• HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    That’s a very weird comment - first part is really hard to read and you’ve accused me of not arguing in good faith without anything to suggest as much. If im reading this correctly

    • Evs are comparable in manufacturing carbon. I don’t have the numbers but believe Evs are much higher due to rare earth mining, and that is before considering the environmental damage due to mining, social costs involved and considering the lack of standards where they are mined. Make no mistake, fossil fuel mining isn’t much better in this regard but it is a well known beast.

    You then have the whole argument on how that power is actually generated. Mass power generation is much more efficient than small ICE, but it does still add up if its not using renewable sources.

    Regarding battery efficiency- yes I agree they will get better the same way ICE did.

    The other point is that the EV swap delays other advances - walkable cities, car centric infrastructure, mass transportation. If we cut carbon by 50% but it delays 0% by decades did we actually achieve anything?

    • ArachnidMania@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Fair point on the readability of the first paragraph, I’ve edited a little bit to clarify it’s about pollution. And I’m agreeing with you on the first paragraph, construction of EV does induce more or equal pollution, but it’s different sources of pollution, EV have the availability to have the most important part (batteries) easily recyclable. Once enough batteries hit the market to meet demand, recycled batteries could replace the majority of the market, replacing mining. Or new batteries; sodium? Who knows, the future could hold some wild advances!?

      The big part of a power grid source is that it can be modular, in a area still running on coal can shut down dirty power plants and connect clean ones, a ICE will stay a ICE until you get a new car, which the current argument is that the production of cars is dirty and should be reduced as much as it could - I agree on that

      I can’t quite understand the final paragraph… I don’t understand the 50% and 0%, and while walkable cities are good to strive for, it’s comparing apples to oranges.

      While it could have been phrased differently, I very well did believe you could be arguing in good faith, there has been such a mix of people who have genuine concerns, and others that want to believe it’s a fad for one reason or other. But I would like to say I genuinely do hope you’re in the first group.