• Solivine@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    My main problems with EVs is that they don’t reduce car dependency and the upfront manufacturing environmental cost of making them do not make them more eco friendly across their lifespan (especially with the trend of bigger and heavier cars). Car manufacturers are just jumping on the bandwagon to keep cars relevant in the mind of the consumer and clean their image of more obvious pollutants such as gas and oil.

    Electric cars will just perpetuate all the other problems with cars, while tricking consumer into thinking they’re making an environmentally sound choice and clean their conscience. There was still a giant environmental cost to making them, children still mined lithium for them, tyre rubber will still fill the lungs of people, etc etc.

    • Staccato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      EVs start their life with a higher environmental burden than ICE vehicles, but the math comes out so that the burden becomes lower after between 15k-20k miles.

      By the end of life of an EV, they are more eco friendly than an ICE vehicle of similar build.

      • Solivine@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        If that’s true then I’ve been fed some misinformation, could you provide a link/source verifying this?

        • Tnaeriv@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          I found this article by the European Environment Agency. There’s also the Green NCAP website where you can check the environmental impact of different vehicles over their entire lifetime.

      • drewdarko@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Also, “Environmental burden” and “eco friendly” are generic buzzwords used to lump other environmental issues like micro plastics or habitat destruction in with the reduction of green house gases.

        I wonder how the math would work out when it is strictly about reduction of greenhouse gases and factors unrelated to our dependency on fossil fuels are not skewing the results.

        • Staccato@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Good point. I was referring to analyses I read that were calculating the carbon footprint specifically. Apologies for using vague language.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        The number of miles varies a lot depending on the source of electricity but it goes up to 50k if it’s from burning coal IIRC

        • Staccato@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Which, over the lifetime of the car, is still a win environmentally. Modern cars are estimated to last for 200k miles, and electric vehicles are believed capable of enduring for 300k miles (although most models are too new to really prove that with data).

    • cynar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      As far as I was aware, the environmental impact is still considerably less than a ICE car, even if powered from dirty power. The impacts are different, making a simple comparison difficult, but generally EV win out.

      I’m not saying electric cars are perfect, far from it. However, the change is pushing in the right direction. Think of it as a 2 front battle. Public transport Vs car, and EV vs ICE cars. Your arguments have very little bearing on the public Vs private transport argument, but heavily affect the EV Vs ICE argument.

      I’d strongly prefer cities with public transport so good that there is little need for cars etc. However, I would also rather have a city with EV cars over ICE cars. The change over from ICE to EV will also help change habits. That is a perfect time to push public transport into the mix.

      Picking a fight with EV is just going to leave both groups bloody. Big oil etc will egg it on, while laughing all the way to the bank.

      • Takumidesh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean it makes sense at a first principles level.

        An ice car connected to a transmission has a lot of losses, additionally, the engine is constantly in and out of various power and efficiency ranges.

        Even if you are just hooked up to a generator somewhere else, the generator can run at peak efficiency consistently to charge the battery instead of constantly varying.

        You could translate it to any power source. A large wind turbine is going to do better than a small one on top of the car.

    • drewdarko@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Lithium isn’t mined it is gathered by pumping water into salt flats so the lithium rises to the surface and it isn’t done by children. You’re repeating misinformation.

      There is an environmental cost for absolutely anything we make. Do you suggest we stop making anything and everything?

      Electric cars are the more environmentally sound choice. They are a required first step to ending our dependence on fossil fuels. Without them we cannot end our dependency.

        • drewdarko@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Not weird at all. They are mining an ore called spodumene then using a new method to refine it into lithium. They aren’t harvesting raw lithium like it is done everywhere else in the world.

          Also, nothing about children doing the work.

          Nice try moving the goalpost though.

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I never said anything about the children though.

            Your comment started with “Lithium isn’t mined”, I just proved that was false, that’s all.

            • drewdarko@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              You didn’t prove anything false. You proved that spodumene is mined and spodumene isn’t lithium. Just like iron mined isn’t steel.

              Also you’re trying to ignore the context, which is that ‘EVs bad cause children are forced to mine lithium’. Which proves you’re not arguing in good faith.

              • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Pretty disingenuous, that’s like me saying “gas doesn’t come from underground because it’s actually refined from petrol and the petrol isn’t underground anymore when it’s refined”

                • drewdarko@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  More like saying “EVs are bad because lithium is mined by children”.

                  Then when it is proven that it is not mined, let alone by children, you linking to an article of some rare method of mining spodumene that isn’t done by children and you pretending that is what the discussion is about.

                  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I was answering your message, I’m not the person that talked about children in the first place, you’re message was “it’s not mined AND its not done by children”, that’s two separate affirmations, I only replied to the first one yet you keep bringing up the second one.

                    Mining is one way Lithium is produced, therefore you were wrong. Doesn’t matter that it’s rare, your first point was that it doesn’t happen at all, which is false.

        • drewdarko@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Your first three articles are about children mining COBALT in Africa. Not mining lithium like I said.

          Cobalt is not required for making EVs. It is just an ingredient in one of the many different battery types.

          Your 4th link is about using child labor in China to build batteries. Not mine material.

          Conclusion: you either didn’t read the articles or you are trying to move the goalpost.

            • drewdarko@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Theres 4 links that I see. I commented on the first 3 then the 4th.

              If that went unnoticed by you then how is anyone supposed to trust your research on the subject?

          • Solivine@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            And they’re needed in the construction of Lithium-Ion batteries, which the vast majority of EVs use, you’re clearly arguing in bad faith over semantics. My bad, since children are dying mining for some other mineral it’s okay, my mistake.

            • drewdarko@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Again, cobalt isn’t needed to make batteries and there are many other battery chemistries that can be used in EVs. If that is really a concern of yours then you would be arguing for EV manufacturers to use a different battery chemistry. Which they are already transitioning to.

              But you aren’t arguing for manufacturers to change battery chemistry. You’re cherry picking information to argue that EVs are the same as ICEs vehicles. Which makes your intentions obvious.

              You argue against EVs then claim to want to end car dependency. So you want everyone riding busses and trains run on diesel?

              Climate change is real and we need to end our dependency on fossil fuels to prevent the extinction of our species and EVs are a required step in doing that.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      do not make them more eco friendly across their lifespan

      I upvoted you despite this inaccuracy.

      The problem with electric cars is that they’re only a marginal improvement over fossil-fuel cars (note: not the same as “ICE”)*, when, as you said, what we need are the transformative gains from ending car-dependency. (I.e., changing the zoning code to encourage walkable density instead of prohibiting it and ending subsidies on car infrastructure.)

      (* IMO internal combustion is not the right distinction to make, since things like biodiesel and gasoline synthesized from CO2+H20+electricity could be carbon-neutral too.)

    • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      No matter how you power it, bringing 6000lbs of steel with you to go anywhere or do anything is unsustainable.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s not even just that! Bringing a thing that takes a 10’x20’ space to store with you everywhere is unsustainable.

        Even a 2000lb Mazda Miata takes up the same number of parking spaces – one – as a Ford Excursion, which means it contributes just as much to parking lots destroying walkability as the big SUV does. It also contributes just as much to the “need” to widen roads, since you can only have one car per lane and the longitudinal space is dominated by safe following distance, not the length of the vehicle itself.

        The bottom line is that all cars ruin cities, even the small ones. (And before somebody chimes in with “but whatabout Kei cars/compact parking spaces,” I’ll note that Japan doesn’t even let you buy any car – including a Kei car – without proof that you have an off-street parking space to store it in, and such spaces are far and few in between in cities since Japan’s zoning code is relatively sane. In other words, the total number of cars is substantially limited and that’s the saving grace, not the Kei cars themelves.)