1 in 5 new car sales globally were EVs in 2023, and that's curbed oil demand – IEA
1 in 5 new car sales globally were EVs in 2023, and that's curbed oil demand – IEA
Without clean energy and EVs, the global rise in emissions in the last five years would have been three times larger, new IEA analysis shows.
You're viewing a single thread.
The overall number of ICE cars has still only increased and global CO2 emissions are higher than they have ever been. Electric cars literally mean fuck-all.
Well fuck, since you put it that way, we should just give the fuck up! My next vehicle is going to be a massive SUV, with 10 mpg!
Right? So many people don’t understand the phrase “perfect is the enemy of good”.
"Don't let perfection get in the way of progress."
But in this case, EV's are neither perfect nor good. They're "better" but they're still unsustainable.
More effecient transportation is the solution. Ideally walking or cycling with transit for longer trips. Unfortnately we will probably never live in a society without private vehicle ownership but we should be able to build one where private ownership is optional.
That requires walkable cities
That is part of the solution
Hard agree. Kick 90% of the cars out and make places people actually want to live in instead
Society without private vehicle ownership is a pipe dream and in my opinion not even worth striving for. The way to solve issues like this is not to go from one extreme to another. There's a ton of people who reluctantly own cars because it's the only feasible way of getting around because the alternatives are too inconvenient or dangerous. Make it easier for these people to live without a car and they gladly will. This includes a huge portion of people living in cities which is where most people live anyway. If you try to solve the issue by blanket banning private car ownership you just now made life much harder for a ton of people. The issue is not owning cars. It's building our infrastructure in a way that you have to own one. If one lives on the country side far away from everything then it makes much more sense to let them get around by car instead of building a public transport infrastructure there that will only have a few people using it.
Ah, but the trick is that with an EV, it's more energy efficient (75% compared to ICE's 20%), and it can use other fuels than just fossil by proxy. If you have hydro, or solar, you can charge using those, since it's just based on what your energy provider uses to power the grid, or what you might have yourself. An ICE has a much harder time switching between fuel sources, or unburning petrol. You also don't get fumes, which is nice both from an environmental, and "eugh car exhaust" perspective.
Then give up. You’re a waste of oxygen and a shitty source of CO2 if you can’t understand the benefit of transportation electrification.
Edit: based upon your post history you are anti Trump. This post that you made is pro Trump. Fucking edit it brah.
This post that you made is pro Trump.
Not engaging with the argument itself, but the guy said nothing about Trump. There exist more than two sets of opinions in the world brah. Trump can be bad, and some of his positions can be still not bad. Or not-Trump can also have shitty positions.
Politics in democracies means more than voting for the one camp or the other.
You are of course right but this is the new reality. You're either with us or against us, no in between. It's so exhausting.
Take his posting history in consideration BRAH.
China out-emits the whole West combined. Where the West decreased emissions, China increased.
And?
He's just bragging.
China #1!!!
Considering a lot of goods the west buys are made or travel via China, that makes sense. We didn’t drop our emissions, we just shifted it to China.
Now go look at the stats of emission per capita and get back to me.
China doesn't have the same GDP per capita. A lot of people in China still live the farm life in rural areas.
I have no idea how that's relevant here
Emissions per capita of China have been higher than the european average for about a decade now.
Whole west != Europe.
Nice try though
lopq's original comment is correct for 'whole west' too. the second part is also true per capita. By the way europe also has a lot more people than united states, it's not irrelevant.
Firstly, US is not the only country with higher emissions per capita outside of europe. If you wanted to say a truthy but mostly irrelevant statement in this context you succeeded, but remember Canada Australia and New Zealand are also western. Note the grey area of South Korea & Japan.
Secondly I'm assuming you googled "population of Europe" and then falsely counted Russia and Turkey as western. Also there are grey areas of Belarus, Greece, Ukraine and other "European" counties without strong historic western culture.
With that in mind population difference is closer than you think, assuming you wanted to focus on that. Although that's not the point, getting sidetracked is all too common on this site.
I really cba to do the math on emissions, because I know neither of us has done accurately. If I was getting paid, maybe I would spend a few weeks on it, research properly heavily considering Chinese emissions which are spent making and shipping goods for the west. Paying off our emissions to other counties is a cop out and we all know it.
Im sorry, but Greece doesn't have a strong history of western culture? I agree with the rest of your post but that is a mad claim to make. There's a strong argument that "European" culture is essentially a hangover from the Roman empire, which itself essentially copied Greek culture wholesale.
Yeah that's fair enough good point, I omit Greece from that list, but there are others which are not part of that culture although in Europe
As it happens I've been calculating per capita emissions for 28 years, since COP2. You can see my model here.
No I certainly don't include Russia nor Turkey, although europe is more than EU. Korea is indeed notable. Regarding what they call 'consumption emissions', you can get such data from Global Carbon Project, on that I'm less an expert but my hunch is that industry emissions are dominated by heavy products like steel and cement for construction (made with help of gigatons of coal), rather than light consumer goods for export. Over-construction is the root of the problem, global emissions will peak (maybe now) as that bubble bursts.
China is making a lot of moves towards efficiency, their train network for example is outstanding and they've invested huge sums in renewables. Plus it's silly comparing effects of different sized populations,
The average Chinese person uses far less energy than the average American, about 10.1 tons of carbon pollution annually compared to 17.6 tons in the U.S., according to analyses from the Rhodium Group.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/19/climate/us-china-climate-issues.html
Yes they invested enormously in high-speed train lines. But look on satellite image around those train stations, new city blocks have massive roads everywhere, 5 lanes in each direction, plus in parallel another set of toll roads. Even if those roads were empty , the cement and steel for all that has contributed enormous quantity of CO2 to the atmosphere.
Chinese emissions per capita are higher than european average for many years now, however they always pick the worst country in the world for comparison statistics.
You are right, it’s simple numbers, scientific fact, pity so much downvotes, people should check recent data rather than get stuck with old concepts from 1990s (when climate politics began).