3 ms·

> but in general they're replacing something considerably larger than a Prius. You are conceding the point with extra words here Reality is that the amount of

> but in general they're replacing something considerably larger than a Prius. You are conceding the point with extra words here Reality is that the amount of vehicles is increasing, and by rule of thumb 50% of the emissions released by vehicles come from their own construction, steel, copper, manufacturing, chemicals needed for the production Given the size of a f150, would you take the bet that its manufacturing cost co2 wise is lower than a prius? This is obviously, bypassing the fact that rather than having to buy a 0km vehicle instead someone could have bought a second hand f150 and therefore not strictly needed to increase the total amount of vehicles in circulation

bryanlarsen 4y ago
Your rule of thumb is from 2012, and is very wrong in 2022. A recent paper came out that determined that the production emissions of gasoline and electric vehicles are now equivalent. I can't dig it up and it hasn't been generally accepted yet, but the generally accepted number now is that an EV is net carbon negative after 6 months of driving. But that's for an electric car vs a fuel efficient car. An electric truck vs a 15 mpg gasoline truck will go carbon negative a lot faster than 6 months.
- bombcar 4y ago
  The other poster is saying that what’s happening is there are MORE vehicles so carbon production continues to rise. That the real deal is figuring how to reduce the number of vehicles in total. Is the F150 Lightning better than commuting to work in a deuce and half? Sure. But it is not carbon neutral or negative except when compared to something worse - and there’s always something worse that could be compared.
  - ncallaway 4y ago
    > The other poster is saying that what’s happening is there are MORE vehicles so carbon production continues to rise. I think people are looking at different derivatives. If you compare the rate of change of emissions, they do continue to rise as new electric vehicles are produced. But, the claim that an EV is more efficient than a regular truck is not a claim about the first derivative, but about the second. That is, in theory, an EV raises CO2 emissions less than the equivalent truck. That's saying the impact should be visible in the *2nd* derivative being negative, but not necessarily the first.
    - bombcar 4y ago
      Yeah, the question is if there's some sort of "traffic expands to fill the highways" argument, that as vehicles become less emissive we'll get more and more of them so our total emissions continues to grow. I suspect there is not in the US (as almost everyone who wants a vehicle has one or two already) but there certainly could be in less vehicle-saturated markets. When it's a straight 1 over 1 it's easy - for example, if someone were to buy me a Milwaukee M18 lawnmower, I'd be willing to scrap the existing gas one, so it can no longer pollute. If I were to give it away or sell it, it would still be doing whatever it does for someone else.
      - ncallaway 4y ago
        > Yeah, the question is if there's some sort of "traffic expands to fill the highways" argument Yep, that's always a concern, and one of the reasons I framed my response around what the argument was, and what the claim was. I haven't really done enough research to know or feel confident in whether that claim is borne out or holds and the concern you've raised is the major thing that could get in the way. I was largely just commenting on the disconnect in the discussion that I was observing.

bryanlarsen 4y ago

Your rule of thumb is from 2012, and is very wrong in 2022. A recent paper came out that determined that the production emissions of gasoline and electric vehicles are now equivalent. I can't dig it up and it hasn't been generally accepted yet, but the generally accepted number now is that an EV is net carbon negative after 6 months of driving. But that's for an electric car vs a fuel efficient car. An electric truck vs a 15 mpg gasoline truck will go carbon negative a lot faster than 6 months.

bombcar 4y ago
The other poster is saying that what’s happening is there are MORE vehicles so carbon production continues to rise. That the real deal is figuring how to reduce the number of vehicles in total. Is the F150 Lightning better than commuting to work in a deuce and half? Sure. But it is not carbon neutral or negative except when compared to something worse - and there’s always something worse that could be compared.
- ncallaway 4y ago
  > The other poster is saying that what’s happening is there are MORE vehicles so carbon production continues to rise. I think people are looking at different derivatives. If you compare the rate of change of emissions, they do continue to rise as new electric vehicles are produced. But, the claim that an EV is more efficient than a regular truck is not a claim about the first derivative, but about the second. That is, in theory, an EV raises CO2 emissions less than the equivalent truck. That's saying the impact should be visible in the *2nd* derivative being negative, but not necessarily the first.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    Yeah, the question is if there's some sort of "traffic expands to fill the highways" argument, that as vehicles become less emissive we'll get more and more of them so our total emissions continues to grow. I suspect there is not in the US (as almost everyone who wants a vehicle has one or two already) but there certainly could be in less vehicle-saturated markets. When it's a straight 1 over 1 it's easy - for example, if someone were to buy me a Milwaukee M18 lawnmower, I'd be willing to scrap the existing gas one, so it can no longer pollute. If I were to give it away or sell it, it would still be doing whatever it does for someone else.
    - ncallaway 4y ago
      > Yeah, the question is if there's some sort of "traffic expands to fill the highways" argument Yep, that's always a concern, and one of the reasons I framed my response around what the argument was, and what the claim was. I haven't really done enough research to know or feel confident in whether that claim is borne out or holds and the concern you've raised is the major thing that could get in the way. I was largely just commenting on the disconnect in the discussion that I was observing.