Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead
* 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.
|
You lost me at "mitigate climate change". We're near a minimum in this latest interglacial period...meaning 3* cooler than the peak. Even the most extreme doomsday "prediction" is 2.5* warmer than today in the next century. CO2 is 0.04% of the atmosphere, humans actually produce a small fraction of total global CO2, and cars/commercial/refineries produce a small fraction of that. The tail doesn't wag the dog.
Buying a six figure car to "save gas" and "fight climate change" sounds like propaganda. I agree that cars aren't evolving nearly quickly enough, but put some blame on the EPA and NHTSA for legislating cars into the porkers they are now. A remake of the 1994 Civic DX with a small turbo diesel would get better-than-hybrid economy, and be affordable-but it's illegal.