Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

boersc t1_j22orcd wrote

Reply to comment by MeteorOnMars in Russians did such a good job promoting renewable energy and electric vehicles this year. by darth_nadoma

Then again, how is that tesla's electricity made? Coal and other fossil fuels.

−3

ForHidingSquirrels t1_j23szd0 wrote

In the US it’s filled with 45% emission free electricity

2

boersc t1_j248u62 wrote

As it's extra electricity, you can only take into account the variable fuel. Wind and solar are always at their max, whether there are electric cars or not. So, for now, extra electric cars means more fossil fuels burnt.

−1

ForHidingSquirrels t1_j24h3bk wrote

Did you have chatgpt make that up since you’ve got no idea how to respond to reality?

1

boersc t1_j24z50j wrote

Sorry to burst your bubble, but for now this IS reality. Every extra usage of electricity means extra fossil fuels burnt, not extra solar energy or wind.

How else would the extra demand be met? Right now, we don't have a flexible renewable energysource that we can throttle.

In the long run, when we're approaching 100% renewable energy, sure. But for now, the sole benefit of electric cars is that the energy is created at a central place, where it is made more efficiently than in a car.

−1

DynamicResonater t1_j26u6sc wrote

There's such things as energy storage facilities that can be throttled faster and more efficiently than conventional baseline plants. California has several, for instance, and Australia is a world leader in it. Even so, EV's cause less fossil fuels to be burned than a new ICE, you know that right? It sounds like you do, given your last sentence, which somewhat counters your first.

1

DynamicResonater t1_j25bh0p wrote

My power mix in California is:

  • Renewable (Bio/Geo/Hydro/Solar/Wind) = 33.6%
  • Large Hydro = 9.2%
  • Nuclear = 9.3
  • Other = 7%
  • Natural Gas = 37.9
  • Coal = 3%

Even if EV's ran only on coal or natural gas they would still be far cleaner than ICE vehicles. Sorry, but I've seen your argument dozens of times and it's been refuted repeatedly by legitimate scientific organizations.

1