EVs are worse for the environment (and other EV related myths)

PaulJoseph22

https://news.sky.com/story/mineral-rush-how-chiles-mega-mines-are-critical-to-our-electric-future-12643616

Wanderer78

yes, building electric vehicles is still very harmful to the environment, but we cannot build vehicles without having any negative impact on the planet, this could always be the case....

the_amazing_raisin

Well I'm glad Chile finally elected a social democratic government so the people of Chile may be able to benefit from their mineral wealth

I imagine they'll do better than any of the theocratic monarchies or a corrupt dictatorships which control the fossil fuel industry

Furze99

Posters bang on about the the carbon footprints of EVs and in passing blithely mention that they hope they'll be run on 'clean' renewable energy from the Irish grid. As if the electricity just appears by magic from these sources. Reality is that onshore and offshore wind farms have substantial carbon footprints involved in their own construction & maintenance, never mind the environmental damage caused in their construction. Ditto for solar farms and panels, battery storage and pumped storage schemes.

We may need to do these things as oil, coal & gas gets less plentiful. But there's absolutely no free lunch for any form of motorised travel. One's not much better than the other. If you really want to be Green, then walk or cycle as much as you possibly can and never fly.

crisco10

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119279797#Comment_119279797

while I totally agree that any activity costs carbon, it has been shown that an onshore wind farm becomes carbon neutral in about 5 to 10 years and all the remaining life is genuinely “green”.

not sure what similar analysis of solar shows.

there’s about 3gw of onshore wind in that age bracket or older so plenty of genuinely green green electricity on the grid.

PaulJoseph22

https://news.sky.com/video/share-12644023

unkel

@KCross - "I'd rather my car be driven by electricity from our grid and have the ability to further clean up our grid as time progresses (already at 30% renewable) than to be forever at the mercy of the p*cks controlling the oil/gas which is doing immeasurable damage at multiple levels (not just environmental)"

Well said. And most EVs charge at night which is already at 50% renewable (as per your own research) and climbing every year. Personally, since I installed my zappi charge point last month, my cars have been charged 100% from the sun at home. None of this is reflected in the above calculations. And I'm not some rich bloke in a big house. My income is about average and I live in a small semi-D home in a Dublin suburb. My roofs are plastered with solar PV panels though (and also solar thermal tubes). I personally use almost zero fossil fuel for my house / cars.

slave1

There you go, break even at 3.5yrs....much sooner if charging at night rate/solar PV like a good few here

Are electric vehicles really better for the environment? (rte.ie)

liamog

Mod Note: Posts deleted, poster was previously warned that the EV forum is not the right place for a general debate on motoring, stick to the topic of the comparative environmental impact of EVs versus non electrified cars

Mr Q

The amount of times some fool has told me that the battery in my car won't last 5 years is hard to believe.

And they genuinely believe it to be true and that anyone driving an EV is the fool.

I assume this is also why they think they are not better for the environment. They're misinformed.

MightyMunster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119279797#Comment_119279797

Make you sure you don't walk too fast though as that produces more CO2 than walking slowly. Bikes have a CO2 manufacturing cost as well, as do bike lanes, foot paths and street lights.

EVs are far greener over their life than an equivalent ice and come with the benefit of no tail pipe emissions. Nobody is advocating for replacing active travel or Public transport with EVs and it's a total straw man argument which only serves the likes of Exxon and Toyota who are lobbying hard to be allowed to keep destroying the climate by burning oil as long as possible for their own short term gain.

Furze99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119288968#Comment_119288968

Says you, yet again conveniently ignoring the carbon footprint & environmental degradation concerned with the generation & storage of all this electricity whether by fossil fuels or renewables or nuclear. I suppose what's out of sight is conveniently out of mind and can be overlooked.

MightyMunster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119289128#Comment_119289128

Nobody is ignoring it, it's just not as bad as the alternative. That's all.

...Ghost...

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119289128#Comment_119289128

We live in a modern society where we prefer to keep our creature comforts and lifestyles as best we can, choosing EV over ICE is a positive step. Choosing solar and wind over coal and oil is another positive step. Unless you live in cave, walk everywhere and dress in fallen leaves, then your carbon footprint is going to be high. We all know there is a cost for setting up and building renewables and EVs. Nobody is saying otherwise, but these carbon/environmental costs are offset within months in most cases. The same cannot be said of fossil fuels....which has a greater level of supporting infrastructure to begin. Are you suggesting we don't switch to EVs and renewable energies?

innrain

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119287286#Comment_119287286

While I don't necessarily agree with the slopes in that graph I do agree with the general trends and the fact that there is an intersection point. The important bit is on the right hand side of the intersection point. Those lines diverge which mean that every km driven on diesel has a greater impact on us, and it could be avoided. It is beneficial the fact that all of these are questioned and the EVs are build with the environmental impact in mind. When ICEs took off nobody cared or questioned what happens with the by-products resultant from burning petrol. They even added lead to it and it took 100 years to give it up although it is a well known harmful substance.

liamog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119289128#Comment_119289128

It's not ignored, but it is decoupled from the operation of transport. A conventionally powered vehicle is essentially fixed on day one and will always have a given emissions per km. The advantage of electrified transportation is that we separate out the generation of electricity from the application of that electricity to generate motion. A BEV sold today can be completed operated from sources that have zero carbon impact after installation, it can also be operated by supplying all it's electricity from a diesel generator.

Don't fall in to the trap of allowing perfect to be the enemy of good, as a nation we should be reducing our reliance on external consumables, burning oil is a huge part of our imports and reducing that has a positive effect on our balance of trade. There is a reason there is so much propaganda out their against electrification, the countries that currently export oil see that our reliance on them decreases as we move to indigenous energy sources. I hope they are compensating you well for parroting their talking points.

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119289229#Comment_119289229

We really can't be prefacing environmental discussions on the basis of 'keeping our creature comforts and lifestyles'. You're absolutely correct to say that most people do approach these discussions on that basis, but something has to give. If we do maintain our creature comforts and lifestyles, we won't have a planet to hand on to our children and grandchildren.

waterwelly

Considering the number of new cars that go on roads every day, the big switch to electric cars will do little to reduce emissions over the next 10 years.

The only way to reduce emissions is to kill people.

Tailpipe emissions help there.

The irony.

slave1

Well that's a bit extreme, surely kill the cows first!

Anyhoo, we got to be honest, a lot of folk make the switch from new ICE to new EV for financials, this means fiscal policy is working and the only way to eat this elephant is one bite at a time. End result is all that matters. I have not used petrol or diesel in 5 years. I am currently around 4000kms self generated PV range this year, want to keep chipping away at it. Come winter I will have a coal fire, I'm no tree hugger but do a lot where I can

liamog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119289316#Comment_119289316

Studies of locations where there has been a large switch to zero emission vehicles show significant increases in air quality as the number of zero emission vehicles increases. If you are interested Oslo is a great case study as the market penetration of EVs there means around 1 in 5 vehicles are fully zero emissions. Similarly London can be used to show the effect of the ULEZ (Ultra Low Emission Zone). Most cities have a fixed capacity for number of vehicles per road, if a road carried 4,000 vehicles per hour before, and now carries 3500 vehicles plus 500 zero emission vehicles you've already reduced roadside emissions by 12.5%.

the_amazing_raisin

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119289316#Comment_119289316

I'm fairly sure the decomposition of the bodies would also cause some considerable air pollution

Barring any disasters (which tbh are starting to look more likely) the population of humans is going to keep increasing at least within our lifetime

So as a species we need to figure out how to reduce and repair the damage we're doing to the environment while still handling more mouths to feed

EVs are ONE piece of an overall solution. As other posters have mentioned, there are other parts to this such as renewable energy, moving away from fossil fuels, improved public transportation and walking/cycling infrastructure and plant rich diets as well as a bunch of other things we're still working on

liamog

As other posters have mentioned, there are other parts to this such as renewable energy, moving away from fossil fuels, improved public transportation and walking/cycling infrastructure and plant rich diets as well as a bunch of other things we're still working on

A valuable topic of discussion more suited for elsewhere on the site, can everyone take note of the mod instruction and keep the topic to the EV part of the solution rather than devolve into a general motors vs other travel options discussion

waterwelly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119290453#Comment_119290453

I'm not sure how much EV's are part of the solution tbh.

Each one is a bit better than an ice, but still a big polluter overall.

Furze99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119289302#Comment_119289302

Some would argue that decoupling the carbon cost of electric fuel for an EV from the carbon cost of it's manufacture & disposal is a bit of a three card trick. It's a familiar tactic used by extractive industries too, who when costs are being totted up, regularly omit the destruction and degradation of the environment. There's no free lunch in these matters for sure. The argument that EV = Good and ICE = Bad is a nice simple clear message. It might suit the politics, PR and sales campaigns but it's full of half truths.

liamog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119290952#Comment_119290952

It's full of well documented methodologies that include the carbon generation of the energy sources used to power an EV. The half truths are coming from the oil industry who seek to muddy the math. Can you provide any life cycle assessment that shows an EV to be demonstrably worst than a conventionally fuelled vehicle, or is your source a Facebook meme?

slave1

Neither ICE nor EV are "good" but in a country with deplorable public transport we require two in the house to earn a living. From a relative perspective I believe it is better both financially and environmentally to choose EV over ICE (when you have to change car) and that is why we did it.

Last year we got around 1,400kms of charge into our EVs from solar, this year I'm aiming for 6,000kms and next year 10,000kms before I max out capability due to available space for panels, couldn't do any of that with ICE, that's a fair bit of carbon avoidance

John_Rambo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119267336#Comment_119267336

How were you surprised to see 1950's cars in Cuba? It's famous as being the most documented living museum for classic American cars.

Rest of your story sounds like one of those Facebook stories with a picture of an Australian mine (that has nothing to do with car batteries) an African starving child shot from the eighties and false warnings of batteries not lasting etc...

dingbat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119291966#Comment_119291966

It's almost as if the poster, at every stage, was talking completely out of the wrong orifice.

dingbat

Various interests want this to be a "debate". Like so many things. To "both sides" the issue rather than coming to a considered agreement on a few common facts. It's so very tiring, and that's the goal. To tire us out. Might be best to not engage.

Instead of dealing with those who themselves deal in bad faith - instead of wasting that energy, time, and trouble - better to concentrate on persuading those who just need that little push. In fact they might already want to push, but they don't know how to do it and they don't want to look silly by making a mistake.

This cannot be left to the car manufacturers themselves - like health insurance there are just so many options and between mild hybrid, HEV, PHEV all being trumpeted as a way to do your bit for the planet you can see why so so many people genuinely don't feel they need to take that extra step to commit to full BEV.

Because, like it or not, going full BEV is seen as a commitment. So when they are considering that commitment let's make it *easy* for them not to feel silly, not to feel like the easy mark when their well-meaning friends or family press them on why they are going BEV because of X, Y, or Z misunderstood perceptions.

Let's make it easy to compare different models in one place. The SEAI site is reasonable, but it doesn't tell you how much carbon you'll save over X years of your type of mileage. It should be easier for people to do this. To have a carbon target in mind rather than just running costs.

That carbon target - that mindset shift - opens the gate to thinking about all transport, indeed all choices, in the same way. It opens the mind to having a cargo bike instead of that second car, at least at some of life's stages.

Let's make things easy for them when it comes to setting up their home charging, and what charging options they have when out on the road.

And let every BEV driver be a keen walker, cyclist, and public transport advocate who minimises their air travel. It is all connected.

That's how this happens. Not by going after bad-faith anonymities but instead by making it easier for your mate, or your mum, to make a good car decision.

purplefields

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119287286#Comment_119287286

Thanks for posting the graph.

Just some points:

• With Diesel and Petrol increasing, ICE drivers may cut back on their driving. This is less likely to happen with EV owners, so there is a social aspect to consider.
• EVs are still responsible for tons of CO2. If people really wanted to help slow down climate change, they wouldn't drive at all. The EV emissions are still too high. Climate change is happening now (heat wave in Japan, Lake Mead, Oz floods, Italy glacier etc, etc...)
• Are hydrogen cars not better again? produce Hydrogen via off-shore wind farms and use that. No worries about batteries.