart and the body would rust much sooner than its engine or gearbox will fail. All the parts like upholstery, suspension wear as much on electric as on ICE I would think. No one replaces those parts, does it mean you'll be driving your electric car till your sit falls through the rusted floor but the engine still runs smooth?
    - AngryData 5y ago
      In the rust belt I find that doubtful, bodies and suspension will rot out before a properly maintained ICE fails. That might be different in dry areas though.
lm28469 5y ago
> I drive it infrequently enough that the cost of just making the body of a new car and nothing else would outweigh the savings. Even trashing your working ICE car to buy an EV is a net negative if your car is still running fine. Unless you drive a _lot_, the least polluting car you can get is the one you already have. And that's not even talking about the energy sources used to produce the energy to charge the EV.... What we're witnessing is the last creation of capitalism, aka "green capitalism", but it's still about mindlessly consuming, you just get to feel good about it regardless of the reality. > For example, a typical medium sized family car will create around 24 tonnes of CO2 during its life cycle, while an electric vehicle (EV) will produce around 18 tonnes over its life. For a battery EV, 46% of its total carbon footprint is generated at the factory, before it has travelled a single mile. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjThe-p_r32AhXTUOUKHWiBApwQFnoECAIQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zemo.org.uk%2Fassets%2Fworkingdocuments%2FMC-P-11-15a%2520Lifecycle%2520emissions%2520report.pdf&usg=AOvVaw13Rs9JPCTO2aPdRN1SjKTZ https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c... https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjThe-p_r32AhXTUOUKHWiBApwQFnoECAcQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.acea.auto%2Ffigure%2Fco2-emissions-from-car-production-in-eu%2F&usg=AOvVaw2GJouvy8gSANxBKQ2o0Yac https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...
- throwaway22032 5y ago
  Right. My car has 100g/km CO2 emissions. I'd need to drive 10000km or 6500mi to emit a ton of carbon. But that's like, loads. I use the car for occasional 10-20 mile drives to DIY stores or whatever. I'd need to do that every day for a year to even get close to 1t. For a new car we're talking 10x that, at minimum.
  - fomine3 5y ago
    That's why tax should be done for fuel.
    - throwaway22032 5y ago
      In the UK it is, we pay something like $8-9 per US gallon.
digitallyfree 5y ago
This isn't limited to cars either, but rather many "green" purchases in general. I remember one of my professors in an environmental studies course talking about people replacing all the CFL bulbs in their home with LED ones when they came out, citing energy efficiency reasons. However, if you look at the manufacturing process of the LED bulbs and the disposal of the CFLs, the resulting environmental cost is greater than the power savings attributed to the LEDs (embodied energy/emissions). Obviously Marketing will downplay this impact as they want people to buy the new bulbs and feel good about helping the planet. The same goes for buying items made of recycled materials, a more power-efficient computer, and so forth. That's great - if you actually need the new item. If you are getting the replacement solely for environmental reasons you have to consider the impact of producing the new item and disposing of the old one before making that call.
- yardie 5y ago
  Most CFL bulbs for the home were total garbage. The colors were limited and the light was harsh. CFLs in the E26 bulb format ran too hot and the bulb electronic ballasts either smoked out or occasionally caught on fire. My country, France, banned incandescent bulbs early on. The CFL replacements were poor. The LED replacements that followed were significantly better.
- robocat 5y ago
  > LED bulbs and the disposal of the CFLs, the resulting environmental cost is greater than the power savings The CFD manufacture and disposal cost are sunken costs - you shouldn't include those in most calculations. Counter-intuitively for high use situations, the longer the CFD has left to live the more obvious it is to change it sooner to save $ and the environment. Assuming ① cost in dollars is proportional to environmental cost (edit: for both electricity and LED bulb), ② electricity costs $0.10 per kWh, ③ LED bulbs live as long as CFD bulbs, ④ LED bulb uses 7W whereas CFD uses 14W for the same lumen output, then if CFD has 5000 hours left, you can save $3.50 of electricity. If cost of LED is reasonably less than $3.50, it is obvious it makes sense to replace CFD with LED. If the bulb would never need to be replaced (examples: very low usage; you are moving out soon; or house is going to be demolished before bulb is replaced) then it may make sense to leave a CFD in place. The price of the LED is an investment with a payback period, so if you can't afford it or you have better returns for that investment elsewhere then you shouldn't replace the CFD. If your electricity comes from your own renewables, then the calculation is different again. Although note that in most countries nearly 100% of your reduced electricity usage will result in a nearly 100% reduction in non-renewables like gas or coal (even if your country is say 80% renewables). Marginal generation and usage matters. If you can find a better source than your professor, I would be interested.

snarf21 5y ago

This isn't about you specifically. They want old cars to get scrapped so the average emissions goes down even further even quicker. They won't want your car to end up in the hands of someone who will drive it A LOT. Each EV sold is one less ICE sold. The goal is a market of lower emission used cars.

throwaway22032 5y ago
Except my car only has about another 5-10T of CO2 in it before everything fails anyway. This makes no sense, the current set of EV's aren't built to last much longer than ICE cars do.
- outworlder 5y ago
  They will definitely outlast ICE vehicles - except for the battery. We need a better story on that.
  - aliher1911 5y ago
    When people say electric car will outlast ICE what do they mean exactly? I'm driving 10 y.o. Honda and with my usage I think rubber and plastic trims will fall apart and the body would rust much sooner than its engine or gearbox will fail. All the parts like upholstery, suspension wear as much on electric as on ICE I would think. No one replaces those parts, does it mean you'll be driving your electric car till your sit falls through the rusted floor but the engine still runs smooth?
  - AngryData 5y ago
    In the rust belt I find that doubtful, bodies and suspension will rot out before a properly maintained ICE fails. That might be different in dry areas though.

lm28469 5y ago

> I drive it infrequently enough that the cost of just making the body of a new car and nothing else would outweigh the savings. Even trashing your working ICE car to buy an EV is a net negative if your car is still running fine. Unless you drive a _lot_, the least polluting car you can get is the one you already have. And that's not even talking about the energy sources used to produce the energy to charge the EV.... What we're witnessing is the last creation of capitalism, aka "green capitalism", but it's still about mindlessly consuming, you just get to feel good about it regardless of the reality. > For example, a typical medium sized family car will create around 24 tonnes of CO2 during its life cycle, while an electric vehicle (EV) will produce around 18 tonnes over its life. For a battery EV, 46% of its total carbon footprint is generated at the factory, before it has travelled a single mile. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjThe-p_r32AhXTUOUKHWiBApwQFnoECAIQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zemo.org.uk%2Fassets%2Fworkingdocuments%2FMC-P-11-15a%2520Lifecycle%2520emissions%2520report.pdf&usg=AOvVaw13Rs9JPCTO2aPdRN1SjKTZ https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c... https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjThe-p_r32AhXTUOUKHWiBApwQFnoECAcQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.acea.auto%2Ffigure%2Fco2-emissions-from-car-production-in-eu%2F&usg=AOvVaw2GJouvy8gSANxBKQ2o0Yac https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...

throwaway22032 5y ago
Right. My car has 100g/km CO2 emissions. I'd need to drive 10000km or 6500mi to emit a ton of carbon. But that's like, loads. I use the car for occasional 10-20 mile drives to DIY stores or whatever. I'd need to do that every day for a year to even get close to 1t. For a new car we're talking 10x that, at minimum.
- fomine3 5y ago
  That's why tax should be done for fuel.
  - throwaway22032 5y ago
    In the UK it is, we pay something like $8-9 per US gallon.

digitallyfree 5y ago

This isn't limited to cars either, but rather many "green" purchases in general. I remember one of my professors in an environmental studies course talking about people replacing all the CFL bulbs in their home with LED ones when they came out, citing energy efficiency reasons. However, if you look at the manufacturing process of the LED bulbs and the disposal of the CFLs, the resulting environmental cost is greater than the power savings attributed to the LEDs (embodied energy/emissions). Obviously Marketing will downplay this impact as they want people to buy the new bulbs and feel good about helping the planet. The same goes for buying items made of recycled materials, a more power-efficient computer, and so forth. That's great - if you actually need the new item. If you are getting the replacement solely for environmental reasons you have to consider the impact of producing the new item and disposing of the old one before making that call.

yardie 5y ago
Most CFL bulbs for the home were total garbage. The colors were limited and the light was harsh. CFLs in the E26 bulb format ran too hot and the bulb electronic ballasts either smoked out or occasionally caught on fire. My country, France, banned incandescent bulbs early on. The CFL replacements were poor. The LED replacements that followed were significantly better.
robocat 5y ago
> LED bulbs and the disposal of the CFLs, the resulting environmental cost is greater than the power savings The CFD manufacture and disposal cost are sunken costs - you shouldn't include those in most calculations. Counter-intuitively for high use situations, the longer the CFD has left to live the more obvious it is to change it sooner to save $ and the environment. Assuming ① cost in dollars is proportional to environmental cost (edit: for both electricity and LED bulb), ② electricity costs $0.10 per kWh, ③ LED bulbs live as long as CFD bulbs, ④ LED bulb uses 7W whereas CFD uses 14W for the same lumen output, then if CFD has 5000 hours left, you can save $3.50 of electricity. If cost of LED is reasonably less than $3.50, it is obvious it makes sense to replace CFD with LED. If the bulb would never need to be replaced (examples: very low usage; you are moving out soon; or house is going to be demolished before bulb is replaced) then it may make sense to leave a CFD in place. The price of the LED is an investment with a payback period, so if you can't afford it or you have better returns for that investment elsewhere then you shouldn't replace the CFD. If your electricity comes from your own renewables, then the calculation is different again. Although note that in most countries nearly 100% of your reduced electricity usage will result in a nearly 100% reduction in non-renewables like gas or coal (even if your country is say 80% renewables). Marginal generation and usage matters. If you can find a better source than your professor, I would be interested.