A little question about electric cars

[77TA]

Who knows, maybe to some people that doesn't count either.
It's a waste of time debating with those that refuse to see the whole picture.

And no one is disputing that there are GHG emissions during the production of an EV, that's been established here there and everywhere ... and even when EVs are fuelled by coal-generated electricity they still have fewer emissions after 5 years ...

First, thanks for helping to prove the "it doesn't count" theory to be false for the willfully blind.

So...5 yrs huh? How many kms were driven during that time, in which gas and electric vehicles, in what part of the world and in what conditions were they used to come to that conclusion?

A simple link would suffice.

[LovemyBolt]

It does, and it's quite helpful. This explains why it's so easy for governments to get away with claiming the EV rebates they're using public resources for are effective for "addressing climate change", despite not providing any evidence the EV rebates they're using our resources for actually are effective for "addressing climate change".

So you accuse me of assumptions, you're all about assumptions. These are all grand assumptions that you're concluding.
Yes it's obvious that the proliferation of EV's will reduce emissions overall. You don't agree. We stand at loggerheads. No one will budge. Do we really need to keep going back and forth with the old Monty Python argument sketch of yes it is, no it isn't, yes it is, no it isn't on and on.

[rustled]

It does, and it's quite helpful. This explains why it's so easy for governments to get away with claiming the EV rebates they're using public resources for are effective for "addressing climate change", despite not providing any evidence the EV rebates they're using our resources for actually are effective for "addressing climate change".

So you accuse me of assumptions

No accusation, just a simple statement of fact. What we're being provided with isn't evidence the EV rebates are effective in "addressing climate change". What we're being provided with is a) the assumption that because EVs "don't emit while they're being driven" they must be responsible for fewer emissions "overall" or cradle-to-grave (that's clearly an assumption), and b) this means (here comes another assumption) the EV rebates must effectively "address climate change". Assumptions. Not evidence.

[LovemyBolt]

First, thanks for helping to prove the "it doesn't count" theory to be false for the willfully blind.

So...5 yrs huh? How many kms were driven during that time, in which gas and electric vehicles, in what part of the world and in what conditions were they used to come to that conclusion?

A simple link would suffice.

I use the DDG search engine. I typed in "ev emissions compared to icev emissions" and found many articles.
This one for starters - https://electricautonomy.ca/2021/07/26/ ... ions-icct/
There are many more.
Edit - or this nice chart - https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics ... ce-vehicle

[LovemyBolt]

No accusation, just a simple statement of fact. What we're being provided with isn't evidence the EV rebates are effective in "addressing climate change". What we're being provided with is a) the assumption that because EVs "don't emit while they're being driven" they must be responsible for fewer emissions "overall" or cradle-to-grave (that's clearly an assumption), and b) this means (here comes another assumption) the EV rebates must effectively "address climate change". Assumptions. Not evidence.

And then you assert from nothing. It's an obvious conclusion that you simply do not wish to agree with. And that's fine. You're free to believe in whatever easter bunny you like.

[rustled]

No accusation, just a simple statement of fact. What we're being provided with isn't evidence the EV rebates are effective in "addressing climate change". What we're being provided with is a) the assumption that because EVs "don't emit while they're being driven" they must be responsible for fewer emissions "overall" or cradle-to-grave (that's clearly an assumption), and b) this means (here comes another assumption) the EV rebates must effectively "address climate change". Assumptions. Not evidence.

And then you assert from nothing.

Translation, please.

It's an obvious conclusion that you simply do not wish to agree with.

Agreeing with conclusions that are only "obvious" when one agrees with certain ideological assumptions, which are not supported by evidence, is not sensible.

[LovemyBolt]

And then you assert you from nothing.

Translation, please.

It's an obvious conclusion that you simply do not wish to agree with.

Agreeing with conclusions that are only "obvious" when one agrees with certain assumptions, and which are not supported by evidence, is not sensible.

I made a correction of that sentence.
I make perfect sense. You refuse to see the obvious. No assumptions required. It's plain as day. You're just blind to the blindingly obvious.

[rustled]

Translation, please.
Agreeing with conclusions that are only "obvious" when one agrees with certain assumptions, and which are not supported by evidence, is not sensible.

I made a correction of that sentence.

Yes, I saw that and changed it in my post. Its meaning still isn't clear.

No assumptions required. It's plain as day.

What's plain is that those are assumptions, not evidence.

[LovemyBolt]

I'm off to ride on a machine that will spew a gazillion tonnes of GHG to get to a sunny and warm place.
Early start. I'm done with this pointless madness here.

[rustled]

I'm off to ride on a machine that will spew a gazillion tonnes of GHG to get to a sunny and warm place.
Early start.

Cheers. Enjoy your vacation.

[spooker]

And no one is disputing that there are GHG emissions during the production of an EV, that's been established here there and everywhere ... and even when EVs are fuelled by coal-generated electricity they still have fewer emissions after 5 years ...

First, thanks for helping to prove the "it doesn't count" theory to be false for the willfully blind.

So...5 yrs huh? How many kms were driven during that time, in which gas and electric vehicles, in what part of the world and in what conditions were they used to come to that conclusion?

A simple link would suffice.

Plenty of links available:

https://www.factcheck.org/2024/02/elect ... lifetimes/

https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics ... ce-vehicle

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/life-c ... -vehicles/

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/elect ... yths#Myth1

https://medium.com/@maximilian.zoller/i ... 6eb0d78487

The question has come up for years so people went out and quantified the answer ...

[spooker]

So you accuse me of assumptions

No accusation, just a simple statement of fact. What we're being provided with isn't evidence the EV rebates are effective in "addressing climate change". What we're being provided with is a) the assumption that because EVs "don't emit while they're being driven" they must be responsible for fewer emissions "overall" or cradle-to-grave (that's clearly an assumption), and b) this means (here comes another assumption) the EV rebates must effectively "address climate change". Assumptions. Not evidence.

It's only an assumption if you ignore the studies that have been done to verify that EVs have lower lifetime emissions ...

Considering our lack of effort to address emissions significantly over the last 30 years has put us in a position of having to make a greater change we need to throw more resources at it ... and with the way we've let the free market dictate our choices, the rebates are a valid tool to increase choice quicker than waiting ...

[77TA]

First, thanks for helping to prove the "it doesn't count" theory to be false for the willfully blind.

So...5 yrs huh? How many kms were driven during that time, in which gas and electric vehicles, in what part of the world and in what conditions were they used to come to that conclusion?

A simple link would suffice.

Plenty of links available:

https://www.factcheck.org/2024/02/elect ... lifetimes/

https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics ... ce-vehicle

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/life-c ... -vehicles/

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/elect ... yths#Myth1

https://medium.com/@maximilian.zoller/i ... 6eb0d78487

The question has come up for years so people went out and quantified the answer ...

Yes, we know, much effort has been put forth to quantify an answer. Each of those links has many flaws and assumptions/projections. Each also relies on low carbon electricity production. None take the lifetime of the vehicle into account exept to assume a battery pack can go, in at least one case, 200,000 miles. We could pick your favorite article and discuss it if you like. Hey, I get it, where's all the Google results that show evs at a disadvantage right? I think any intelligent person knows the answer to that so I won't suggest it here. Rustled has pointed out many flaws in the push for evs but Google doesn't recognize them.

When you own an ev, have driven it for 200,000kms or so and disposed of it, please let us know how much ghg you saved the planet.

[spooker]

Yes, we know, much effort has been put forth to quantify an answer. Each of those links has many flaws and assumptions/projections. Each also relies on low carbon electricity production. None take the lifetime of the vehicle into account exept to assume a battery pack can go, in at least one case, 200,000 miles. We could pick your favorite article and discuss it if you like. Hey, I get it, where's all the Google results that show evs at a disadvantage right? I think any intelligent person knows the answer to that so I won't suggest it here. Rustled has pointed out many flaws in the push for evs but Google doesn't recognize them.

When you own an ev, have driven it for 200,000kms or so and disposed of it, please let us know how much ghg you saved the planet.

Can you provide the flaws and assumptions that you found in those studies?

No, it doesn't prove anything to use values from a single vehicle ... science doesn't use exceptions to prove the rule

[77TA]

Yes, we know, much effort has been put forth to quantify an answer. Each of those links has many flaws and assumptions/projections. Each also relies on low carbon electricity production. None take the lifetime of the vehicle into account exept to assume a battery pack can go, in at least one case, 200,000 miles. We could pick your favorite article and discuss it if you like. Hey, I get it, where's all the Google results that show evs at a disadvantage right? I think any intelligent person knows the answer to that so I won't suggest it here. Rustled has pointed out many flaws in the push for evs but Google doesn't recognize them.

When you own an ev, have driven it for 200,000kms or so and disposed of it, please let us know how much ghg you saved the planet.

Can you provide the flaws and assumptions that you found in those studies?

A couple cut and pastes from one of the linked studies;

2.1. STUDY SCOPe, DEFINITIONS, AND MAJOR ASSUMPTIONS

As with the vehicle modeling, fuels investigated in this study are assessed based on publicly available
data and models, and assumptions made by the authors.

Reflecting increased research interest in synthetic liquid fuels produced using renewable low-carbon electricity and
CO2 sources, electro-fuels (a.k.a. e-fuels) were added to the potential future fuel technologies that are
evaluated.

I barely scratched the surface on this single one to give you a slight idea what I mean. If you haven't read the actual studies but only the articles that tell you how great evs are, I'd suggest looking further into the methodology of these conclusions. These studies are extremely complex and not user friendly for us mortals but if you put in the effort, many an eye brow will be raised. You may or may not like what you find, similar to climate change modeling and the articles that are written about it.

Challenges, such as infrastructure availability for certain fuels (e.g., hydrogen fueling stations) require
more careful analysis. The market demand for fuels and vehicles depends strongly on their costs, which
this study attempted to evaluate quantitatively. However, other factors that impact consumer choice are
not covered in this study (such as vehicle range, battery charging time, and hydrogen fuel/charge
availability). Furthermore, the cost estimates in this study are subject to uncertainties and their
dependence on technology advancement for the FuTURE TECHNOLOGY case.
Key parameters influencing the results of various pathways are subject to different degrees of uncertainty