416

Everyone knows that electric vehicles are supposed to be better for the planet than gas cars. That's the driving reason behind a global effort to transition toward batteries.

But what about the harms caused by mining for battery minerals? And coal-fired power plants for the electricity to charge the cars? And battery waste? Is it really true that EVs are better?

The answer is yes. But Americans are growing less convinced.

The net benefits of EVs have been frequently fact-checked, including by NPR. "No technology is perfect, but the electric vehicles are going to offer a significant benefit as compared to the internal combustion engine vehicles," Jessika Trancik, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, told NPR this spring.

It's important to ask these questions about EVs' hidden costs, Trancik says. But they have been answered "exhaustively"


her word


and a widerange of organizations have confirmed that EVs still beat gas.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago

Because the conservative machine, despite the love of Elon's right-wing antics, never stop talking about how bad EVs are. Funny, the only time they act like they care about the environment is when they talk about how bad the EV batteries are to manufacture. While they roll coal and drive gas-guzzling mall cruiser bro-dozers all over the place.

[-] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 8 points 12 hours ago

Its about 40% more power efficient per mile but theres a couple of other trade-offs, still better yeah.

[-] AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee 28 points 16 hours ago

Public transportation is even better yet

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 5 points 12 hours ago

And when we actually get that going I'll stop making sure I always have a car available.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Fedizen@lemmy.world 5 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

zombie engineer voice "traiiiiiins"

[-] Wispy2891@lemmy.world 15 points 15 hours ago

Put them in a sealed room with a gas engine running and you'll see how fast they realize that they're cleaner

[-] Mcdolan@lemmy.world 3 points 12 hours ago

Fair, but the first rebuttal is going to be "go into a sealed room with a coal fire burning"

[-] Liz@midwest.social 2 points 8 hours ago

I'd happily hang out in a sealed room with a nuclear reactor.

[-] guacupado@lemmy.world 4 points 10 hours ago

... how is that an argument?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] ninekeysdown@lemmy.world 5 points 12 hours ago

Because we Americans are easily swayed by propaganda, unfortunately.

[-] celsiustimeline@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 16 hours ago

Of course they're cleaner. As long as your electricity isn't coming from coal, you're doing better by the environment than an ICE.

[-] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 28 points 16 hours ago

Even if your energy comes from coal they're still more efficient.

[-] dutchkimble@lemy.lol 11 points 18 hours ago

Genuine question - are EVs better for the environment if the main source of electricity of my country is coal based? Most of the coal plants are pretty old too…

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 16 points 12 hours ago

Yes. That's the entire point here. The answer is yes.

[-] LordKitsuna@lemmy.world 30 points 18 hours ago

Yes, whether your electric plant is coal, natural gas, or honestly even if it was diesel. Larger engines are more efficient than smaller ones. It's been a long time since I broke down the math over 10 years so my information is probably wildly out of date but even 10 years ago when you broke down the math charging an EV from a fossil fuel plant of any kind was still ultimately more efficient than a gas car in the long term.

Couple that with the ability of many EV now to also act as a battery for your house and that just goes wildly into the EVs favor if you utilize that for peak demand offset. Which many people could do easily even if it meant not having their battery fully charged in the morning when they go to leave for work because let's face it very few people drive more than 60 miles full round trip in a day so even with their battery at say half they would have more than enough for their whole day plus extra.

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

Cleaner than gas cars =/= Clean.

This is the lowest possible bar to pass. The point isn't that EVs are worse than gas. The point is that both are terrible for people, health, safety, climate, transit, sustainability, equity, freedom, etc.

So what’s your plan? Ban cars? Good luck.

[-] celsiustimeline@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

We wouldn't have to resign ourselves to bullshit half measures if we lived in a society that didn't treat public transit as the "poor person's option" and didn't see sitting in bumper to bumper traffic, breathing in all those wonderful carcinogenic fumes as "freedom".

Let's ban oil company propaganda first. Also, yeah. Fuck cars.

[-] auzy@lemmy.world 3 points 15 hours ago

We have plenty of public transport here.

I'd still need a car because I do a lot of hiking and I carry a lot of stuff to and from work

[-] hardcoreufo@lemmy.world 3 points 15 hours ago

It's not that public transportation is for the poors, it's that it is inconvenient. I used to ride the metro every day to work when I lived in DC and it added an extra hour vs driving. I didn't mind as I could chill and read a book or listen to music but it was extra time.

When I moved to Portland I could take the bus to work because my house and job were on the same route so it was only about 5 minutes more than driving. Now I'd have to take 2 buses, or walk a mile to the bus stop on the same route as my work. Either option would turn a 10 minute drive into an hour commute each way. I don't have that kind of extra time when I work 12 hour shifts and come home on my lunch break to walk the dog. I assume people with kids have even more of a time crunch.

[-] Eximius@lemmy.world 7 points 18 hours ago

Wut. Cars have legitimate uses.

EVs dont only not pollute wherever they drive, but overall are probably around 70% efficient if including the power generation, while gas is 40% or less.

The others, I think you are projecting US problems to the whole self-owned transportation sector.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

Over the longterm, and they also require a lot less maintenance because they don't have to deal with mini-explosions from combustion generating excess heat and stress. The problem is in the battery, and the industry hasn't even scratched the surface for solutions.

I see trucks carrying butane tanks all the time, where are the trucks carrying EV battery replacements? There aren't because the industry wants to charge extra for fixed installation ones depending on capacity and charging capacity and there is absolutely no profit incentive that offsets other losses to standardize battery systems in a way they can be easily extensible or replaceable.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2024
416 points (96.2% liked)

News

22926 readers
3804 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS