this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2024
139 points (97.3% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

6997 readers
417 users here now

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: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world.  About 1C of total warming.  Second chart:  about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability.  Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases.  About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The emissions from the EV are largely because we've not yet gotten fossil fuels out of electric generation.

all 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 34 points 11 months ago (3 children)

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.

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago (2 children)

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.

[–] femtech@midwest.social 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] lemmyseikai@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

You've got my axe!

[–] Kyrgizion@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] swampdownloader@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 11 months ago

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.

[–] brianary@startrek.website 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

In the PNW, we've been all hydropower for generations.

[–] sonori@beehaw.org 2 points 11 months ago

Depends a lot on which company, for instance while Bonneville is like 50% hydro and 6% fossil, Puget Sound Energy and Portland General Electric are currently something like 19% and 25% fossil fuel respectively in this last year and used to be far higher in the recent past.

[–] lnxtx@feddit.nl 8 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Small electric SUVs? They exist?

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

"Small" is the non-monstrous size.

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

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.

[–] Kaboom@reddthat.com 2 points 11 months ago

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

[–] OpticalAccount@aussie.zone 1 points 11 months ago

MG ZS for example

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 4 points 11 months ago

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.

[–] socsa@piefed.social 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

And what about a normal sized EV?

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Even better of course. Not that there are many on the market in the US; automakers are increasing the size of every model.

[–] Kowowow@lemmy.ca 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Please I just want a modern style electric bronco

[–] blandfordforever@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

It seems like you're putting form before function.

[–] Mac@mander.xyz 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] blandfordforever@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] Mac@mander.xyz 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

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

[–] sonori@beehaw.org 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It’s also confusing because it’s not like there isn’t a electrical grid within a hundred miles of where one would go off roading. Us rural mountain yokel’s actually do have plenty RV parks, hotels with EV chargers, and plenty of other places with household outlets that allow overnight charging.

There are also of course a lot of other reasons people might get an electric SUV, not least of which are that there are actual options in the market segment, no one makes electric vans with sufficient range to make it between interstate and highway fast chargers or minivans period, need to seat more than four people comfortably or seven people total, need at least some towing, need a decently sized cargo space that isn’t seat shaped, etc…

I mean i’d love it if car manufacturers would stop shoving everyone towards high margin SUVs and Pickups, or made EVs in more than large sedan and SUV flavor, but it doesn’t feel like that’s what they’re talking about.

[–] blandfordforever@lemm.ee -1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] threeganzi@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

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.

[–] Kowowow@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago

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