Electric cars are actually worse for the environment then a lot of people think?

[RiseofArtemis]

EV's are praised to be the savior of earth when in fact they are worse then the newest generation of naturally aspirated cars. An EV causes 17.5 tons of Co2 on production while a normal car causes 7 tons of Co2 on production.

The newest naturally aspirated engine (Not on market yet) is a zero emission engine that can work with E-fuel. It may hit the market in the next few years and promptly cause EV's to lose market value as no petrol is needed for E-fuel.

[Soteris]

This is incorrect. People have been trying to undermine EVs for a while now and this has been their favorite argument. Does not mean its very persuasive however. Sure, the fact that EVs require rare materials like lithium is not ideal but that is just a short term problem. EVs has crazy future potential which also includes using different materials for their batteries which is long overdue for a breakthrough.

But putting all that aside. An EV inherently causes zero Co2 when driving. An average car produces around 5 tons a year. Even if we take your numbers at face value that would mean the EV beats an average car after around 2 years of operation. This alone is a strong argument in favor of it.

But again, the reason we are moving over to EVs is its future potential. Internal combustion engines have pretty much been perfected so there is pretty much no room for future growth. Electric cars is just scratching the surface to a whole new world of power and efficiency. Its not even a question which is why car manufacturers are so quick to jump to developing EVs since its the car of the future and they dont want to be left behind.

[RiseofArtemis]

You don't seem to have read all I wrote, they are already working on a Natural aspirated zero emision engine which works with normal fuel or E-fuel. Once they are on the Market in a few years your preciois EV is going to be thrown aside and seen for what it is. A useless step in development.

[Soteris]

You don't appear to have read all that I have written either. The internal combustion engine is a completed design. It is perfected. It can no longer be significantly improved and it is not up to the task of our future needs. Any dollar spent on them right now is going to be wasted when you are forced to turn towards electrical engines in the near future because they are objectively superior.

[RiseofArtemis]

Tell me how the combustion engine is perfected already when this has just been created recently from a Spanish university and isn't yet on the market. A zero harmful emission engine. Your EV is nothing but a worthless dead end. Look up "Spanish university creating Zero harmful emission engine." To know why an EV will soon be worthless.

[Soteris]

... You are just proving my point. That zero emission engine or whatever is not an improved design that produces a superior engine compared to other internal combustion engines. All they are doing is changing the emission which has nothing to do with making the engine go faster or more efficient.

It is still subject to the same limitations. Again, electric vehicles are not going to replace internal combustion because of climate concerns, if the world cared about the climate we would not be here sitting on our hands to this very day, the industry is picking up electric vehicles because they are objectively superior in performance. That is what is going to kill the internal combustion engine and any similar technology.

[Astarlessnightsky]

E-Fuel is incredible inefficient, it takes a shitton of energy and is super expensive, so its better to just use the energy directly.

Same deal with hydrogen.

You just loose a lot of energy when "producing" these, compared to directly charging a cars battery.

But you are right when you say EV aren't perfect and also harmfull to the environment.
The Lithium wastes a shitton of water during processing. And the cars are still huge as fuck and require a lot of energy to get moving.

We need a lot more and a big change when ot comes to transportation and mobility to reduce the co2 footprint, less cars in general, more people per car, more bikes, more public transport, less need to take the car (eg more homeoffice, stores more closely together...)

[RiseofArtemis]

I'd suggest you to look what Formula1 is doing they want to have 100% E-fuel in a few year and those guys are gonna get it moving. A lot of the modern day cars are actually results from racing series experiences as they are used for testing and innovation. They said they want to turn formula 1 into formula E but that is not gonna happen unless they want to kill the sport so they are gonna go with 100% E-fuel.

[jshm2]

Don't talk such shit, kiddo.

EV's are BETTER for the environment, but they were not touted the best thing for the environment. CO2 production is not a good measure of anything, You've produced CO2 since you were born, and still have no good environmental or social impact to date. Yet you're bitching about cars worth more than you are?

Joking aside, the step towards EV's is more towards sustainability and cutting down inner city pollution that exhaust fuel cars all produce. Just like moving from smoking to vaping cuts down your risk of lung cancer, but it increases your risk or heart and respiratory problem. But worst of all guarantees I will laugh at you for being a fucking candy smoking ponce.

[RolandCuthbert]

You just posted a bunch of lies.

Electric cars have no carbon footprint save the way the electricity that powers the car was produced. So if you use green tech to produce electricity you have zero carbon footprint.

E-fuels is just the latest lie by the fossil fuels industry to keep carbon producing cars on the road. Synthetic fuels are almost as bad as traditional fuel and the funny thing is, they are much more expensive to make.

[FilmGuy93]

Correct. I read a study that a lot of pro-EV people like to cite in these arguments, and the literature doesn't paint a pretty picture at all. The study found that the lithium batteries sourced for gas powered to EV converted vehicles have the same environmental impact as normal car batteries.

The pro-EV people like to say that this is proof that the overall production of electric vehicles is comparable to that of normal cars, but nothing about the data actually suggests that.

[likelyOK]

I’ve also wondered the same thing it’s really sad when you think about it. Beyond those implications oil companies do some of the worst pollution and TERRIBLE Evil things.

[Flats-Runner]

They are extremely bad for the environment. The way forward is small economic petrol cars.

[RiseofArtemis]

Look into Zero natural combustion engines. They are going to throw down EV's quite soon. together with E-fuel there is little to no reason why someone should by an expensive EV

[joeldalton]

Let's just make it simpler. You need to burn fossil fuels to generate electricity to charge EV batteries.

[MrTaboo]

Don't forget the 1000lb hazardous waste battery when it dies.

[Fromdusktilldawn]

First, where is the electricity coming from? Coal power plant? Also look how they produce the batteries

[Anonymous]

Not to mention the strain charging stations are gonna have on the electrical grid. But don't tell that to the democrats.

[MrTaboo]

Yes they are.