I assumed ev emissions would be less than that of ICE vehicles. I didn’t really think about what source of energy powers local grids. What’s going to happen when EVs become the norm and millions of cars are charging overnight? Hard to imagine there will be significant discounts for TOU plans at that point.
Humanity must move on to green energy sources. Wind, Solar, Nuclear, Tidal.
We have the technology for this planet to never run out of electricity. We just need to overcome the politics of big oil.
An EV doesn’t do much for the environment if the power that’s filling it is not from renewable sources. But also, having a renewable electricity grid doesn’t help with vehicle emissions if most of the cars on the road still have internal combustion engines.
You’re not saving the planet by driving an EV today. But fleet electrification at scale, along with the move to renewable electricity generation, together, will make a difference.
2 Likes
People will buy whatever “feels” good or right to them. A LR Discovery produces the same carbon footprint as a Prius once you factor in the manufacturing and disposal of the battery. 100 of the largest companies in the world produce something like 70% of emissions and the world’s largest cruise ships produce more carbon than all the cars combined each year.
As @AA-NJ mentioned, until the root cause of pollution is addressed through clean energy paired with cooperate accountability, EVs replacing ICE doesn’t make a big difference.
5 Likes
What you posted is not true. What is true is that a large cruise ship at full throttle produces as much particulate matter as (perhaps) a million cars with modern pollution control equipment. That’s bad for people breathing in the vicinity but not the green-house catastrophe that you implied.
That’s the problem with the modern press also, they take a small sliver of truth and wrongly extrapolate it to some worst case conclusion. And that’s why we have so many skeptics.
5 Likes
I’m not a scientist, but we all know that many industries are threatened by renewable energy and EV’s, so obviously, there will be some misinformation out there and I don’t really dabble much with this debate as I don’t know what sources to trust. I think I read something on Edmunds that said that it will take 2 years or 25k (something like that) for the EV to be better for the environment after considering production. Some of my actual scientist friends have said that battery recycling is growing and some are already reusing 90% of old battery components, and it will only get better as technology evolves.
If I’m not wrong only 15-20% of the energy in gasoline is actually used to move the car and the rest of the energy is lost on the way, so even if an EV is still filled up by fossil fuels they are much more efficient on power and eventually is still “better for the environment.”
But still I’m no climate scientist or automotive engineer so don’t quote me on all of this.
That is entirely dependent on the efficiency of the power generation facility times the efficiency of the power transmission times the efficiency of the power charging times the efficiency of the power storage times the efficiency of the power delivery vs the efficiency of the ice vehicle (bit of an over simplification, but point is there are lots of places to lose efficiency)
1 Like
I used ships, as in multiple ships, not a singular ship.
1 Like
Again your narrowly defined “pollution” isn’t what you or the article is implying. Autos never were much with respect to sulfur dioxide emissions. This article is very misleading.
I stand by what I posted. And that’s why we have so many skeptics.
This thread is a mistake.
Another politics driven cesspool of a conversation waiting to happen.
Slow mode and landfill, here we come.
It’s possible we reach that point but it’s a long ways off. Utilities need to have enough power generation capacity for peak of peak times. That’s weekdays between 3pm-6pm from memorial day to labor day.
Theoretically solar might make a dent in needed generation capacity but the need for power even when it’s very hot and overcast means utilities arent going to be able to shed large amounts of generation capacity any time soon.
Which is all to say we are decades off from overnight time of use plans going away. EVs just don’t draw that much power compared to normal peak daytime usage.
I charged for a night on my current plan before I made the switch to a TOU plan and it was $6 for a full charge vs $2.50 on the TOU. Which is pretty significant for a jeep 4xe that only has 20-25 miles of electric range. Just wondering when the world has shifted to full ev adoption, if electric rates will look just like our current gas rates. Will we swap the opec cartel for the local energy mafia?
Pollution is pollution, doesn’t matter what the chemical’s name is. I’m not against EVs, but cars make up such a small proportion of total pollution compared to areas we could actually be investing money and change.
With which devil may I make that Faustian bargain, today?
tons of really good news coverage the past week on Energy and Climate, better than anything this thread will yield. But glad people are starting to wake up.
It’s all bad, it’s not all the same. How far it travels depends on what it being polluted. And ”pollution” doesn’t really speak to the effects of acquisition in many cases (lithium for those batteries is currently a nightmare to extract, but the extraction isn’t so much pollution).
1 Like
My father worked for a CT utility for 20 years and now is on board of our local town municipal electric company. First time I’ve ever heard him called a mafioso 
. I kid I kid
But this is very region dependent. Where I live charging the Jeep’s battery even without TOU would cost about $2.25.
1 Like
No the implied conclusion was that a handful of cruise ships were far worse for the environment/global warming than 260 million cars. The conclusion is clearly WAY wrong except for one cherry-picked item of which autos really don’t count for…
Again these dishonest statistics are why many are skeptical.
2 Likes
You can always pay a little more and choose a green energy supplier. At least with PSEG you can.
1 Like
I don’t think anyone is skeptical of EVs, especially as renewable energy becomes more prevalent, and just that there are other sources of significant pollution that should have a larger focus, namely large corporations.
Genuine question: is that actually the case?
1 Like
Let me know if this answers your question:
The EPA has identified six pollutants as “criteria” air pollutants because it regulates them by developing human health-based and/or environmentally-based criteria (science-based guidelines) for setting permissible levels. These six pollutants are carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen oxides, ground-level ozone, particle pollution (often referred to as particulate matter), and sulfur oxides
Nothing is greener than Nuclear
3 Likes