• ZC3rr0r@piefed.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    5 hours ago

    While you are not wrong, the enemy of “perfect” should not be “good”.

    In this case, presuming folks get into a new vehicle ever 4-5 years on average (I know the number is skewing more toward 6-7 in the US, but the point stands) having them switch to a car that has a slightly higher production impact but makes up for it after the first 1.5 years of ownership still means we achieve net lower emissions. There are numerous studies showing that EVs, even when used on less clean electricity sources, drastically reduce total lifetime emissions compared to combustion engine vehicles.

    And let’s not forget that we can power EVs using renewable sources (solar, wind, hydro) which is just an economically and environmentally more sustainable practice than the single-use burning of a bunch of hydrocarbons.

    • Ignotum@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I think it’s also more efficient to burn the hydrocarbons in a large generator and using the power to charge an EV,
      combustion engines on vehicles are limited in weight size and shape, and since its rpm varies a lot during driving it is not operating at peak efficiency
      a large and heavy generator can extract more of the energy, and always runs at the optimal operating speed, making it way more efficient, producing enough additional to cover the conversion losses of the mechanical->electric->electrochemical->electric->mechanical chain and then some