3 ms·

People keep their cars for longer than 2 to 4 years and an EV sold in 2 to 4 years will likely be driven by someone else. Which is why I put a used EV as being

by cogman10 10mo ago

People keep their cars for longer than 2 to 4 years and an EV sold in 2 to 4 years will likely be driven by someone else. Which is why I put a used EV as being better for the environment vs a new one. But both will be better for the environment in their lifetime than keeping a used ICE on the road. It's more economical to keep your current car until it starts seeing major mechanical issues. However, environmentally an EV will (almost) always beat an ICE, the sooner you get one the better. Especially in a place like the EU where you can get even more environmentally friendly EVs due to the lower amounts of driving. You can, for example, grab the BYD seagull which has a 30kWh battery pack. That alone significantly reduces the new EV environmental impact beyond what some of the older numbers would have shown.

closewith 10mo ago
> However, environmentally an EV will (almost) always beat an ICE, the sooner you get one the better. Especially in a place like the EU where you can get even more environmentally friendly EVs due to the lower amounts of driving. This is simply not true. A new EV will not reach emissions parity with a used ICE car in its average useful lifetime (12.5 years). This isn't close or controversial, so I wonder what the basis for your mistaken belief otherwise is? Not even EV companies make this claim.
- cogman10 10mo ago
  The payoff period for an EV is anywhere from 15,000 to 25,000mi. The moment any EV crosses that threshold, it becomes better for the environment than the ICE vehicle that you'd otherwise buy. If your used ICE vehicle has 15 to 25,000mi in it, then yeah, replacing it with an EV today is the better choice. It's more a matter of when it will be the better choice. This is only not true if you have very low yearly milages or a particularly efficient ICE. Which, maybe you do. [1] https://www.politifact.com/article/2022/dec/06/carbon-dioxide-released-during-production-electric/#:~:text=Some%20estimates%20say%20that%20after%20about%2015%2C000,at%20the%20University%20of%20Liege%20in%20Belgium https://www.politifact.com/article/2022/dec/06/carbon-dioxid...
  - closewith 10mo ago
    > The payoff period for an EV is anywhere from 15,000 to 25,000mi. The moment any EV crosses that threshold, it becomes better for the environment than the ICE vehicle that you'd otherwise buy. That's the payoff period for the carbon differential between a new EV and a new ICE, not a new EV and your existing ICE, where the carbon cost of production is already sunk. Hence why the GP commented that keeping your ICE is environmentally better than buying a new EV. Also note that 15-25k miles is 24-40k km, or 2.4-4 years of the average annual mileage in the EU. That's to break even with a new ICE. To break even with a second hand ICE, it's on the order or 15-20 years, or effectively longer than the useful life of the EV. > If your used ICE vehicle has 15 to 25,000mi in it, then yeah, replacing it with an EV today is the better choice. It's more a matter of when it will be the better choice. This claim is simply false. There is no point in the lifetime of a used ICE where replacing it with a new EV will result in reduce overall emissions.
    - cogman10 10mo ago
      > That's to break even with a new ICE. No, that's to break even with a new EV per the article I posted. I'd love to see a source that says otherwise. I think you have a bad source for the CO2 emissions of new EV production.
      - closewith 10mo ago
        From the ICCT, ironically under the subtitle "Addressing misuse of data in the EV debate": > One common claim is that electric vehicles have higher emissions associated with battery manufacturing. While manufacturing emissions for battery electric cars are roughly 40% higher than for gasoline cars, the ICCT’s research shows that this initial “emissions debt” is typically offset after around 17,000 kilometers of driving, usually within the first one to two years of use in Europe. The emissions debt is relative to a new ICE. In cradle-to-grave emissions, electric cars are much lower than ICE cars in lifetime carbon footprint, often 50% lower. That doesn't change the fact the replacing a used ICE with a new EV will result in increased overall emissions and increase the net carbon footprint. > I'd love to see a source that says otherwise. I think you have a bad source for the CO2 emissions of new EV production. This is a completely uncontroversial fact and no environmental or governmental bodies make the claim which you are putting forward, so I'd rather like to see your sources. Source: https://theicct.org/pr-electric-cars-getting-cleaner-faster/#:~:text=One%20common%20claim%20is%20that,years%20of%20use%20in%20Europe https://theicct.org/pr-electric-cars-getting-cleaner-faster/...

closewith 10mo ago

> However, environmentally an EV will (almost) always beat an ICE, the sooner you get one the better. Especially in a place like the EU where you can get even more environmentally friendly EVs due to the lower amounts of driving. This is simply not true. A new EV will not reach emissions parity with a used ICE car in its average useful lifetime (12.5 years). This isn't close or controversial, so I wonder what the basis for your mistaken belief otherwise is? Not even EV companies make this claim.

cogman10 10mo ago
The payoff period for an EV is anywhere from 15,000 to 25,000mi. The moment any EV crosses that threshold, it becomes better for the environment than the ICE vehicle that you'd otherwise buy. If your used ICE vehicle has 15 to 25,000mi in it, then yeah, replacing it with an EV today is the better choice. It's more a matter of when it will be the better choice. This is only not true if you have very low yearly milages or a particularly efficient ICE. Which, maybe you do. [1] https://www.politifact.com/article/2022/dec/06/carbon-dioxide-released-during-production-electric/#:~:text=Some%20estimates%20say%20that%20after%20about%2015%2C000,at%20the%20University%20of%20Liege%20in%20Belgium https://www.politifact.com/article/2022/dec/06/carbon-dioxid...
- closewith 10mo ago
  > The payoff period for an EV is anywhere from 15,000 to 25,000mi. The moment any EV crosses that threshold, it becomes better for the environment than the ICE vehicle that you'd otherwise buy. That's the payoff period for the carbon differential between a new EV and a new ICE, not a new EV and your existing ICE, where the carbon cost of production is already sunk. Hence why the GP commented that keeping your ICE is environmentally better than buying a new EV. Also note that 15-25k miles is 24-40k km, or 2.4-4 years of the average annual mileage in the EU. That's to break even with a new ICE. To break even with a second hand ICE, it's on the order or 15-20 years, or effectively longer than the useful life of the EV. > If your used ICE vehicle has 15 to 25,000mi in it, then yeah, replacing it with an EV today is the better choice. It's more a matter of when it will be the better choice. This claim is simply false. There is no point in the lifetime of a used ICE where replacing it with a new EV will result in reduce overall emissions.
  - cogman10 10mo ago
    > That's to break even with a new ICE. No, that's to break even with a new EV per the article I posted. I'd love to see a source that says otherwise. I think you have a bad source for the CO2 emissions of new EV production.
    - closewith 10mo ago
      From the ICCT, ironically under the subtitle "Addressing misuse of data in the EV debate": > One common claim is that electric vehicles have higher emissions associated with battery manufacturing. While manufacturing emissions for battery electric cars are roughly 40% higher than for gasoline cars, the ICCT’s research shows that this initial “emissions debt” is typically offset after around 17,000 kilometers of driving, usually within the first one to two years of use in Europe. The emissions debt is relative to a new ICE. In cradle-to-grave emissions, electric cars are much lower than ICE cars in lifetime carbon footprint, often 50% lower. That doesn't change the fact the replacing a used ICE with a new EV will result in increased overall emissions and increase the net carbon footprint. > I'd love to see a source that says otherwise. I think you have a bad source for the CO2 emissions of new EV production. This is a completely uncontroversial fact and no environmental or governmental bodies make the claim which you are putting forward, so I'd rather like to see your sources. Source: https://theicct.org/pr-electric-cars-getting-cleaner-faster/#:~:text=One%20common%20claim%20is%20that,years%20of%20use%20in%20Europe https://theicct.org/pr-electric-cars-getting-cleaner-faster/...