369
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2023
369 points (95.8% liked)
Asklemmy
44123 readers
622 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
ICE rely on 100% carbon fuels. There is no other option.
EVs don't have to. If the grid is decarbonised, they could run on 100% renewable energy. Even if there are fossil fuels powering the grid, the centralisation of the combustion should make it an easier target to scrub/capture pollution from.
Tire pollution is pretty bad tho.
While EVs aren't going to save the planet, hopefully the battery tech and infrastructure investments will help pave the way to better solutions.
To get anywhere close to the grid being considered decarbonised (I'm ignoring carbon capture here because that's not going to happen at any meaningful scale unless we geoengineer shit) all of the materials, all of the manufacturing and all of the building and maintenance would have to be run on renewable energy. Like from the mines of Australia over to all of the plants in china to assembly, for every component.
And to have it make any difference at all, you have to do it within the next 30 or so years. And then there's still the tyres, also you gotta do the entire shit again for the very climate friendly processing of building roads that withstand cars for give or take a season, extra challenge mode due to the increased weight of EVs. And also then there's still the tyres.
We've already got those, it's called trains and bicycles, former have been EVs for like a century
While I understand that, you've also described the supply chain of building an ICE vehicle, extracting and refining fuel, transporting fuel etc.
Even if the EV suppli chain is currently terrible, that's because regulations haven't caught up yet. It was the same with oil extraction, "why pipe it when you can just have a river of crude oil" mentality. And hopefully regulations are faster to be enforced.
Anyway, if the end result of a given supply chain is something that goes on to produce less pollution, then that is progress.
And yes, public transport is always going to be better. Especially if they aren't ICE.
Even EV mopeds are great. And the amount of electric bicycles I've seen going around is encouraging.
I agree EVs aren't going to save the planet. But they are progress, and you can't convince me that we should continue using fossil fuels for personal transport.
I'm not arguing pro ICE cars over EV cars, I'm arguing against cars, be they EV or ICE
A purely fossil fuelled electric car (as in, fossil grid) is already more efficient than an ICE.