4 ms·
> Not at all. Even if that were true (it is for some vehicle classes and use cases but not generally), CO2 emissions are not the only car-related emmissions. P
by bArray 3y ago
> Not at all. Even if that were true (it is for some vehicle classes and use cases but not generally), CO2 emissions are not the only car-related emmissions.
Please see another comment (don't want to duplicate the comments on HN): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37998960 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37998960
> But sulfuric emmissions are actually cooling the atmosphere, so limiting them won't do anything good for the climate. And to stop global warming it would not be enough anyway.
Let's start ramping up sulphur fires then /s. I don't think this is a good option. I think getting a handle on shipping would make a quick enormous dent.
> Done: https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/carbon-border-adjustme https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/carbon-border-adjustme...
It's only as good as it can be enforced. Last time I checked I can still get cheap crap from China made with the worst environmental considerations.
- tpm 3y ago> I don't think this is a good option. It's certainly not a good thing to willingly emit sulfur into atmosphere, but removing such emmissions does nothing positive to battle climate change. > I think getting a handle on shipping would make a quick enormous dent. You can think that, but should also prove that. I think ocean shipping is quite down on the list because shipping is energy-effective. It only emits about 2.9% of total greenhouse gasses. By comparison, road transport is at about 10%.