10 ms·
Which is why electric SUVs are actually a step backward on a lot of fronts except CO2 emissions.
by VHRanger 3y ago
Which is why electric SUVs are actually a step backward on a lot of fronts except CO2 emissions.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- jeffbee 3y agoDirect, operating CO2 only. In terms of embodied CO2 from manufacturing, and indirect impacts from increased demand for parking, demand for larger parking spaces, demand for charging infrastructure, and induced travel leading to sprawling urban forms, electric SUVs are a regression.
- slashdev 3y ago> embodied CO2 from manufacturing, indirect impacts from increased demand for parking, demand for larger parking spaces Why would electric cars be any worse than combustion cars for these?
- baq 3y agoBatteries, mostly. Copper and lithium mining. Sprinkle with rare ears for magnets etc.
- jeffbee 3y agoIt doesn't really have much to do with the mining. The embodied carbon of the battery comes mostly from the fact that it has to be baked to dehydrate the materials. Carbon, because there is not enough renewable energy in the places where these batteries are made. As time goes on the carbon embodiment will decrease. The overwhelming problem with giant electric SUVs is the opportunity cost. Given limited capacity for battery making, and considering that we are using the last bit of our emissions budget to make them, it is obviously better to make them as small as possible. Slapping a 180kWh battery pack in a Rivian is ridiculous. With the same materials you could make 500 electric bicycles.
- slashdev 3y agoBicycles are not a replacement for cars in all situations, uses, or weather. You could make lighter vehicles, but that’s equally true for combustion vehicles.
- jackmott42 3y agoyou mine for battery materials once. with an ICE engine you mine for oil over and over and over again, and you burn more fossil fuels to refine it, and burn more to transport it to you, over and over and over again.
- slashdev 3y ago[flagged]
- slashdev 3y agoHow’s that worse than continuous fossil fuel extraction, refining, and combustion over the lifetime of the vehicle?
- bell-cot 3y agoGuess: The "with a charger" aspect increases the total physical footprint of a parking space. (Ditto cost, infrastructure, etc.)
- throwaway894345 3y agoObviously you can park an electric SUV in a parking space without a charger, just like you can park an ICE SUV in a parking space without a gasoline/diesel pump.
- bell-cot 3y agoI know of zero parking lots/structures, however new or trendy, which feature fuel pumps. But - at least around me - EV chargers seem to be mandated (for at least for some of the spots) when any large or image-conscious organization builds or renovates parking infrastructure. For the purpose at hand, it doesn't matter whether the mandate is legal, or just "or what will they say about us on social media???".
- jackmott42 3y agoCan you show the total lifecycle math where you worked this all out, or are you just asserting it without evidence? How much bigger and heavier is an electric SUV vs a regular one? How does a ModelY compare to a Mazda CX-5 for instance?
- dgfitz 3y agoFor that specific example: a model y weighs ~4450 lbs and a cx5 weighs ~3800, leaving a delta of ~3-4 grown adults in terms of weight.
- mormegil 3y agoTesla Y: Max curb weight 2003 kg Mazda CX-5: Max curb weight 1765 kg (according to Wikipedia)
- cuu508 3y agoAbout same size, Model Y is 33% heavier https://www.carsized.com/en/cars/compare/tesla-model-y-2021-suv-vs-mazda-cx-5-2017-suv/ https://www.carsized.com/en/cars/compare/tesla-model-y-2021-...
- kracejic 3y agoMazda CX-5 looks to be smaller than Model Y, so more fair comparison would be to CX-60 which seems to be similar size, where the difference between these two is under 20 kg according to carsized. See: https://www.carsized.com/en/cars/compare/mazda-cx-5-2012-suv-vs-tesla-model-y-2021-suv/ https://www.carsized.com/en/cars/compare/mazda-cx-5-2012-suv... https://www.carsized.com/en/cars/compare/tesla-model-y-2021-suv-vs-mazda-cx-60-2022-suv/ https://www.carsized.com/en/cars/compare/tesla-model-y-2021-...
- iso1631 3y agoWhy would an electric SUV have any more demand for parking than a non-electric SUV?
- paulmd 3y agoSurely you must admit that parking space depends on factors other than the physical size of the vehicle? For example, consider a BMW...
- sokoloff 3y agoI'm pro-EV and happily daily-drive one, but I think it's fair to conclude that the need for 1-hour to 8-hour+ charging means that the "space needed for parking while energy is being dispensed" is higher fleet-wide for EVs than for ICE vehicles. We don't think of nor call it "parking" at the gas pump, but we do at a charging station. There's a reason that's the case. Many people will have a dedicated charging space at home (taking up only epsilon extra space for the charger), but all the Tesla super-charger, Chargepoints, EVGo, ElectrifyAmerica, etc en route chargers will require more parking space per EV than the equivalent petrol station per ICE.
- varjag 3y agoThis is negligible fraction of percent over total parking spaces. Most EV owners charge at home.
- stetrain 3y agoCradle to grave analysis of most EVs puts them ahead on emissions, even including manufacturing, even with poor grid mixes of mostly coal power. Battery materials are also recyclable, so those manufacturing impacts should decrease over time on a per-vehicle basis. Smaller, more efficient vehicles with smaller batteries are definitely better and should be incentivized. If you want to compare them yourself, don't forget to include all of the externalities from drilling, transporting, and refining petroleum before it reaches the pump. Tailpipe vs tailpipe certainly doesn't tell the whole story.
- acdha 3y agoYou’re right assuming preferences don’t change but I think it is worth highlighting the research suggesting that large EVs will never break even compared to normal sized ICE vehicles. We can’t afford to allow greenwashing where someone pretends a large SUV is anything but polluting.
- justrealist 3y agoThe core problem with the modern environmental movement is the refusal to take a W when one is staring them in the face. EVs are happening. It's a huge win for the environment and all the environmental orgs that pushed for it. Stop trying to rewrite this revolutionary change as a hidden nefarious L. You're just making yourself sad and the youth jaded.
- infecto 3y agoCan we get more of this please? It’s like people will not be satisfied until we eliminate cars and all other modern inventions.
- globular-toast 3y agoW=Win, L=Loss? Why would you randomly abbreviate single 3-4 character words? EVs are, at best, stagnation. At worst they simply go even further to hide the enormous external costs of everyone using giant, heavy wheelchairs to move around anywhere.
- throwaway894345 3y agoEVs emit about half of the co2 per mile (including manufacturing emissions) as ICE cars today, and that figure is falling rapidly as we decarbonize electricity production. In what world is a 50% reduction in emissions "stagnation"?
- jeffbee 3y agoIf it perpetuates an inefficient form of urban settlement, then it is at best a local optimization. Look at all the people in this subthread who are demanding a cradle-to-grave lifecycle analysis but are for some reason unwilling to expand the scope of that analysis to ponder the question of why the car should exist at all.
- globular-toast 3y agoIn a world with more than one single dimension. Have you considered there are other factors in addition to CO2 per mile? A trivial example is total number of miles driven. If we end up driving twice as much then that's your CO2 gains gone right there. Considering that's exactly what's happened since 1983 does that seem unlikely? Do EVs do anything to reverse this trend? Do they do anything for pedestrian safety? Do they do anything about the need for parking and huge roads? Do they do anything about noise and particulate pollution of tyres? Do they do anything about road rage? I could go on and on. Focussing solely on one single metric is extremely foolish, but of course it's exactly what the car manufacturers want because they've found a solution for that one metric.
- appplication 3y agoThat’s a big claim, sources needed.
- throwaway894345 3y agoNope. Electric SUVs don't induce more demand for parking nor require larger parking spaces than ICE SUVs, and the charging infrastructure doesn't induce more emissions than equivalent ICE infrastructure, nor do they induce more travel than ICE SUVs. The only correct bit here is that they do require more CO2 to manufacture, but this is made up for by the dramatically reduced operating emissions in the first few thousand miles or so of driving (depending on the source of the energy used to charge it). Further, the grid is getting greener all the time, so operating emissions and the manufacturing emissions are both falling quickly while the operating emissions of fossil fuels remains extremely high (literally and figuratively).
- jeffbee 3y ago> first few thousand miles or so of driving Compared to efficient cars, this crossover point is as late as 50,000km. It does not pay off as rapidly as you are implying. Something like a Kia Niro with a normal-sized battery starts with an embodied CO2 deficit of ~5t. Something absurd like a Rivian is 20t in the hole from the jump and will never be CO2-positive except when compared to something equally wasteful like an ICE Hummer.
- pfannkuchen 3y agoFor the manufacturing part, are we including the environmental impact of oil extraction in the comparison? That isn’t part of “building” an ICE car, unlike with EV batteries, but it is still required on an ongoing basis for operation and it is the direct equivalent of the EV batteries. I find it a little hard to believe that e.g. lithium extraction is fundamentally worse than oil extraction and processing.
- baron816 3y agoI think there is an high likelihood that weights will come down as batteries become more energy dense, which is probably necessary for full market penetration.
- kwhitefoot 3y ago> which is probably necessary for full market penetration. It's one possible way of getting full market penetration. The other way is to subsidise EV's heavily until the market takes off. That's what was done here in Norway, now 80% of new cars sold are pure battery EVs [1]. The best selling model of car in Norway now is the Tesla Model Y. The subsidies are gradually being phased out. [1] https://elbil.no/om-elbil/elbilstatistikk/elbilsalg/ https://elbil.no/om-elbil/elbilstatistikk/elbilsalg/
- theshrike79 3y agoThat and forcing people to build destination chargers when building parking spaces is a good way to break the chicken and egg problem of EVs
- throwaway894345 3y agoNot really because the difference in road wear between ICE and EV SUVs is marginal precisely because road wear is proportional to axle weight to the fourth power. The axle weight of an SUV (whether EV or ICE) is a fraction of that of an 18 wheeler. The road wear of an 18 wheeler is going to be 2 or 3 orders of magnitude greater than that of an EV or ICE SUV (both of which are in the same order of magnitude).
- DistractionRect 3y agoI think another thing to consider is that with ICE vehicles, you're doing (at least) double duty in road damage because all that fuel has to transported to the stations in another vehicle to begin with.
- theshrike79 3y agoYep, the 18-wheelers bringing up to 12000 gallons of fuel to stations is a fuckton of power of four road wear.
- googlryas 3y agoLooking up comparable ICE cars to a Model Y, google tells me Audi SQ5, BMW X3 M40i, and Mercedes-Benz GLC43. Their curb weights in lbs are: Model Y: 4,555 SQ5: 4,288 M40i: 4,392 GLC43: 4,233 So, yes, a model Y is heavier, but only by about 250 lbs. At a 4th power that could be an extra 30% damage compared to an ICE, but even the lightest SUV here is doing something like 3.5x the damage compared to a Honda Civic. So, if you think road damage is a valid concern, electric cars aren't particularly special - SUVs in general should be a bigger worry.
- dingnuts 3y ago>even the lightest SUV here is doing something like 3.5x the damage compared to a Honda Civic this is crazy to consider when you know that parents with three children in car seats cannot find a sedan that can hold three car seats, and wagons disappeared to be replaced by SUVs because of... EPA emissions standards. So it could be argued that the emission standards are the cause of this extra wear, which is additionally ironic when you consider asphalt is an oil product
- Zak 3y ago> wagons disappeared to be replaced by SUVs because of... EPA emissions standards I think that's only half-true. In the US, people weren't buying many wagons when they were available. For the majority of people who don't use their SUVs off road, this seems irrational. I've heard a number of people say that the higher seating position makes them feel safer, though that feeling is not reality-based.
- delecti 3y agoI think it's a tragedy of the commons situation. Driving an SUV feels safer because there are more other vehicles you can see over to keep appraised of your surroundings, but that also makes it harder for the drivers of those other vehicles.
- redundantly 3y ago> I've heard a number of people say that the higher seating position makes them feel safer, though that feeling is not reality-based. It is based in reality, albeit a kind of self fulfilling prophecy. As more and more taller cars (large SUVs and pickup trucks) appear on the road the more dangerous it is for smaller cars. The crumple zones on a compact or sedan don't do much good when the front and rear bumpers of SUVs and trucks clear the hoods of smaller cars, effectively putting the bumper at eye level.
- _ea1k 3y agoOTOH, they take a lot of tanker trucks off the road. Given the way the fourth power rule works here, that might actually make them a net benefit. Those fuel trucks also have to operate on regular streets more than most semi trucks do, which likely compounds the benefit.