5 ms·

The breakeven milage is depressingly far. Electric cars take a lot more stuff and much more polluting manufacturing processes to be made. Around 2016, the tot

The breakeven milage is depressingly far. Electric cars take a lot more stuff and much more polluting manufacturing processes to be made. Around 2016, the total carbon footprint of a gas car was lower than a Tesla, pretty much for its entire life. It's getting better and better as energy gets cleaner, though.

ajross 4y ago
What's the conversion between "depressingly" and "miles"? What you're saying is untrue, but you don't provide a cite so I don't know what to refute.
- pclmulqdq 4y ago
  This is an intentionally vague statement because "depressingly" means "between 5,000 and 200,000 depending on your circumstances and alternatives, and whether you take a high or low estimate of the additional pollution involved in EV manufacturing."
MuffinFlavored 4y ago
So is it safe to safe that the average Tesla buyer/"consumer" is "virtue signaling" that they are actually contributing a measurable change towards climate change but instead just doing something trendy? Granted, the cars have "good tech" (fake full-self-driving claims or not).
- Kranar 4y ago
  Never take what people on this site say at face value. If someone is unwilling to provide sources, it's usually a sign they are hiding something and you should put in some effort to independently verify their claims with reputable sources. Doing so will produce a wealth of sources that all point to OP being misinformed on this issue.
  - MuffinFlavored 4y ago
    as in I'm misinformed or somebody else?
- cokeandpepsi 4y ago
  I don't drive but IMO there's a lot of reasons to not want to use gasoline beyond just 'the environment'
- recursive 4y ago
  Not at all. No gas stations and no oil changes is a real quality of life improvement, and would be even if Teslas ran on pure coal and orphans.
Kranar 4y ago
The EPA does a good job of debunking the persistent myth you're spreading about the manufacturing process of electric cars. https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths#Myth2 https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths#Myt...
- culi 4y ago
  that link doesn't actually directly address the point brought up though. It uses GREET for its number though and others have used that model to answer it, but the the estimates vary widely based on inputted assumptions. E.g.[0] Tesla Model Y (EV) vs Honda CR-V (gasoline): 9,200 miles if the grid is 100% hydroelectric 89,000 miles if the grid is 100% coal [0]: https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/lifetime-carbon-emissions-electric-vehicles-vs-gasoline-cars-2021-06-29/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/lifeti...
- lucideer 4y ago
  Everyone cites this EPA piece with heavy use of the word "typically" throughout. The gp has made two statements: 1) that manufacturing is more polluting. This is confirmed by your EPA link - the graph shows EVs are ~ twice as polluting in this area. > Some studies have shown that making a typical EV can create more carbon pollution than making a gasoline car. This is because of the additional energy required to manufacture an EV’s battery. 2) that in 2016, the breakeven wasn't met. Your EPA link states figures are from 2020. Obviously the breakeven is going to vary greatly by region depending on grid mix, but renewables in the US mix used in the EPA figures has grown ~33% between 2016 & 2020 so the difference isn't going to be small here. The gp's line may be a myth on technicalities, but not a particularly binary right-wrong one. It's recently been a close enough call to be worthy of discussion, rather than the dogmatic claims of dishonesty in the replies.
  - pclmulqdq 4y ago
    I suppose the knives have come out to "debunk" the meaning of the word "depressingly." Personally, I did the math on a Tesla purchase in 2020 given my own climate (very cold), driving patterns (90% high-efficiency highway driving), and energy mix. The end result was somewhere between 50k-100k miles to break even compared to a small, fuel-efficient Honda. Keep in mind that a Tesla is a comparatively big car, and if you don't want to haul around that much car, you don't have to - estimates in the literature tend to compare cars of a similar "class," when your personal alternatives may be outside that class. Also, the Reuters folks (and the EPA) are a bit optimistic and fall on the low end of published estimates I have seen for the carbon footprints of electric cars. However, keep in mind that there's a huge variance here and many of the factors swing both ways: comparing a Tesla model X to a Honda pilot in SoCal (warm climate and tons of green energy) for a commuter (mostly city driving in traffic) may break even at 5000 miles or less.

ajross 4y ago

What's the conversion between "depressingly" and "miles"? What you're saying is untrue, but you don't provide a cite so I don't know what to refute.

pclmulqdq 4y ago
This is an intentionally vague statement because "depressingly" means "between 5,000 and 200,000 depending on your circumstances and alternatives, and whether you take a high or low estimate of the additional pollution involved in EV manufacturing."

MuffinFlavored 4y ago

So is it safe to safe that the average Tesla buyer/"consumer" is "virtue signaling" that they are actually contributing a measurable change towards climate change but instead just doing something trendy? Granted, the cars have "good tech" (fake full-self-driving claims or not).

Kranar 4y ago
Never take what people on this site say at face value. If someone is unwilling to provide sources, it's usually a sign they are hiding something and you should put in some effort to independently verify their claims with reputable sources. Doing so will produce a wealth of sources that all point to OP being misinformed on this issue.
- MuffinFlavored 4y ago
  as in I'm misinformed or somebody else?
cokeandpepsi 4y ago
I don't drive but IMO there's a lot of reasons to not want to use gasoline beyond just 'the environment'
recursive 4y ago
Not at all. No gas stations and no oil changes is a real quality of life improvement, and would be even if Teslas ran on pure coal and orphans.

Kranar 4y ago

The EPA does a good job of debunking the persistent myth you're spreading about the manufacturing process of electric cars. https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths#Myth2 https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths#Myt...

culi 4y ago
that link doesn't actually directly address the point brought up though. It uses GREET for its number though and others have used that model to answer it, but the the estimates vary widely based on inputted assumptions. E.g.[0] Tesla Model Y (EV) vs Honda CR-V (gasoline): 9,200 miles if the grid is 100% hydroelectric 89,000 miles if the grid is 100% coal [0]: https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/lifetime-carbon-emissions-electric-vehicles-vs-gasoline-cars-2021-06-29/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/lifeti...
lucideer 4y ago
Everyone cites this EPA piece with heavy use of the word "typically" throughout. The gp has made two statements: 1) that manufacturing is more polluting. This is confirmed by your EPA link - the graph shows EVs are ~ twice as polluting in this area. > Some studies have shown that making a typical EV can create more carbon pollution than making a gasoline car. This is because of the additional energy required to manufacture an EV’s battery. 2) that in 2016, the breakeven wasn't met. Your EPA link states figures are from 2020. Obviously the breakeven is going to vary greatly by region depending on grid mix, but renewables in the US mix used in the EPA figures has grown ~33% between 2016 & 2020 so the difference isn't going to be small here. The gp's line may be a myth on technicalities, but not a particularly binary right-wrong one. It's recently been a close enough call to be worthy of discussion, rather than the dogmatic claims of dishonesty in the replies.
- pclmulqdq 4y ago
  I suppose the knives have come out to "debunk" the meaning of the word "depressingly." Personally, I did the math on a Tesla purchase in 2020 given my own climate (very cold), driving patterns (90% high-efficiency highway driving), and energy mix. The end result was somewhere between 50k-100k miles to break even compared to a small, fuel-efficient Honda. Keep in mind that a Tesla is a comparatively big car, and if you don't want to haul around that much car, you don't have to - estimates in the literature tend to compare cars of a similar "class," when your personal alternatives may be outside that class. Also, the Reuters folks (and the EPA) are a bit optimistic and fall on the low end of published estimates I have seen for the carbon footprints of electric cars. However, keep in mind that there's a huge variance here and many of the factors swing both ways: comparing a Tesla model X to a Honda pilot in SoCal (warm climate and tons of green energy) for a commuter (mostly city driving in traffic) may break even at 5000 miles or less.