Sign up for daily news updates from CleanTechnica on email. Or follow us on Google News! A recent article at Forbes explains that environmentalism might not be the best thing to focus on when selling EVs. While this may seem like a “duh” kind of thing, it affects more than ... [continued]
BEVs do not reduce emissions enough. That is the point. Not even close to enough. And that’s putting aside all of the physical space requirements, lack of water absorbtion, pollution, and personal injury caused by vehicles.
It’s not an overnight fix, but the fact remains that people have magical thinking and believe EVs are fixing or addressing climate change. They ARE NOT, they continue to exacerbated the issue. Being marginally better isn’t fixing or fighting anything, it just lets you feel better.
Climate change is a multifactorial problem and it will require multipronged solutions. This includes transition to EVs, transition to solar/renewable electricity production, higher efficiency homes, higher efficiency industry/agriculture, and more.
There will always be individual transportation, and climate scientists account for that when setting climate goals.
Light duty EVs will contribute little to CO2 emissions once the electrical grid moves away from fossil fuels. In some states, there is already enough wind/solar electricity that EVs decrease CO2 emissions by 94%.
The idea that EVs will contribute little to global CO2 emissions is complete fantasy, and it demonstrates exactly what I was saying in my first comment. Nobody is willing to make the sacrifices necessary, so we all buy our indulgences and continue driving straight at the cliff we can clearly see. It’s already too late to stop a climate disaster, we’re simply determining how bad it’s going to be. And from where I stand, it’s going to be much worse than you’re pretending.
In the meantime, we keep on buying vehicles and dumping GHG into the air and pollution into our water.
I don’t care if you own an EV. You still look at EVs in terms of “sin” and “indulgences”, as a priest would. You even share their belief in an preordained apocalypse.
I look at EVs as a scientist would: they are an effective way to reduce CO2. I don’t care about your moral judgment at all, for the same reason I don’t care what priests say: your various pronouncements are not based on science.
No, I think we can mitigate the effects of climate change with effective regulation. And part of that includes replacing ICE vehicles with EVs.
BEVs do not reduce emissions enough. That is the point. Not even close to enough. And that’s putting aside all of the physical space requirements, lack of water absorbtion, pollution, and personal injury caused by vehicles.
It’s not an overnight fix, but the fact remains that people have magical thinking and believe EVs are fixing or addressing climate change. They ARE NOT, they continue to exacerbated the issue. Being marginally better isn’t fixing or fighting anything, it just lets you feel better.
Nothing, by itself, “reduces emissions enough”.
Climate change is a multifactorial problem and it will require multipronged solutions. This includes transition to EVs, transition to solar/renewable electricity production, higher efficiency homes, higher efficiency industry/agriculture, and more.
It includes a transition away from individual transportation.
Light duty vehicles account for 57% of transportation emissions. https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fast-facts-transportation-greenhouse-gas-emissions
There will always be individual transportation, and climate scientists account for that when setting climate goals.
Light duty EVs will contribute little to CO2 emissions once the electrical grid moves away from fossil fuels. In some states, there is already enough wind/solar electricity that EVs decrease CO2 emissions by 94%.
The idea that EVs will contribute little to global CO2 emissions is complete fantasy, and it demonstrates exactly what I was saying in my first comment. Nobody is willing to make the sacrifices necessary, so we all buy our indulgences and continue driving straight at the cliff we can clearly see. It’s already too late to stop a climate disaster, we’re simply determining how bad it’s going to be. And from where I stand, it’s going to be much worse than you’re pretending.
In the meantime, we keep on buying vehicles and dumping GHG into the air and pollution into our water.
The idea that EV adoption can significantly reduce global CO2 emissions is supported by science.
But you seem more interested in moral judgment than science.
Let me reiterate, I own an EV. You can feel morally judged all you want, that’s on you.
I don’t care if you own an EV. You still look at EVs in terms of “sin” and “indulgences”, as a priest would. You even share their belief in an preordained apocalypse.
I look at EVs as a scientist would: they are an effective way to reduce CO2. I don’t care about your moral judgment at all, for the same reason I don’t care what priests say: your various pronouncements are not based on science.