1.8 Million Barrels of Oil a Day Avoided from Electric Vehicles - CleanTechnica
cleantechnica.com
Sign up for daily news updates from CleanTechnica on email. Or follow us on Google News! We love covering electric ... [continued]

1.8 Million Barrels of Oil a Day Avoided from Electric Vehicles::Sign up for daily news updates from CleanTechnica on email. Or follow us on Google News! We love covering electric … [continued]

  • jenny_ball@lemmy.worldEnglish
    13·
    1 year ago

    but also factor in what it takes to charge those batteries because that is fossil fuel somewhere down the line.

      • mriguy@lemmy.worldEnglish
        20·
        1 year ago

        No, even those are the old talking points! Now it’s “EVs have batteries that are very heavy, so they generate lots of tire particulates, which is way worse than the tailpipe emissions of ICE cars, which somehow magically don’t also have tires or something, and aren’t also getting heavier every year.”

        • AA5B@lemmy.worldEnglish
          5·
          1 year ago

          You skipped brakes. For a short time generating brake pad particulates was the talking point, until they discovered what “regen” meant

    • I_Fart_Glitter@lemmy.worldEnglish
      25·
      1 year ago

      They did.

      Naturally, less oil being burnt means less CO2 emissions. BNEF estimates that electric vehicles currently prevent 112 million metric tons of CO2 emissions per year. And this is net emissions reductions, also taking into account the emissions from extra electricity generation.

    • Snowstorm@lemmings.worldEnglish
      5·
      1 year ago

      edit: so the article claimed to have factored electricty generation. Cant believe you are the one being downvoted this hard. As someone who worked in the renewable energy research institute, each time people equal ev to ‘clean’ automatically I get crazy. The article especially mentioned china, who has a significant portion of electricty generated by coal. Even its by oil, it would produce more co2 for energy loss in conversion. The article has no merit with such flawed comparison

      • seang96@spgrn.comEnglish
        7·
        1 year ago

        The article literally states they factored in charging the battery, which is the main reason they are being down voted. Read the dang article if you are going to criticize it.

        • Snowstorm@lemmings.worldEnglish
          2·
          1 year ago

          I did not catch the single sentence buried there while being distracted by the old/new ev critism talk. Thanks for pointing out. This is interesting now if true. I’m reading the pdf later

          • seang96@spgrn.comEnglish
            1·
            1 year ago

            Yeah I am assuming it is true based off other reasings. Didn’t really read the data behind this article though. From past references larger battery EVs take about 16 months of break-in before it’s carbon neutral for manufacturing / emissions costs from an ICE vehicle. At that point even the heavy fossil fuel reliant electrical grids for charging is more energy / carbon neutral than the cost to refine / deliver / use gasoline for ice vehicles.