6 ms·
i think this is a missed opportunity when it comes to convincing more people about the advantages of switching to clean energy, especially in developing countri
by kmlx 4y ago
i think this is a missed opportunity when it comes to convincing more people about the advantages of switching to clean energy, especially in developing countries (at least from a marketing pov).
for example my dad isn't really convinced about "climate change", but would love for the air to get cleaner. and for this reason he installed solar, a battery, even got a hybrid car.
- rad_gruchalski 4y agoIsn’t a hybrid the dirtiest to manufacture? You have batteries AND an ICE.
- kmlx 4y ago> Isn’t a hybrid the dirtiest to manufacture? not sure, could be. with a hybrid he was happy that he got to spend less money on fuel, and in turn produce less pollutants. he would've bought an ICE (and charged it from their own solar), but those were much, much more expensive than the car he got. nonetheless the point was that some people might not be convinced by climate change, but a lot of people want to breath cleaner air.
- bombcar 4y agoAnd everyone wants to save money - even "coal rollers" will buy a hybrid truck if it's cheaper to operate in the long-run.
- kingnothing 4y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_coal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_coal
- jakear 4y agoThis is miles from the truth. Installing coal rolling equipment actually costs money. And the act of rolling is a lower efficiency combustion. Some people just want to watch the world burn.
- Tade0 4y agoThe difference in fuel consumption more than makes up for that small battery and powertrain. That's at least two metric tonnes of fuel saved over the lifetime of the car compared to ~150kg of additional components. The process of making them would have to be especially dirty to reach the environmental footprint of such an amount of fuel.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- rad_gruchalski 4y ago> The difference in fuel consumption more than makes up for that small battery and powertrain. Does it not depend on the driving style?
- Tade0 4y agoLess than in a regular ICE car. I've found that at least in my case average speed and use of accessories in heavy traffic is a better predictor of fuel consumption - I suppose it's due to regenerative braking.
- _ea1k 4y agoI wouldn't think so. I can't imagine that manufacturing a small ICE engine is particularly dirty compared to a much larger battery pack. With a PHEV, it would seldom need to run as well, negating the emissions of a purely ICE vehicle.
- rad_gruchalski 4y agoHybrid does not imply a small engine. For example, 2023 Toyota Sequoia has an option of a hybrid V6.
- _ea1k 4y agoThat's fair. Not all hybrids are created equally. With larger vehicles, the larger gas motor is almost essential, tbh, as otherwise the total power output will sometimes be limited by the maximum output of the gasoline motor. The i3 was an extreme example of that.
- r00fus 4y agoThe "dirty" battery build pales in comparison the the cost of extraction/transport/burning of gas in the hybrid. I have yet to see any EREOI impact study of gas vs. battery electric that shows gas vehicles to be anywhere close to hybrid or electric.
- rad_gruchalski 4y agoApparently it all depends on the driving style? So it seems to require an eco-conscious driver?
- r00fus 4y agoNot at all - you can drive with a lead foot on an EV and still be better off than gas by miles.
- paganel 4y agoMaking people in developing countries poorer is not a “missed opportunity”, is not realizing the true context. Because, yes, trying to force people in developing countries to “buy an EV!” (or equivalent) when they can barely purchase a 10-year-old SH car from Germany will make them poorer.
- kmlx 4y ago> Making people in developing countries poorer who said poorer? > trying to force people in developing countries to “buy an EV!” who's trying to force anyone? i'm sorry, but what i wrote has to do with convincing people (via marketing for example) that it's much better to switch to clean energy because of clean air. and i was referring to "developing countries", a huge list: https://www.worlddata.info/developing-countries.php https://www.worlddata.info/developing-countries.php, aka a huge opportunity.
- starkd 4y agoI think that confuses two potential problems in one: pollution from particulates and pollution from carbon dioxide. If you don't really think carbon dioxide is that big of a problem, or can be managed effectively, the priority should be on filtering out particulates from the burning of fuels. This can be accomplished with much less disruption to the economy than trying to eliminate fossil fuels, which will likely backfire anyway, as countries such as China and India will continue to use it without regard to either problems.
- kmlx 4y agohmm, interesting, i think you're right, but i also think that focusing more on "clean air" than "climate change" in certain countries could alleviate both of the pollution problems you mention.
- 5e92cb50239222b 4y agoOh please. I live in a 'developing country' (don't like that term because I have doubts that it's actually developing). A substantial portion of the population lives in houses heated with coal furnaces. Except that for the past few years coal prices went up somewhat and many people went to burning trash: rubber tires, old rags soaked in motor oil, pieces of bitumen, old plastic bottles, you name it. In winter air quality is simply horrible (my Grafana instance shows an average of 240 µg/m³ PM2.5 for January of this year). I have a t-shirt that was hung out to try at the beginning of this year and it still smells of burnt coal and rubber. The government spent a pretty penny subsidizing installation of natural gas furnaces. Guess what, almost nobody is actually using that now since coal is noticeably cheaper, so people went right back to burning it. I understand they don't care about anybody else, but in winter their own kids breathe air that is literally black and reduces visibility to a few dozen meters. Good luck trying to convince them of anything.
- bombcar 4y agoThe solution is to make natural gas cheaper than coal, even free. But the West reacts violently to "installing carbon-emitting natural gas in developing countries" and it doesn't happen.
- jeromegv 4y agoWhy would you subsidize gas, of all type of energy we could subsidize?
- gruez 4y agoI wouldn't, but it seems somewhat plausible to do it if you really care about costs.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 4y agoSolar and wind costs much less than gas, and we can still increase the % of intermittent energy sources by a lot before we actually need to install stationary storage. Of course people will oppose gas when we have a better and cheaper alternative.
- lm28469 4y agoWhen 50% of the west is obese/heavily overweight and under exercises I'd be hard pressed to think people care about living longer.