View Single Post
Old 02-23-2023, 11:57 AM   #4 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
aerohead's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 15,555
Thanks: 23,670
Thanked 7,037 Times in 4,512 Posts

Originally Posted by redpoint5 View Post
There were no facts in that link, and even an uninformed person like me can tell they are lying.

Battery production has way more entrained CO2 emissions than building a whole ICE vehicle. An EV starts out with a CO2 output something like 3x greater than an ICE.

So, anyone saying the indirect emissions of an EV are lower than ICE are either misinformed, or corrupt.

All that aside, the lifetime emissions of an EV will be lower, it just takes many miles to make up that initial deficit.
* There's a link to a link for the Yale research.
* All your points are addressed by Jonny Lieberman.
* BEV battery production averages the pollution of 74-gallons of gas.
* Where ICE vehicles need 9-million barrels of oil/day, BEVs require only 2.3-million barrels/day equivalency.
* Energy infrastructure capacity buildout for BEVs requires only 25.5% that of ICE for equivalency.
* ICE is a whale oil lamp, vs LED for BEVs.
* BEVs can operate without fossil fuel. ICE cannot.
* BEVs can mitigate climate change. ICE cannot.
* BEV regen can recover braking energy. ICE cannot.
* BEV sedan pollution equations favor BEV over ICE after 1.4-1.5-years.
* BEV SUVs after about 1.6- 1.9-years.
* Even with a 2-year lease on a BEV will net out better than ICE.
* In 2022, about 22% of the US power grid was green.
* 2023 is expected to be 24%.
* Wind is predicted to grow 3-X by 2040.
* Solar is predicted to grow 4-X by 2040.
* BEV pickup trucks after about 1.6-years.
Photobucket album:
  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to aerohead For This Useful Post:
NeilBlanchard (02-25-2023), The Toecutter (03-15-2023)