5 ms·
They are symbols. Far more carbon would be saved if people instead bought solar panels for thier houses and drove a smaller IC car rather than an EV tank. But
by sandworm101 1y ago
They are symbols. Far more carbon would be saved if people instead bought solar panels for thier houses and drove a smaller IC car rather than an EV tank. But you cannot flaunt solar panels like you can a fancy car.
- bumby 1y agoThe environmental aspect I rarely hear discussed is how much carbon would be saved by maintaining your existing vehicle instead. The existing car is already a sunk carbon cost and manufacturing is a huge emitter. It’s more nuanced of course, but it seems to me that it’s always been a status play falsely veiled as a virtuous environmental decision. We humans are great at rationalizing our emotional decisions.
- everyone 1y agoIts an optimization problem, the embodied energy of the new car vs how much you save driving it, as it's more fuel efficent than the old one. But in most cases you would need to drive the new car for decades before you break even.
- sandworm101 1y agoFor the rich people who can even consider a tesla, there are no old cars. The average tesla owner would not be seen in any car more than a decade old. They lease. Older/used cars are someone elses domain. This is a shame because cars today can easily last 25+ years. If manufactuers wanted to, they could even biuld them to last much longer. But the new car market is dominated by people who lease and dump cars, not people who keep them around once the shine is gone.
- Nasrudith 1y agoI've heard that argument long ago pushed by totally-not-oil-industry-marketers. If I recall correctly math worked out as 'pays for itself in three to five years'. If you are of the practice of getting a new car every two years it wouldn't help, but if you are doing so already just keeping your cars until they die/it becomes more expensive to repair would be the easy environmental improvement that would also save money.
- bumby 1y agoYep, at least using numbers from an LLM, the break even emission standpoint seems to be about 3-4 years. For people who use leases to get a new car (average lease is 36 months) they’d be doing more harm to the environment, but for people who hold onto their cars longer, they’d be reducing CO2e. Those are just rough generalizations, and of course it depends on driving distance, grid emissions, etc. For example, if you get your electricity primarily from coal, the break even is closer to 12 years. But as others have said, the EV market tends towards the type of people who don’t hold on to cars very long. >expensive to repair would be the easy environmental improvement that would also save money. This line of thinking seems to miss the financial reality of the vast majority of Americans. Most people aren’t choosing between an $1800 repair vs a $50k new EV for environmental reasons, it’s because they can only afford one of those options.
- triceratops 1y agoResidential rooftop solar panels are an inefficient use of money. They're very expensive and most people don't get battery storage. Going all-electric (vehicles and heat pumps) and getting your utility to install solar and wind is much more effective. Or switching to a utility that has green options, in places where such an choice exists. And the choice isn't "smaller ICE car" and "EV tank". There are many EV hatchbacks, sedans, and compact cars available, arguably more models than ICE vehicles in North America. Most ICE drivers are the ones who buy tanks anyway.
- spookie 1y agoEVs are huge compared to ICE cars anywhere but North America.
- tim333 1y agoNot necessarily so in the UK. We have small EVs too, eg the Mini. The Renault 5 seems popular https://www.whatcar.com/renault/5/hatchback/review/n27187 https://www.whatcar.com/renault/5/hatchback/review/n27187
- sandworm101 1y agoTeslas are all tanks, the cybertruck being the king of road tanks.
- triceratops 1y agoSedans are tanks?
- Nasrudith 1y agoElectrical vehicles are heavier so I think they are judging them all as 'tanks'. While ignoring that all vehicles, electrical or not have been trending heavier for their size over time anyway.
- 1y ago
- paddy_m 1y agoEven better if people bought ebikes. It is galling that rich people get a $7500 credit to buy a $50-100k luxury bauble, while there are no incentives for ebikes.
- LargeWu 1y agoMy biggest reservation about e-bikes is that if you ride it regularly for your transportation, it WILL get stolen, it's only a matter of time. I have a hard time putting thousands of dollars into a bike knowing I'm likely to lose that investment.
- Workaccount2 1y agoBuy a mid-drive, you're not immune, but thieves are drawn to hub-drive fat-tire ebikes because they are obviously ebikes. Mid-drives look much more like regular old bikes.
- tim333 1y agoI have an old rusty e-bike that I use for transportation and cost £200. It doesn't seem to get stolen although I leave it on the street. I do remove the battery which would cost £200 new on it's own so the batteryless bike is not of much value to thieves. Especially as it has a wacky diy paint job too. It works pretty well although there is some maintenance cost when bits pack up. It's quite easy to find similar on facebook market.
- Zambyte 1y agoBuy a lock. You should usually be spending 10-20% of the value of the vehicle on locks. I bought two locks (a chain lock and a D lock) totaling $150 for my $750 electric scooter that I just got. They came with a $4000 warranty for vehicles stolen while locked.
- LargeWu 1y agoAround here, having a lock doesn't guarantee anything. Bike thieves think nothing of cutting the lock with a cordless angle grinder in broad daylight. Or they'll super glue the locks and come back at night. Nice bike, junk bike, it doesn't really matter. Even being in a locked building.