9 ms·

“ Comparing larger vehicles, the original Hummer H1 emits 889 grams of CO2 per mile and the new Hummer EV causes 341 grams, demonstrating that behemoth EVs can

• lbrito 4y ago
  Here's an alternative: don't allow the normal hummer owner to get a new one because they're terrible for everyone else. That's one of the reasons what governments were made for.
  • mint2 4y ago
    Unfortunately half of our government is against any common sense regulations or rules. Mass shootings are becoming a daily occurrence that happens in no other first world country but instead the gop has spent the last decades trying to weaken what little gun regulations there are. Enough of The public seems totally okay with that, and would absolutely go batshit if they perceived someone as wanting to ban trucks. Tell me in that climate how the government does it’s job? People keep electing government officials who are expressly against what you’re suggesting.
• afavour 4y ago
  Arguably that’s why you need legislation to more strongly dissuade buying a ridiculous car like that via taxes or whatever. If you leave it to individual choice there will always be plenty of people who don’t care about the costs they’re imposing on others.
  • ReptileMan 4y ago
    The US has huge variety of terrain, climate and road quality. Hummer has it's use cases.
    • afavour 4y ago
      I always see replies like this in conversations about vehicles in the US and it baffles me a little. Yes, of course there are appropriate situations in which someone might own a Hummer. But are we really trying to claim that even 10% of Hummers out there today are used in those situations? They’re very obvious status symbols.
      • chrisseaton 4y ago
        > They’re very obvious status symbols. Vast majority of people with a truck or off-road vehicle have one for work - they’re working vehicles.
        • krallja 4y ago
          Vast minority*
        • finfinfin 4y ago
          This definitely does not mean what you think it means. Owning a large car for work doesn’t mean it’s utilized as such. I know people who own trucks and large SUVs for work - but it’s “just in case” not because they need additional space on a daily or even weekly basis.
        • btilly 4y ago
          We're talking about Hummers here, right? https://www.motorbiscuit.com/why-hummers-arent-good-for-off-roading/ https://www.motorbiscuit.com/why-hummers-arent-good-for-off-... If their owners wanted to actually go off road, they'd have bought something else. They really have no purpose other than to mark you as a person with more money than sense.
        • RC_ITR 4y ago
          Ok let's diligence this: There are about 60m trucks on the road in the US [0] There are 6m construction/mining workers, 6m installation workers, and 4m building maintenance workers. [1] Using that definition, at most, 25% of trucks are used for work. If you want to be extremely generous, there are also 13m transportation drivers (being very generous because that 60m does not include big rigs) and 8m factory workers (again, unlikely to use trucks for work). Using that frankly incorrect definition, you still get only 62% of trucks being used for work. So no, under NO circumstances are the "vast majority" of trucks in the US used for work. [0]https://www.bts.gov/content/number-us-aircraft-vehicles-vessels-and-other-conveyances https://www.bts.gov/content/number-us-aircraft-vehicles-vess... [1] https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm
  • HPsquared 4y ago
    The high cost does this automatically, a Hummer EV is over $100k.
  • bragr 4y ago
    Relevant example from Finland: https://www.thedrive.com/news/44642/imported-1000-hp-hennessey-ram-trx-limited-to-55-mph-over-tax-loophole https://www.thedrive.com/news/44642/imported-1000-hp-henness...
  • pmichaud 4y ago
    This seems like a useless place to optimize. Like, what is the total pollution output of all Hummers or similar vehicles? A rounding error, I'm guessing. The only way to make dents is with systemic changes like for entire trucking industry, for example.
    • quickthrower2 4y ago
      Well could be done on all scales. A small Kia with a roofrack / towbar maybe for extra cargo / small trailer is probably big enough for most human A->B needs, even small scale moving house.
      • corrral 4y ago
        Large trucks and SUVs tend to be so expensive to buy and operate that you can pay for a lot of deliveries and truck rentals per year—maybe a boat slip at the local marina, too—while still saving money. Farther out in the sticks, sure, those things may be so inconvenient or unavailable that it's not an option, but it is for the average Suburban Assault Vehicle owner.
        • quickthrower2 4y ago
          Yes, some people really need big vehicles (and/or we need them to keep farming) and so you need exemptions. In the UK there is Red diesel for example that is for farm use / private use that is much cheaper than diesel for the road.
          • lostlogin 4y ago
            What is the justification for this subsidy?
            • amanaplanacanal 4y ago
              Likely untaxed for road wear that isn't happening when they aren't driven on roads.
  • willcipriano 4y ago
    Combine it with a similarly restrictive air travel regulation and I'm on board. Takes a lot of miles in a Hummer to equal a trip to Europe and back.
    • nr2x 4y ago
      Ugh, just skipped a conference in Australia for that reason - decided I'm only doing long-haul flights for things I *really* care about.
      • willcipriano 4y ago
        "Honor is the gift a man gives himself." I'm fairly low emissions but mostly by accident. I work from home and have until recently been too poor to travel like that. I just always found it annoying when people who are jetting around the globe complain about other people's cars. You on the other hand have a leg to stand on in that regard.
        • nr2x 4y ago
          I put in a ton of flight miles and saw the world. No regrets, but I recognize I need to spend my carbon more judiciously now. That said, I do truly believe travel makes you a better person, so if you can afford it now you should get out there and see it before it all burns down. Use my “credit”. :-)
  • vvern 4y ago
    Can we just properly price carbon emissions and be done with it?
    • culi 4y ago
      What are the carbon emissions of manufacturing a yellow pencil? The amount of carbon released by the trees that were cut down? What about the chemicals needed to add the shine? Or the rubber manufactured for the eraser? What about the employees that have less time to feed themselves so they buy crappy junk food with packaging creating more waste? What about the costs to recycle it? What about the ecosystem that was replaced to make way for the new factory? What about the cost of the tools that were created to make these pencils? Do you calculate that in by how much wear is added every time they're used? And what about the tools needed to make THOSE tools? What about the graphite powder used for the lead or the energy it cost to heat petroleum coke above the temperature of graphitization or the ships needed to ship those to the right factory? What about that petcoke? Do you discount some of its cost because its mostly a side-product of the process of refining oil? What about when a company innovates to sell higher quality pencils made of higher quality petcoke that requires more emissions to make and isn't just a byproduct? What is the social cost of advertising and manipulating tastes in demand? Where exactly do you stop? [Yes this is my subverted version of "I, pencil"]
      • johnfernow 4y ago
        > The simplest approach, administratively, is to levy the carbon tax “upstream,” where the fewest entities would be subject to it (for instance, suppliers of coal, natural gas processing facilities, and oil refineries). Include other highly polluting industries with that, and while you may not get 100% coverage, it would definitely cover the majority of carbon intensive products and services and lead to a drastic reduction in emissions. CCL estimates that the annual administrative cost of a carbon tax in the US would be about $4 to $5 billion per year, which is about 6.8 percent of revenues in year one ($15/ton of CO2e year one, rising by $10/ton each year), but as revenues grow along with the fee, it drops to only about 1.7 percent by year 10.
        • 4y ago
  • 7speter 4y ago
    That’s why we need legislators who actually legislate.
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  • elihu 4y ago
    > If you leave it to individual choice there will always be plenty of people who don’t care about the costs they’re imposing on others. I think the current state of affairs is actually worse than that -- big trucks are popular not just because some people like big trucks, but also because there are regulations that prevent small trucks from being a viable market segment in the U.S.: that class of vehicle has much more stringent fuel economy standards (perversely forcing people into larger vehicles with looser regulations), and light trucks imported from other countries are subject to a 25% tariff. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax The only light truck I know of that you can get currently is the long version of the Jeep Wrangler. I'm not sure if they actually meet the fuel economy standards, or if they can somehow claim to not technically be a light truck. Maybe there are some others, but as far as I can tell almost all trucks sold in the U.S. are huge and have comically tall grills. If I wasn't already in the middle of an EV conversion project, I'd be tempted to get something like an old Datsun 620 and load it up with batteries. I wish there was a product on the market like that.
• nr2x 4y ago
  I think the premise of the article is a bit silly - not everything is "average-able". The US is huge, and many places (like SV) do have 100% renewable energy so the electric is carbon free. This is like saying that if Portugal had a 100% clean grid that cars in Poland powered by coal plants meant that Portuguese EV's were not truly "environmental".
• culi 4y ago
  I think you're missing the fact that a huge chunk of a vehicle's lifetime emissions are just in the manufacturing alone. And EVs are much more energy intensive to manufacture. Mostly this is due to the batteries. Which also have to be replaced every decade Because of this alone, there are many EVs that are still worse for the environment than many gas-powered vehicles 38%[0] of an EVs emissions are in the manufacturing alone. Ultimately, the best thing you can do for the environment is still to STOP BUYING NEW CARS [0] https://energy.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Insights-into-Future-Mobility.pdf https://energy.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Insights-i... (page 90)
• DonHopkins 4y ago
  I don't think the normal hummer owner gives a shit about the environment or wasting food. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmBGSKRGs6A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmBGSKRGs6A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmk6z3qqfIw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmk6z3qqfIw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KaQ-s_P5mwM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KaQ-s_P5mwM
• switchbak 4y ago
  Something rarely discussed is that the generation technology matters in your specific locale. If you're powering it with coal, this is horrible. If hydro/solar/nuclear power, well it's still a big load on the grid, but carbon wise it's a small fraction of the footprint. Of course you need to factor in where the power is actually coming from on your grid. And definitely factor in the time of day (are you charging overnight and actually using a higher carbon source, etc). When you do the math on this Hummer on the cleanest sources, it's still far cleaner than even a small ICE engine. Even though I still hate it :)
  • seoaeu 4y ago
    If you are powering with hydro/solar/nuclear then you are consuming electricity that could otherwise be used to reduce the load on a natural gas power plant somewhere else