Even if you charge an EV on electricity generated from coal, it’s still cleaner over its lifetime.
(Shock! Running one large generator constantly at the peak of its efficiency curve is more efficient than tens of thousands of tiny engines from a cold start, with varying levels of proper maintenance, all over their rev-range).
About 5 years ago, two (peer reviewed) UK studies found that EVs typically overtake ICE vehicles after only around 2 years of ownership. The UK grid is cleaner now so it will now be an even shorter timeframe.
I have an MX-5 that I drive on weekends, and care for dearly, it burns petrol, and I plan to keep this car literally for the rest of my life, because I love driving it. But fuck me am I fucking tired of the FUD surrounding EVs.
Stop spreading disinformation and do some bloody research. Do better.
The basic fact is that mining sucks and cars (or for that matter, most other technical products) are not environmentally friendly. However, the scale of these issues varies for different products. And to the point of scale:
I’ll admit, the specifics and the source on this infographic are “trust me bro” because I forgot where I screenshotted it from. The takeaway is this, though: The necessary level of materials mining for electrified products and green energy does not compare to the level of fossil fuels drilling needed otherwise. In addition, battery materials can be recycled pretty well, so you only need to mine them once. Fossil fuels can not be recycled.
In any case, it’s a good idea to question where all of the things you own and consume come from. It’s a good thing to fight for supply-chain laws. However, detractors of green energies systematically exaggerate environmental impacts precisely because the technologies they propose are massively dirtier.
As to lithium in particular: Lithium from South America indeed has large environmental ramifications. However, most lithium is in fact mined in Australia in a completely different process.
I’m sceptical of electric cars because I believe trains are the better solution. No batteries at all, and no microlastic pollution (tyres). Also much less steel and other materials needed per person-kilometre, and the train cars last for tens of millions of kilometres, not just 200k or so.
Mass transit is better than cars. That’s transparent. The point you were making previously though, was that electric cars may be worse than fossil-fuel burning cars. Why are you switching tack again?
I was asking, not making a point. I saw a documentary about the catastrophic environmental impact of lithium mining in Argentina. When I expressed a view critical of a conversion from ICE to EV I had a conversion to trains instead in mind
Even if you charge an EV on electricity generated from coal, it’s still cleaner over its lifetime.
(Shock! Running one large generator constantly at the peak of its efficiency curve is more efficient than tens of thousands of tiny engines from a cold start, with varying levels of proper maintenance, all over their rev-range).
About 5 years ago, two (peer reviewed) UK studies found that EVs typically overtake ICE vehicles after only around 2 years of ownership. The UK grid is cleaner now so it will now be an even shorter timeframe.
I have an MX-5 that I drive on weekends, and care for dearly, it burns petrol, and I plan to keep this car literally for the rest of my life, because I love driving it. But fuck me am I fucking tired of the FUD surrounding EVs.
Stop spreading disinformation and do some bloody research. Do better.
Ahat about lithium production? Do you know much heavily contaminated water that leaves behind?
I don’t have an ICE car, by the way. Nor will I buy one.
The basic fact is that mining sucks and cars (or for that matter, most other technical products) are not environmentally friendly. However, the scale of these issues varies for different products. And to the point of scale:
I’ll admit, the specifics and the source on this infographic are “trust me bro” because I forgot where I screenshotted it from. The takeaway is this, though: The necessary level of materials mining for electrified products and green energy does not compare to the level of fossil fuels drilling needed otherwise. In addition, battery materials can be recycled pretty well, so you only need to mine them once. Fossil fuels can not be recycled.
In any case, it’s a good idea to question where all of the things you own and consume come from. It’s a good thing to fight for supply-chain laws. However, detractors of green energies systematically exaggerate environmental impacts precisely because the technologies they propose are massively dirtier.
As to lithium in particular: Lithium from South America indeed has large environmental ramifications. However, most lithium is in fact mined in Australia in a completely different process.
I’m sceptical of electric cars because I believe trains are the better solution. No batteries at all, and no microlastic pollution (tyres). Also much less steel and other materials needed per person-kilometre, and the train cars last for tens of millions of kilometres, not just 200k or so.
Mass transit is better than cars. That’s transparent. The point you were making previously though, was that electric cars may be worse than fossil-fuel burning cars. Why are you switching tack again?
I was asking, not making a point. I saw a documentary about the catastrophic environmental impact of lithium mining in Argentina. When I expressed a view critical of a conversion from ICE to EV I had a conversion to trains instead in mind
Are you conceding that you were indeed making shit up in your previous comment?
Nowhere near as bad as what goes on with fossil fuel production.
Ok?
Asking a question is making shit up?
Why are you so angry towards me?
No, making shit up is making shit up.
I’m being terse with you because you’re spreading disinformation about EVs that was thoroughly debunked years ago.
Then, when corrected, you’re just jumping to the next piece of disinformation.
We must be talking about different conversations