Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
The emissions from the EV are largely because we've not yet gotten fossil fuels out of electric generation.
This is with the US electricity generation mix. That is a significant amount of gas and coal. In a country with a greener mix the emissions will diverge further.
I wonder how many EV owners in the US have solar panels on their houses? I bet it’s a larger percentage than ICE drivers.
Solar panels on houses aren't the win they seem to be unless one lives in a market with an unstable grid and requires self-powering. It's nice to feel like you're "helping" but grid-scale solar will always win. Plus the whole home solar market is a complete scammy racket now unless one can find a reputable local company.
Looked into it a while ago, oftentimes the agreement has the solar company leasing your roof space for 30+ years, and during construction they have a carte blanche permission to access any part of your house at any time. After install, you have to then seek permission through them if you want to do anything to your roof. Hail storm caused a roof leak? Well, you'll be waiting a bit to have that taken care of. My favorite agreement was one with a California firm, you had 72 hours to cancel after signing and the only way to cancel was to telegram their California office.
They also do a piss-poor job of factoring in things like the expense of having to rewire your utility panel or the necessity of lopping off the tops of trees (which then reduces the carbon sink they were doing, and shade on the house) in the initial estimates and try to wave away the mushrooming expenses. If the company goes under and there's not a transfer of stewardship of the generating equipment, it can arbitrarily be disabled until the homeowner finds a way to manually override or a new vendor takes over in their stead.
As someone who has solar panels on their roof, this is a bunch of BS. They paid for themselves after five years. I didn’t lease them, I paid for the system and the city, state, and feds helped to offset the costs with rebates. I didn’t have to rewire my house. Without the panels, my summer HVAC bill would be twice what I pay each month.
Depends of the solar vendor. Some do indeed have fucked up models. If I can ever afford it, I'm buying not leasing.
5 years is a tight ROI! How much was the TCO?
Count me as 1!
You've got my axe!
Where I live, the majority of energy contracts are explicitly green, in which the producer guarantees the power was generated by renewable sources (mostly wind, water & solar). That would indeed skew the "greenness" even more.
Depending where you are, a lot of those “green” supply contracts in the US are worthless RECs like overnight wind surplus in Texas, sold to consumers elsewhere (in an entirely different grid). In which case I would argue they are greenwashing.
In the PNW, we've been all hydropower for generations.
Lifetime vehicle miles traveled is 183,363 miles, and the assumed grid mix is the 2022 U.S. average in R&D GREET 2023.
EVs vehicle should last longer than that (though the battery will require replacement) so I think the EV production part will shrink.
Notice they break down the production and distribution of gas (not including the burning). Interesting.
Yeah, refining some oil deposits involves absolutely huge inputs of methane to turn heavy oil into something that's suitable for use in motor vehicles.
And what about a normal sized EV?
Even better of course. Not that there are many on the market in the US; automakers are increasing the size of every model.
Doubtful. Smaller cars are ~~more~~ aerodynamic and much higher fuel economy.
The same drop in energy needs applies to the EV too, along with sharply reduced emissions associated with manufacturing it.
Nope, that's not how physics works. SUVs are insanely inefficient. A box on wheels. 11MPG vs 50. Likewise, all electric vehicles have more mass than their engine equivalents. And that mass is constant. Aerodynamic shit cars are simple piles of metal that ingest a chemical and produce range. Not even getting into the human and environmental cost of battery production.
Gas propulsion cars need to die, no question. Only because their fuel is finite and there are much better options now. However, there is no easy Apple keynote solution. It is complex and sometimes doesn't make sense.
Small electric SUVs? They exist?
"Small" is the non-monstrous size.
They used to. GM had the Chevy Bolt and Kia had the Soul EV. The bolt is supposedly coming back, but I don’t have much faith that it will be small and economical like the previous version.
MG ZS for example
It's called a cross over. Basically a large hatchback. It's not a SUV if it's not built like a truck, IE body on frame construction
my problem with those is that production is where most emissions are. we need them to be repairable and not disposable, and its not looking good how they are trying to turn cars into smartphones.
Please I just want a modern style electric bronco
It seems like you're putting form before function.
There are a hundred different forms and they all function the same.
Wanting a specific form does not take away from function in this scenario.
SUV's with their extra weight, high suspension, and big, inefficient tires definitely take away from the function of an electric vehicle.
Aren't we all in agreement that the cybertruck is a ridiculous, nonsense, piece of garbage?
Are you going to bring a trailer full of solar panels with you on your EV overlanding adventure? Where do you think you're going to plug this thing in?
They don't need off-road capability. They're just going to drive a needlessly inefficient design to work and the grocery store because they like the way it looks.
Gasoline engines make way more sense for off-road capable vehicles.
The current state of electric vehicle tech is still better suited to vehicles that focus on efficiency.
EV SUVs are already a (very popular) thing. I'm sorry that you take issue with that.
OP didn't say anything about big lifted overlanders, you're projecting. They, like me, might think the base Bronco is a cute little SUV that is styled well and has a really pretty color combination.
Also, there's nothing wrong with bringing a wild energy setup for an adventure.
I honestly can't figure out if you're butthurt about SUVs, EVs, or lifted trucks. lmao
I think what annoys me is the oxymoronicality (is that even a word?) of the whole thing. We're excited that EVs pollute less. However, we're choosing a less efficient, more pollution creating, worse version of the new, better thing: The efficient type of power in the body of a gas guzzler.
ICE vehicles are unsustainable. EVs are also unsustainable but they're a little better. We should strive for even more efficiency and even less pollution.
I should probably just take my attitude back to the "fuck cars" community.
If we could just have a tax based on carbon footprint it would incentivize better decisions. And perhaps start low and then slowly increase the tax at a constant and predictable rate so industry and consumers can plan ahead. The tax income could also be equally distributed to all citizens, where people with less carbon footprint gets money back. And now we’ll have a thriving economy driving the climate transition.
Check out Citizens Climate Lobby by the way.
I just would like something a little bigger than a kia soul, it's so close to perfect for me I'd convert it if the bronco didn't look a bit better