5 ms·

Electric cars vastly reduce the environmental impact of cars. Everyone who's run the numbers agrees on this [1][2][3]. Battery vehicles aren't that much heavier

Electric cars vastly reduce the environmental impact of cars. Everyone who's run the numbers agrees on this [1][2][3]. Battery vehicles aren't that much heavier than gasoline vehicles, and the volume of metals needed to make a battery is a tiny fraction of the volume of oil needed to fuel a car across its lifecycle. Power plants are much more efficient than small engines in cars, and as the grid decarbonizes the emissions of battery electric vehicles move towards zero. Electric cars really are far better for the planet than burning gas, there isn't a catch. I get the worries, Lithium mining causes ecological damage, but every sort of resource extraction causes ecological damage. Every kilogram of pollution generated from lithium mining prevents many times more pollution generated from oil extraction and emissions. Lithium, cobalt, and the rest aren't exotic materials, the battery industry is huge and has many decades of experience building batteries. Synthesizing hydrocarbons is an important technology. But that process is incredibly energy intensive, and it's much more efficient to use electricity to just charge a battery. The scale of production of synthetic hydrocarbons isn't anywhere close to where it would need to be to make a dent in climate change. I think that electrofuels will be very important in aviation - they're the only apparent pathway to run jet engines without emissions. But it will be a long time, if ever, before that technology is mature enough to fuel passenger vehicles at a meaningful scale. [1] https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/comparative-life-cycle-greenhouse-gas-emissions-of-a-mid-size-bev-and-ice-vehicle https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/comparative-l... [2] https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.html https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.html [3] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032122000867 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S136403212...

AnthonyMouse 3y ago
It's not just that. Solar is already cheaper than other generation methods, except that it's intermittent. So it needs some kind of storage technology. The batteries in electric vehicles are a storage technology, so all you have to do is charge your car while the sun shines. If you need the batteries anyway it makes much more sense to put them there so you can also stop burning gasoline.
- lovecg 3y ago
  Yeah I became convinced over the last couple of years that solar + batteries is pretty much the solution and all the technology is here, everything else (degrowth, nuclear) is a politically infeasible distraction. We need larger scale and faster adoption which is a whole set of challenges on its own (see CA lagging behind Texas for example in what is a complete self-own)
  - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
    Solar + electric cars is an excellent solution for transportation. It's basically the whole problem gone as fast as you can build the new infrastructure. But solar still has the same storage problem in the power grid. You need something to keep the lights on at night. Lithium batteries are cost effective when it means you can avoid the cost of the whole ICE powertrain and replace buying gas with cheap daytime solar -- which also means that the production capacity for lithium batteries is going to go there. But then you start talking about electrifying heat, for which the peak demand is when it's colder. At night. And for that it makes sense to build some more nuclear reactors.
    - lovecg 3y ago
      I’m encouraged by this graph https://ourworldindata.org/battery-price-decline https://ourworldindata.org/battery-price-decline - hopefully the trend can continue for a while longer!
      - pptr 3y ago
        Unfortunately, it looks like costs have stagnated in recent years: https://about.bnef.com/blog/lithium-ion-battery-pack-prices-rise-for-first-time-to-an-average-of-151-kwh/ https://about.bnef.com/blog/lithium-ion-battery-pack-prices-...
      - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
        This is a classic exponential curve, which infamously level out after they hit some kind of bottleneck. <insert Disco Stu meme> It's possible that it will keep going long enough to be competitive, but it's not a safe enough bet to put all the eggs in one basket. If we build a lot of nuclear reactors and then it turns out that storage becomes cheaper, it will cost an amount of money in line with what we currently pay to generate electricity, much of which will be paid by the investors who bet on the wrong horse. If we don't build a lot of nuclear reactors and then it turns out storage is not cheaper and so we keep burning fossil fuels, that is bad.
6D794163636F756 3y ago
The only nuance is that it's often better to continue using your existing car than buying a new ev. That's the only situation I've heard any real suggestions that ice is more environmental than an ev.
krmboya 3y ago
What's the story for safe disposal/recycling of used batteries?
fulafel 3y ago
It's 50%. It's significant, as much as gas car economy improvements over a few decades. We should of course still take it, but it's not nearly enough. We need a order of magnitude improvement to make the globally growing car use remotely sustainable. Reducing car usage can be done many ways, eg ensuring gas is taxed enough that gas-based cars don't stay in everyday use, and developing non car transport and urban structure.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago

It's not just that. Solar is already cheaper than other generation methods, except that it's intermittent. So it needs some kind of storage technology. The batteries in electric vehicles are a storage technology, so all you have to do is charge your car while the sun shines. If you need the batteries anyway it makes much more sense to put them there so you can also stop burning gasoline.

lovecg 3y ago
Yeah I became convinced over the last couple of years that solar + batteries is pretty much the solution and all the technology is here, everything else (degrowth, nuclear) is a politically infeasible distraction. We need larger scale and faster adoption which is a whole set of challenges on its own (see CA lagging behind Texas for example in what is a complete self-own)
- AnthonyMouse 3y ago
  Solar + electric cars is an excellent solution for transportation. It's basically the whole problem gone as fast as you can build the new infrastructure. But solar still has the same storage problem in the power grid. You need something to keep the lights on at night. Lithium batteries are cost effective when it means you can avoid the cost of the whole ICE powertrain and replace buying gas with cheap daytime solar -- which also means that the production capacity for lithium batteries is going to go there. But then you start talking about electrifying heat, for which the peak demand is when it's colder. At night. And for that it makes sense to build some more nuclear reactors.
  - lovecg 3y ago
    I’m encouraged by this graph https://ourworldindata.org/battery-price-decline https://ourworldindata.org/battery-price-decline - hopefully the trend can continue for a while longer!
    - pptr 3y ago
      Unfortunately, it looks like costs have stagnated in recent years: https://about.bnef.com/blog/lithium-ion-battery-pack-prices-rise-for-first-time-to-an-average-of-151-kwh/ https://about.bnef.com/blog/lithium-ion-battery-pack-prices-...
    - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
      This is a classic exponential curve, which infamously level out after they hit some kind of bottleneck. <insert Disco Stu meme> It's possible that it will keep going long enough to be competitive, but it's not a safe enough bet to put all the eggs in one basket. If we build a lot of nuclear reactors and then it turns out that storage becomes cheaper, it will cost an amount of money in line with what we currently pay to generate electricity, much of which will be paid by the investors who bet on the wrong horse. If we don't build a lot of nuclear reactors and then it turns out storage is not cheaper and so we keep burning fossil fuels, that is bad.

6D794163636F756 3y ago

The only nuance is that it's often better to continue using your existing car than buying a new ev. That's the only situation I've heard any real suggestions that ice is more environmental than an ev.

krmboya 3y ago

What's the story for safe disposal/recycling of used batteries?

fulafel 3y ago

It's 50%. It's significant, as much as gas car economy improvements over a few decades. We should of course still take it, but it's not nearly enough. We need a order of magnitude improvement to make the globally growing car use remotely sustainable. Reducing car usage can be done many ways, eg ensuring gas is taxed enough that gas-based cars don't stay in everyday use, and developing non car transport and urban structure.