this post was submitted on 10 May 2024
179 points (96.4% liked)

World News

38639 readers
2438 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Does the carbon savings make it worth it?

[–] JustTesting@lemmy.hogru.ch 8 points 4 months ago

In addition to other answers, keep in mind that Tesla gets credits relative to how far below the average carbon footprint their cars are and sell those credits to manufacturers of cars with more emissions. So in a way a part of the reduced liferime emissions are "gone" before the cars drive for the first time

[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Highly doubtful. EVs still have a high footprint, especially those obese ones that we're making in the West.

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago (2 children)

They have a large footprint of creation. Their footprint over their lifetime is net negative when measured against direct alternatives.

[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Measured against ICE cars. Actual direct alternatives are public transport, bikes, and micro cars. And you're also assuming they're driven that long before the person buys another car.

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Those are indirect alternatives. A direct alternative serves the exact same function.

It doesn’t matter if that person buys another car; it matter is the EV stays on the road. They do.

[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

They do serve the exact same function. And no, they don't stay on the road. The batteries degrade, die and aren't replaceable due to proprietary designs. There's already plenty of dead EVs.

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

The average life of an EV is over 13 years. The batteries, generally have 100k warranties and are consistently lasting well into the 150k mile ranges. These vehicles stay on the road for as long as an ICE automobile and have a negative carbon footprint when compared to that baseline.

Buses, trains, trams, etc. serve a similar overall function as a personal automobile, the two even share some overlap on fundamental functions; however, as they are not 1:1 replacements for one another any comparison can never be of a direct nature.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I've been doing an ebike conversion to do errands around town. I won't be using it to travel to my mother in law's place 70 miles away. They aren't direct alternatives.

[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That's what trains are for, or worst case, a car that isn't an oversized mess.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 1 points 4 months ago

I'd love that. We're also not likely to get it anytime soon between us and her. Though we hopefully will for other cities in the area.

[–] GiveMemes@jlai.lu -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Unless you consider alternatives such as e-bikes and public transport which we should be. We're not gonna make a dent in climate change without some form of sacrifice.

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Those are indirect alternatives and are not relevant to my comment.

[–] slurpyslop@kbin.social 3 points 4 months ago

if there were some figures i could fiddle to fit that narrative, do you think that would mean that cutting down 250 acres of forest would actually be worth it rather than a convenience somebody has gussied up as "necessary" because it would make them a profit?