We know that we don't talk about the downside of making petrol in this video and focus on lithium, it's because when we've talked about the environment in the past and without fail people bring up "but what about child labor" and "what about mining lithium?" We address that in this video. We don't talk as much about how dirty it is to refine petrol. At the end of the day, EVs from cradle to grave are better for the environment.
as a car enthusiast i hate EVs and most others do too because on how we will lose ICE cars but i know for a fact that just changing a way a car runs wont fix climate change infact evs could cause more pollution rather than ICE cars because of auto manufactures to make even more for high demand effectively likley making climate change go faster.
@@stalllow 100% incorrect. My EV embarrasses Porsches every time they try. Heck even my wife’s grocery getter does this (Tesla MYP). So no, EVs are no slouch. You get the added convenience of having a “full tank” every morning, never having to go somewhere else other than your own home for energy. EVs are more comfortable, silent, smooth, and deadly at stoplights. What about cornering, right? Try 1.06g for a full size four door sedan. Yes there are benefits to having a lower centre of gravity. What about weight? Hybrids are heavier than EVs, look no father than the 2025 BMW M5, it’s 900lb heavier than my EV. Also, gas transport eats 70% of our oil which requires “dirty” electricity to pump out of the ground, enough to directly power 12.5 million EVs! Want that oil pumped to refinery? Another 5 million EVs worth of electricity. 10% of shipping is for fossil fuels! Ouch!! All so you can drive a rattle box and pollute our city environment at 22% energy efficiency. It’s insane. If you don’t buy the eco argument (because, say, you’re scientifically illiterate) just accept that EVs are superior products 👋🎤
If you count the mining, manufacturing of battery against EV's carbon footprint, shouldn't you count mining/transporting/refining hydrocarbons against ICE?
The use of materials like Cobalt to refine oil is so often overlooked isn't it? That mining has been going on for decades, but EVs have brought a spotlight on some of the terrible practices in some countries.
@@jmmx69 but there is in the equipment used to process trillions of tons of oil. Cobalt has been used for this process for decades with the largest oil firms taking advantage of countries on the African continent by funding civil wars and paying close to nothing to buy cobalt from mines with no ethics or protection for the workers, but no one was complaining about that.
@@jmmx69 And so does ev. Battery is just one of the component. Some supper cheap EV use sodium polianion and solid materials. majority of Chinese EV no longer use cobalt.
@@marvinsamuels1237 The lunatic fossil fueled far right wing has brought a spotlight to it, trying to derail EVs as it’s derailed much more efficient rail. It’s willing to chew off part of it’s tail to get away.
What, no mention of the collosally filthy petrochemical industry then? If you're going to mention the effects of mining for EV battery materials, you should probably mention the environmental impact of the well to pump petrochemical supply chain too.
@@lemongavine from someone in the fuel industry, you would be surprised how many gas station owners/managers/attendants think they can order a load of fuel and expect it like one would order a pizza. It’s sad, people really do think it magically appears at the pump, no normal person gives any thought to logistics or the supply chain issues faced every day. I hear the argument of “what if the power goes out, how are you going to charge your EV then?” As if 90% of gas stations are not running on .25-1 day supply of normal sales for gas just so they can watch the fuel market. Just wait until a fuel terminal goes down and people panic buy gas like they did toilet paper during covid and all of a sudden those gas cars are stuck at a gas station that doesn’t have an eta on a fuel delivery. At least with EVs one can put solar panels on their roof or property and charge that way, last I checked not many people can refine oil and make gas from their roof. Sure there are gas cans and one can store 5-however many gallons they are able to but rotating gas cans constantly is much more inconvenient than just plugging in.
Batteries are reused outside of vehicles before they go to recycling. EVS can get even cleaner as you put them on cleaner energy, including the ultimate, solar
This is not a terrible comparison; but, as others have indicated. You must account for "mining" of oil for burning and lubrication, refining facilities, hazards of environmental catastrophe (oil spills, blow outs, pipeline leaks, train derailments, refinery explosions, large scale benzene pollution from refineries), the transportation and the fuel used to do all these things.
When we've talked about stuff like this in other videos, it's always mentioned that mining lithium is "so much worse." So we addressed lithium here. At the end of the day, EVs are still better. You know that. We know that.
@@EVPulse But it’s absolutely necessary to say it, over & over & over & over & over & over & over, to counteract the opposite being said even more. The lithium thing is pushed by insane fossil-fueled far right wing ARF trolls & liars-for-hire, & while I’ve seen it said hundreds of times, no one has ever presented one tiny bit of evidence for it that I’ve seen. Fossil fuel mining & drilling is 500 to thousands of times more in amount; it’s hard (ie, impossible) to believe that lithium mining is sooooo much worse it comes anywhere near the total devastation of fossil fuels & related mining, etc. Eg, 40% of global shipping, probably equal amounts of rail & trucking are just to move fossil fuels around. And ships use bunker fuel, the dirtiest there is. Oil refining is also electricity-intensive. EVs are 10 times more energy efficient well to wheel. Plus.... “New Video: Clean Energy = Less Mining” This Is Not Cool, September 15, 2022 Anti-Renewable Fanatics
With lesser parts in EV, the life time of the vehicle does not need more replacement than an ICE Vehicle (engine spark plugs engine oil etc) isn’t that more environmentally friendly in that sense lol
The emissions of ICE vehicles of 430 grams per mile is very low. It accounts for jus5 burning the fuel for running the car. If you add up the amount of CO2 that is added due to exploration, drilling, extraction, transporting, refining , transporting to pump, pumping into a vehicle., emissions from abandoned wells. Just for refining a gallon of gasoline, it requires 4 kWh of electricity, which is got some portions directly from grid and the rest by burning the dirty gas oil. The CO2 emissions and other pollutants are enormous. A Tesla Model 3 can run 17 miles on 4 kWh, the amount needed for one gallon of gasoline. The things are oil spills, leaks everywhere and other loss of fuels like flaring etc. Finally, there are 3 million abandoned oil wells in US and much more abandoned wells from fracking. Fracking wells usually work for 6-18 months and after that we don’t get enough oil to keep it alive. Oil companies never seal these wells and if they seal it works for ten years and after that the seal breaks or explodes. These cause huge methane emissions and also other chemicals totally polluting the neighborhood. Oil companies are not interested in abandoned wells at all because they lose money in that operation. You need account this methane emissions in your calculation. Also, regarding EVs, most used battery chemistry is LFP which requires only Lithium and Graphite, no other Cristal metals. Lithium processing and the Logistics are improving and it be much easier and faster to extract Lithium from ore. Once the recycling of batteries goes on in large scale, it will become even more economical and less polluting. A lot of Lithium refineries are opening in many non China locations
"Just for refining a gallon of gasoline, it requires 4 kWh of electricity..." That has been repeatedly debunked. Where exactly would 4 kWh of electricity enter into the refining process of a gallon of gasoline?
@@rogerstarkey5390 Why would the energy-required be in the form of electricity? If it's not, then there are no *_conversion losses._* Do you understand that?
@@aliendroneservices6621 Go to a bloody refinery and look at all the electric pumps there are tool , it beats me how people like you try to stand up ICE over EVs , all this utter garbage that EVs pollute more than ICE has been totally debunked and is utterly ridiculous !!!
@@aliendroneservices6621 Electricity is far more efficient than burning things. It takes about 5 KWh to refine 1 gallon of gasoline. (Of course there are lots of other energy inputs.) Tesla’s Model S can go 20 miles on 5 kilowatt hours.” Well to wheel, ICVs are 5% efficient & getting worse; EVs are 40-60% efficient & getting better.
And along with some of the comments below comparing ICE to EV with mfg, the video mentions carbons being emitted shipping the batteries and elements across seas. One should also consider as a counter, the carbon emissions to ship oil and gas across the seas for ICE use, as well as to drill and mine.
Forgot to mention that the electricity it takes to simply pump oil to the surface requires enough electricity to power 12.5 million EVs. Want that pumped to the refinery? Another 5 million EVs from that electricity. All of that needs to be considered when considering the fuel component of the ICE cars. Studies today consider only cost to transport fuel (22% correction) not the raw mining costs of oil. Add to this 10% of all shipping is for fossil fuels. The EV difference is under represented even in those studies cited.
@rick From what I’ve read, fossil fuels are 40% of global shipping. Coal alone is 1/3 of freight rail in the US, which is why the rail industry was one of the main funders of climate denial. So probably half of rail for FFs, considerable trucking, & pipelining. A huge expenditure of energy & metal.
It would be interesting to see a study that included HEV life cycle emissions vs. EVs. With some HEVs consuming one-third to nearly one-half the fuel of similar ICE vehicles but with a battery pack a fraction the size of an EV - typically 1.5 kWh vs. 75-100 kWh - I would think the difference in life cycle emissions would narrow considerably.
No, they wouldn't because the HEV is STILL a fossil fueled vehicle. What good do you think a "1.5kWh" battery does? If an *efficient* EV travels 4 miles per kWh that's a 6 mile range full to empty. That means it's continuously charging and discharging to the max/ min. You know one of the "criticisms" leveled at batteries by the informed is "cycle life"? So small pack, always under stress..... cycling every few miles.... Get the idea? . It's the WORST of both worlds.
@@rogerstarkey5390YES YES YES. I saw a comment that says, I’m getting hybrid because it’s the best of both worlds. Like how in the world is it the best of both worlds if it’s a gas car???!! Like sure 40-50+ mpg for cars like the Niro and Prius, but in the end that doesn’t really matter. You still go through the tank and you still consume gasoline.
@@rylans.5365 AND...UK ended subsidies for hybrids when a study found people were gaming the system, buying cheap ICVs & running them that way, never charging them or using them as EVs. “The health of residents living alongside a bus route in Gothenburg became considerably better when hybrid buses were replaced by buses fully powered by electricity. Along with the noise levels there was a reduction of fatigue, day time sleepiness and low mood, a study at the University of Gothenburg shows.” Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg
Not bad but you left out that toxic tailpipe vehicles use cobalt in their petroleum refining process as well,also that about 40% of all ship travel is just moving fossil fuels around, and that the amount of energy it takes to go from crude in the ground to gas in the tank I about as much energy as it takes to power an ev... before burning a drop to move an inch.
For the consumer, from a convenience standpoint at daily use- EVs work for the majority. Financially they are cheaper over the life of the product, they are safer and much quieter which for the non petrol enthusiast is a positive. Personally i still have fossil fuel vehicles and toys that I utilize when it makes sense, I also have electric vehicles and tools/toys that I use when it makes sense. Everyone needs to find the balance that works best for their lifestyle.
We recycle lead acid batteries at about 90% that's why we don't have lead mines everywhere. Some of the lead in your battery might have been mined in the 1950s. We will do the same with EV batteries. By the way cobalt is needed to refine oil into gas so not unique to EVs. The reason EVs don't seem to be making a difference is because they are not "replacing" gas cars, most of them are in addition to gas cars and the gas cars traded in or handed down when someone buys an EV is likely to drive more miles each year than it did with the first owner. It's going to be very slow going.
@frank Yes to the lead stuff, although it’s used in lots of other things, too. EVs ARE making a difference, both directly & by pairing with renewable energy & allowing it to expand with far less harm done. ICVs are 5% efficient well to wheel; EVs are 40-60% efficient. Every mile driven by an EV that replaces an ICV mile uses 1/10th the energy. “Chart: Electric Cars Cutting Gasoline Use By Hundreds Of Millions Of Gallons A Year” Cleantechnica, June 13th, 2019 No reason to think ICVs replaced are used more after, & no evidence for that that I know of.
It really does depend. If you are in a state with mostly dirty electricity, say WV, EVs probably never catch up for all of the "extra" environmental damage during manufacture. In a state with mostly clean electricity, say WA, EVs are the better choice. Heavier EVs do more damage during manufacture and will take longer to break even. Drive a lot of miles, EVs can catch up faster, few, maybe better to stick with ICE, especially since much cheaper. But transportation is a relative small part of the climate change. Maybe 15%. Farming is much bigger, about which we are doing what? Does not seem much. If we cut transportation emissions by 1/3--which would be huge--it would make climate change 5% better. We need to tackle the other, bigger causes. I worry that EVs are becoming a distraction in this regard.
I drive an EV because of the performance, not for the environment. I wish the EV industry never mentioned environmental advantages. It just further separates people. When people try and bring this crap up with me and my EV, they shut right up when I tell them it’s the performance
Yes I was wondering as you had carbon footprint for batteries & did a deep dive into human suffering mining the rare earth metals , do you have carbon footprint oil ? The land ploughing it, removing the trees drilling one 200 wells to find one well that works pumping high-pressure water into the ground to push the oil out, transporting the oil to refined. We refining the oil where they all have long pipes burning off, methane and natural gas as a byproduct into the air, transporting the gas now to the place And the countries in the Middle East that we buy oil from that are in the Middle East countries that we fought wars in , civil wars for oil killing each other over , currently sinking super around tankers around Somalia, , over oil the cost to clean up the super tankers that sink, I’m not saying making batteries is clean just be fair and talk about oil is extremely dirty and carbon footprint to make and turn into gas
Gas cars are not made out of hemp Cobalt is also used to make airbags in automobiles; catalysts for the petroleum and chemical industries; cemented carbides (also called hardmetals) ...etc
I like how all the people that are pro EV think that they dont require oil maybe not in the way of fuel but the lubrication of all mechanical components and most countries generate at least a portion of there electricity with fossil fuels the tyres synthetic fibres used to make the the interior components (seats carpets and plastics) all these thing mean oil doesnt go away its mining is an additional mined element to there construction and operation it doesn't remove any it might reduce the fossil fuel burning at the vehicle but its still happening somewhere weather it be during the mining the manufacturing the charging or the maintenance it still requires fossil fuels and if you think solar and wind power generation is fossil fuels free again oils lubricate moving parts of a wind tubine coal is used in the steel manufacturing of the poles in which they are mounted and the energy to produce solar panels and the tubine blades requires a lot of heat and energy to creat that heat is more then likely natural, coke gas to generate enough heat but yeah you keep believing that your EV is free of these pollutants 👍
@@nitsuareldas1386 10000kwh a month that 10000 kWh is only enough energy to charge 100 EVs how's that sound in perspective only 50 if you're talking about the hummer EV
@rob Everyone knows those things. You can’t possibly be saying mining & drilling thousands of times more has no more effect. So what are you saying? I highly recommend punctuation from now on. And spell check. And research. And psychotherapy.
I drive less than 3K miles a year. Even with my leaded right boot, It would be much more friendly to the envirnonment for me to continue to drive a 1972 Cadillac Eldorado than it would be for me to go out and buy a new EV. Now, when I was a copier repair man, I really could have used a Toyota Prius.
@@J4Zonian Rental cars cost a blooming fortune. I looked into leasing a car, and, if you have the money, you get the best years out of a car for a song, but you can buy an old piece of junk, outright, for the price of a couple of payments and two months of the additional insurance cost.
This argument is always presented in unhelpful ways. They key thing to understand is that eliminating CO2 emissions in transport to maximize environmental benefit is a multi-part solution. You need both clean energy and EVs. That's the goal. To do this as quickly as possible, we should work on both at the same time. Are EVs better for the environment right now with your current local energy generation mix? It's really an irrelevant question in the long run. Sure, if you only build half a house, it doesn't work very well. Build the other half too, and then it works great.
@EVPulse Seems to me that if you're joining in on the misconception that EV's cause more environmental damage in their manufacturing and not all the disctruction and environmental damage done by the exploration, extraction, transportation, refining (including using COBALT), not to mention the major worldwide accidents that has polluted rivers and oceans alike killing all wildfife in their path caused by the oil industry, you can't be much of an EV site.
About how dirty is to produce an EV from time 2:15, yes the EV is not a produced with a clean process considering the entire chain. Mining is dirty and polluting, transport by large boats is also polluting (mind you, if mining is happening in China, the transport is not so far to the factory) and so on but I don't think it is worst than producing ICE cars. The steel is done with iron which is mined. China is producing over 50% of the world steel and have most of the mines. It doesn't make much difference whether we speak about iron, coal or other types of resources. Mining is polluting anyhow. I would say the main thing that makes the EV's dirtiest is the battery disposal and the fanct that replacement batteries are expensive and difficult to find and expensive to change. As such, one may change the whole car just because of the battery. This is where we need to work it out for the environment. Exchange batteries should be something easy. If the 1st owner don't want the car, the next owners should have the chance to change the battery in a convenient way. As it is, the EV cars will be scrapped just because of batteries that will start loosing their life and this is the big fault for the EVs
Why the f does UA-cam have to keep labeling these videos with context about climate change (linking antiquated info) when this video is evaluating further info than what their articles dwelle into ? ? - Keep the narrative grounded at the same old facts even if proven to be not completely accurate ? Sounds like the Google/Alphabet way !
UA-cam does this with other topics like the January 6th events. It’s mere context, and Wikipedia provides a relatively unbiased summary of the topic/facts. It’s a way to do your own analysis without solely relying on the video itself.
Tyres on 3 ton evs? Lifetime of an ev before scrapping? Black mass and recycling? No ev technicians and write-off limits for insurers? Depreciation and worth?
There are three-ton non-EVs on the road. Cars keep getting heavier. They’ll last as long as most ICE cars these days. Battery degradation is different in a car than on your phone. Recyclers exist and more are starting each and every day. There’s an ICE tech shortage. Write off limits mostly due to Tesla’s gigacasting and not a whole industry problem. All cars depreciate. Some ICE cars lose as much or more as EVs.
@pas Gasoline is dangerous in many ways. Explosive, poisonous (benzene? nasty stuff.) Coal is dangerous in many ways. The dangers of gas & fracking are huge & still being discovered. Fossil fuels are 40% of shipping & the 2 main causes of known whale deaths are getting trapped & drowned in fishing nets...& ship collisions. Fossil fuels kill 10 million people every year, seriously sicken 100 million more & kill uncountable others. They cause hundreds of serious conditions from cancer of every organ to dementia, depression, aggression, & lower IQ. ICVs burn 20-60 times more often than EVs per 100k Vs, & hurt & kill more often when they do.
Feel sorry for electric car drivers and future owners. They will simply have to learn the hard way .. as I did. These things are a huge hassle, all those lost hours sitting in those charging stations, huge anxiety, plus a outrageous expense in the long run. Good luck trying to sell a used Electric car with wore out battery modules. You'll find out nobody wants to pay the ridiculous price of batteries ... Batteries are very ... very expensive to replace ( thousands and thousands of dollars) ... and make no mistake, you will be replacing them. These batteries are highly toxic to our environment and a constant concern for fire, also a high potential for disaster to our surroundings. These new specialized automotive grade batteries ... are not green clean energy by any means... Don't fool yourself and certain don't listen to a manufacturer or salesperson, ... they will say anything, do anything to make a sale . I wish I knew all this before I bought my car . For some of you younger people, you probably already made the mistake, but that's how you learn in life !
Always a good start when they say "these things", as in nobody wants these things some of the exact wording you see in multiple comments as if the disinformation is coming from the same source
Ev manufacturers and dealers are saying ev batteries are safe, ? ... kind of reminds me of tobacco producers saying the same thing about their products,.... we all know how that turned out !! These batteries are highly toxic ! They vent toxic gas fumes when charging and discharging through the battery venting system. Batteries are not total sealed. Manufacturers will say anything to make a sale... Get out of the EV market while you can, it's not safe !
@@jmmx69 No it’s not. Why are you lying? EVs use far more renewable energy than their grids. Lots of reasons; here are a few: “Majority of EVs Powered by Solar” The Weekly Driver, August 7, 2023
FYI because of the dangerous nature of current EV battery tech insurance is going through the roof, so no savings will be realized in using electricity at all
No it isn't, insurance is comparable to gassers. Insurance cost is based on replacement cost of vehicle, your record, and is more for high performance vehicles
@@rp9674 no, it is also based on cost to repair which has gone through the roof with all the added technical garbage on vehicles supposely for added safety...a simple windshield replacement was about $200 and now because of the useless extra gadgets it is over $1000, I worked in insurance and rate settings.
Another factor is EVs are most likely to be declared a total lost when involved in an accident. Decreasing the life of an average EV. Also, EVs don't last as long as internal combustion engine. So even if ICE cars pollute twice as much it last twice as long negating any benefits. Its much more environmental friendly to keep a car than to make a new one. Poor people buys old cars and you're a destroying their chances of getting a car.
@Der ICVs pollute far more than twice EVs. EVs are cheaper to own & run (TCO) & have fewer maintenance needs. EVs LAST LONGER than ICVs. Then the batteries can have a 2nd life as grid storage, then get recycled. Compare the mining & metals used by 1 EV to the fuel & materials used by 2 or 3 ICVs. “Solar Waste Stream is Tiny, Compared to Current Fossil Fuels" This Is Not Cool, October 9, 2023 “A Fossil Fuel Economy Requires 535x More Mining Than a Clean Energy Economy” Michael Thomas, Distilled, March 29, 2023 There are 3 parts to a V’s life: making, running, disposing. First & last are settled; the only thing that can make a significant difference for this existential crisis is reducing the amount an ICVs is used. Replacing it with not traveling, walking, biking, public transit including high speed rail, are all better than another V, but if a V is needed it must be an EV, as soon as possible while the worst of the rejected ICVs are recycled into EVs, wind turbines, heat pumps. All those modes, in that order, must be enabled for everyone no matter what it takes. If it means buying EVs for people so be it. Buy em solar panels & a battery to go with it. Collectively owned by apartment dwellers. Community SWB for everyone who can do it.
It doesn't matter whether EVs are actually good for environment or not. The problem is, letting environmental ideologists dictate what kind of cars people have to use. Environmental ideologists have long history of harming our civilization by, for instance, attacking nuclear industries. So allowing them have their way may lead us to another dangerous situation, which is the key concern of this problem. I believe, however, EVs itself have a lot of benefits like low maintenance, energy costs and better ride quality. So just stop mandating EVs, then people will adapt them without noticeable pushbacks.
It may be a surprise to you, but the planet doesn't care that you have to take longer to charge your ev compared to ice or that you don't want them to be mandated. We are already facing heatwave, stronger hurricanes, biodiversity loss, and melting ice caps. We have to adopt lower emissions vehicles and then transition to an electrification of public transportation as opposed to personal vehicles. We aren't waiting until 2050 to turn things around, evs already can easily replace the majority of vehicles on the road because nobody needs a 800 mile ev to go to work and back with 5 minutes charging. Norway has already proven this.
The main problem You overlooked was how the Fossil Fuel Industry has been subsidized and allowed to get away with causing destruction to the Environment. Nuclear Energy's main problem is what to do with the waste it generates. We don't have a perfect system to solve all the problems the Environment is facing. However, We need to realize the Fossil fuel industry isn't going to make the situation better. Clean renewable sources of energy offer a better solution and a serious transition needs to start happening now.
Yeah, heatwave sucks, I really hate that. However, keeping our civilization up and running is by far more important than protecting environment. You may argue that we need to protect environment so that our civilization can thrive but I doubt that. I've yet to hear net-zero advocates actually talking about how to make our city thrive under extreme weather events in the foreseeable future, by, for example, improving flood control systems, installing ACs... The only thing they talk about is reducing CO2, which implies protecting our civilization is out of concern of them. I'm not opposed to aiming net-zero but we need resilient industry, economy and infrastructure to thrive under climate change, for that, utilizing fossil fuel is absolutely necessary for the time being. We just cannot talk about energy transition when there are some people who are shivering in cold for the lack of affordable energy.
@ANONAAAAAAAAA How deranged... when there's no food and people are begging for their lives, does the economy matter then? Does your 5 minute fill up matter more than the heatwave in Australia causing birds to die of heat mid-air? The problem is we value money over life, that's why water costs more than a soda these days. A tree has no value until its dead, sardines mean nothing until they are on a plate, and yet they are responsible for stirring up the ocean for nutrition circulation, which encourages phytoplankton to bloom and suck up co2. Stop thinking like the 0.01% and maybe consider that our economy means squat when the ecosystems are collapsing. Everything we do right now is because of nature, not because of the economy.
@@ANONAAAAAAAAA That may be your perception and I can see why. With the decline of newspapers and magazines, we end up seeing headlines without the story details. Dig a bit deeper and you will find that there is a multiple-front attack on our climate crisis. There are systems like micro-irrigation and rain capture coming into use. Solar cells are becoming more efficient and nuclear fusion is finally getting to the real-world test phase. Sometimes gov't needs to use a stick instead of a carrot. We see one example in our beautiful high def TV system that was forced into existence to avoid a hodgepodge of analog + digital signals. Another good one is helmet laws (we know helmets save lives, yet many refused to wear them unless compelled).
We know that we don't talk about the downside of making petrol in this video and focus on lithium, it's because when we've talked about the environment in the past and without fail people bring up "but what about child labor" and "what about mining lithium?" We address that in this video. We don't talk as much about how dirty it is to refine petrol. At the end of the day, EVs from cradle to grave are better for the environment.
as a car enthusiast i hate EVs and most others do too because on how we will lose ICE cars but i know for a fact that just changing a way a car runs wont fix climate change infact evs could cause more pollution rather than ICE cars because of auto manufactures to make even more for high demand effectively likley making climate change go faster.
@@stalllow 100% incorrect. My EV embarrasses Porsches every time they try. Heck even my wife’s grocery getter does this (Tesla MYP). So no, EVs are no slouch. You get the added convenience of having a “full tank” every morning, never having to go somewhere else other than your own home for energy. EVs are more comfortable, silent, smooth, and deadly at stoplights. What about cornering, right? Try 1.06g for a full size four door sedan. Yes there are benefits to having a lower centre of gravity. What about weight? Hybrids are heavier than EVs, look no father than the 2025 BMW M5, it’s 900lb heavier than my EV. Also, gas transport eats 70% of our oil which requires “dirty” electricity to pump out of the ground, enough to directly power 12.5 million EVs! Want that oil pumped to refinery? Another 5 million EVs worth of electricity. 10% of shipping is for fossil fuels! Ouch!! All so you can drive a rattle box and pollute our city environment at 22% energy efficiency. It’s insane. If you don’t buy the eco argument (because, say, you’re scientifically illiterate) just accept that EVs are superior products 👋🎤
If you count the mining, manufacturing of battery against EV's carbon footprint, shouldn't you count mining/transporting/refining hydrocarbons against ICE?
The use of materials like Cobalt to refine oil is so often overlooked isn't it? That mining has been going on for decades, but EVs have brought a spotlight on some of the terrible practices in some countries.
@@marvinsamuels1237but there is no cobalt or lithium used in ICE vehicles
@@jmmx69 but there is in the equipment used to process trillions of tons of oil. Cobalt has been used for this process for decades with the largest oil firms taking advantage of countries on the African continent by funding civil wars and paying close to nothing to buy cobalt from mines with no ethics or protection for the workers, but no one was complaining about that.
@@jmmx69 And so does ev. Battery is just one of the component. Some supper cheap EV use sodium polianion and solid materials. majority of Chinese EV no longer use cobalt.
@@marvinsamuels1237 The lunatic fossil fueled far right wing has brought a spotlight to it, trying to derail EVs as it’s derailed much more efficient rail. It’s willing to chew off part of it’s tail to get away.
What, no mention of the collosally filthy petrochemical industry then? If you're going to mention the effects of mining for EV battery materials, you should probably mention the environmental impact of the well to pump petrochemical supply chain too.
Nah, gasoline just magically appears at the station
@@lemongavine from someone in the fuel industry, you would be surprised how many gas station owners/managers/attendants think they can order a load of fuel and expect it like one would order a pizza. It’s sad, people really do think it magically appears at the pump, no normal person gives any thought to logistics or the supply chain issues faced every day. I hear the argument of “what if the power goes out, how are you going to charge your EV then?” As if 90% of gas stations are not running on .25-1 day supply of normal sales for gas just so they can watch the fuel market. Just wait until a fuel terminal goes down and people panic buy gas like they did toilet paper during covid and all of a sudden those gas cars are stuck at a gas station that doesn’t have an eta on a fuel delivery. At least with EVs one can put solar panels on their roof or property and charge that way, last I checked not many people can refine oil and make gas from their roof. Sure there are gas cans and one can store 5-however many gallons they are able to but rotating gas cans constantly is much more inconvenient than just plugging in.
Batteries are reused outside of vehicles before they go to recycling. EVS can get even cleaner as you put them on cleaner energy, including the ultimate, solar
This is not a terrible comparison; but, as others have indicated. You must account for "mining" of oil for burning and lubrication, refining facilities, hazards of environmental catastrophe (oil spills, blow outs, pipeline leaks, train derailments, refinery explosions, large scale benzene pollution from refineries), the transportation and the fuel used to do all these things.
When we've talked about stuff like this in other videos, it's always mentioned that mining lithium is "so much worse." So we addressed lithium here. At the end of the day, EVs are still better. You know that. We know that.
@@EVPulse But it’s absolutely necessary to say it, over & over & over & over & over & over & over, to counteract the opposite being said even more. The lithium thing is pushed by insane fossil-fueled far right wing ARF trolls & liars-for-hire, & while I’ve seen it said hundreds of times, no one has ever presented one tiny bit of evidence for it that I’ve seen. Fossil fuel mining & drilling is 500 to thousands of times more in amount; it’s hard (ie, impossible) to believe that lithium mining is sooooo much worse it comes anywhere near the total devastation of fossil fuels & related mining, etc. Eg, 40% of global shipping, probably equal amounts of rail & trucking are just to move fossil fuels around. And ships use bunker fuel, the dirtiest there is. Oil refining is also electricity-intensive. EVs are 10 times more energy efficient well to wheel.
Plus....
“New Video: Clean Energy = Less Mining”
This Is Not Cool, September 15, 2022
Anti-Renewable Fanatics
Sigh, if people really want to save more carbon footprint, then either walk or ride a bicycle.
Yep, you shouldn't be buying a car or telling anyone else what to buy. EVs are just better in every way and drivers don't care what others think.
If you can't do the perfect thing, just give up
With lesser parts in EV, the life time of the vehicle does not need more replacement than an ICE Vehicle (engine spark plugs engine oil etc) isn’t that more environmentally friendly in that sense lol
Yes
The emissions of ICE vehicles of 430 grams per mile is very low. It accounts for jus5 burning the fuel for running the car. If you add up the amount of CO2 that is added due to exploration, drilling, extraction, transporting, refining , transporting to pump, pumping into a vehicle., emissions from abandoned wells.
Just for refining a gallon of gasoline, it requires 4 kWh of electricity, which is got some portions directly from grid and the rest by burning the dirty gas oil. The CO2 emissions and other pollutants are enormous. A Tesla Model 3 can run 17 miles on 4 kWh, the amount needed for one gallon of gasoline. The things are oil spills, leaks everywhere and other loss of fuels like flaring etc. Finally, there are 3 million abandoned oil wells in US and much more abandoned wells from fracking. Fracking wells usually work for 6-18 months and after that we don’t get enough oil to keep it alive. Oil companies never seal these wells and if they seal it works for ten years and after that the seal breaks or explodes. These cause huge methane emissions and also other chemicals totally polluting the neighborhood. Oil companies are not interested in abandoned wells at all because they lose money in that operation. You need account this methane emissions in your calculation.
Also, regarding EVs, most used battery chemistry is LFP which requires only Lithium and Graphite, no other Cristal metals. Lithium processing and the Logistics are improving and it be much easier and faster to extract Lithium from ore. Once the recycling of batteries goes on in large scale, it will become even more economical and less polluting. A lot of Lithium refineries are opening in many non China locations
"Just for refining a gallon of gasoline, it requires 4 kWh of electricity..."
That has been repeatedly debunked. Where exactly would 4 kWh of electricity enter into the refining process of a gallon of gasoline?
@@aliendroneservices6621
So where do they get the energy required?
It's either from Grid electricity, or "burning stuff"
.
Pick one.
@@rogerstarkey5390 Why would the energy-required be in the form of electricity? If it's not, then there are no *_conversion losses._* Do you understand that?
@@aliendroneservices6621 Go to a bloody refinery and look at all the electric pumps there are tool , it beats me how people like you try to stand up ICE over EVs , all this utter garbage that EVs pollute more than ICE has been totally debunked and is utterly ridiculous !!!
@@aliendroneservices6621 Electricity is far more efficient than burning things.
It takes about 5 KWh to refine 1 gallon of gasoline. (Of course there are lots of other energy inputs.)
Tesla’s Model S can go 20 miles on 5 kilowatt hours.” Well to wheel, ICVs are 5% efficient & getting worse; EVs are 40-60% efficient & getting better.
And along with some of the comments below comparing ICE to EV with mfg, the video mentions carbons being emitted shipping the batteries and elements across seas. One should also consider as a counter, the carbon emissions to ship oil and gas across the seas for ICE use, as well as to drill and mine.
Forgot to mention that the electricity it takes to simply pump oil to the surface requires enough electricity to power 12.5 million EVs. Want that pumped to the refinery? Another 5 million EVs from that electricity. All of that needs to be considered when considering the fuel component of the ICE cars. Studies today consider only cost to transport fuel (22% correction) not the raw mining costs of oil. Add to this 10% of all shipping is for fossil fuels. The EV difference is under represented even in those studies cited.
Refining crude oil uses power and pollutes. Gasoline has to be delivered by trucks & tankers
@@rp9674 Yes. Powering ICE involves many layers of inefficiency, waste, and pollution.
💨 💨 💨
@rick From what I’ve read, fossil fuels are 40% of global shipping. Coal alone is 1/3 of freight rail in the US, which is why the rail industry was one of the main funders of climate denial. So probably half of rail for FFs, considerable trucking, & pipelining. A huge expenditure of energy & metal.
It would be interesting to see a study that included HEV life cycle emissions vs. EVs. With some HEVs consuming one-third to nearly one-half the fuel of similar ICE vehicles but with a battery pack a fraction the size of an EV - typically 1.5 kWh vs. 75-100 kWh - I would think the difference in life cycle emissions would narrow considerably.
No, they wouldn't because the HEV is STILL a fossil fueled vehicle.
What good do you think a "1.5kWh" battery does?
If an *efficient* EV travels 4 miles per kWh that's a 6 mile range full to empty.
That means it's continuously charging and discharging to the max/ min.
You know one of the "criticisms" leveled at batteries by the informed is "cycle life"?
So small pack, always under stress..... cycling every few miles.... Get the idea?
.
It's the WORST of both worlds.
@@rogerstarkey5390YES YES YES. I saw a comment that says, I’m getting hybrid because it’s the best of both worlds. Like how in the world is it the best of both worlds if it’s a gas car???!! Like sure 40-50+ mpg for cars like the Niro and Prius, but in the end that doesn’t really matter. You still go through the tank and you still consume gasoline.
Just see MPG between ICE HEV PHEV and BEV, some like MG have all 4 in one car. BEV emission win by huge margin.
@@rylans.5365 AND...UK ended subsidies for hybrids when a study found people were gaming the system, buying cheap ICVs & running them that way, never charging them or using them as EVs.
“The health of residents living alongside a bus route in Gothenburg became considerably better when hybrid buses were replaced by buses fully powered by electricity. Along with the noise levels there was a reduction of fatigue, day time sleepiness and low mood, a study at the University of Gothenburg shows.”
Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg
Not bad but you left out that toxic tailpipe vehicles use cobalt in their petroleum refining process as well,also that about 40% of all ship travel is just moving fossil fuels around, and that the amount of energy it takes to go from crude in the ground to gas in the tank I about as much energy as it takes to power an ev... before burning a drop to move an inch.
For the consumer, from a convenience standpoint at daily use- EVs work for the majority. Financially they are cheaper over the life of the product, they are safer and much quieter which for the non petrol enthusiast is a positive. Personally i still have fossil fuel vehicles and toys that I utilize when it makes sense, I also have electric vehicles and tools/toys that I use when it makes sense. Everyone needs to find the balance that works best for their lifestyle.
We recycle lead acid batteries at about 90% that's why we don't have lead mines everywhere. Some of the lead in your battery might have been mined in the 1950s. We will do the same with EV batteries. By the way cobalt is needed to refine oil into gas so not unique to EVs. The reason EVs don't seem to be making a difference is because they are not "replacing" gas cars, most of them are in addition to gas cars and the gas cars traded in or handed down when someone buys an EV is likely to drive more miles each year than it did with the first owner. It's going to be very slow going.
You do know the best selling car on the planet in 2023 was an EV?
(Tesla Model Y)
.
Watch for the fleet cars filtering into the used market.
@@rogerstarkey5390 I not only know the Model Y was the best selling vehicle I was one of those 2023 sales. Got mine June 2023.
@frank Yes to the lead stuff, although it’s used in lots of other things, too. EVs ARE making a difference, both directly & by pairing with renewable energy & allowing it to expand with far less harm done.
ICVs are 5% efficient well to wheel; EVs are 40-60% efficient. Every mile driven by an EV that replaces an ICV mile uses 1/10th the energy.
“Chart: Electric Cars Cutting Gasoline Use By Hundreds Of Millions Of Gallons A Year”
Cleantechnica, June 13th, 2019
No reason to think ICVs replaced are used more after, & no evidence for that that I know of.
It really does depend. If you are in a state with mostly dirty electricity, say WV, EVs probably never catch up for all of the "extra" environmental damage during manufacture. In a state with mostly clean electricity, say WA, EVs are the better choice. Heavier EVs do more damage during manufacture and will take longer to break even. Drive a lot of miles, EVs can catch up faster, few, maybe better to stick with ICE, especially since much cheaper. But transportation is a relative small part of the climate change. Maybe 15%. Farming is much bigger, about which we are doing what? Does not seem much. If we cut transportation emissions by 1/3--which would be huge--it would make climate change 5% better. We need to tackle the other, bigger causes. I worry that EVs are becoming a distraction in this regard.
I drive an EV because of the performance, not for the environment. I wish the EV industry never mentioned environmental advantages. It just further separates people. When people try and bring this crap up with me and my EV, they shut right up when I tell them it’s the performance
Yes I was wondering as you had carbon footprint for batteries & did a deep dive into human suffering mining the rare earth metals , do you have carbon footprint oil ? The land ploughing it, removing the trees drilling one 200 wells to find one well that works pumping high-pressure water into the ground to push the oil out, transporting the oil to refined. We refining the oil where they all have long pipes burning off, methane and natural gas as a byproduct into the air, transporting the gas now to the place And the countries in the Middle East that we buy oil from that are in the Middle East countries that we fought wars in , civil wars for oil killing each other over , currently sinking super around tankers around Somalia, , over oil the cost to clean up the super tankers that sink, I’m not saying making batteries is clean just be fair and talk about oil is extremely dirty and carbon footprint to make and turn into gas
The EV comes out ahead, which is the point in this video. The EV always comes out ahead.
When we talk about it we get so much pushback on batteries we deep dived the battery process.
Gas cars are not made out of hemp
Cobalt is also used to make airbags in automobiles; catalysts for the petroleum and chemical industries; cemented carbides (also called hardmetals) ...etc
I like how all the people that are pro EV think that they dont require oil maybe not in the way of fuel but the lubrication of all mechanical components and most countries generate at least a portion of there electricity with fossil fuels the tyres synthetic fibres used to make the the interior components (seats carpets and plastics) all these thing mean oil doesnt go away its mining is an additional mined element to there construction and operation it doesn't remove any it might reduce the fossil fuel burning at the vehicle but its still happening somewhere weather it be during the mining the manufacturing the charging or the maintenance it still requires fossil fuels and if you think solar and wind power generation is fossil fuels free again oils lubricate moving parts of a wind tubine coal is used in the steel manufacturing of the poles in which they are mounted and the energy to produce solar panels and the tubine blades requires a lot of heat and energy to creat that heat is more then likely natural, coke gas to generate enough heat but yeah you keep believing that your EV is free of these pollutants 👍
it takes electricity to extract oil, about 10,000 kwh a month. How do they get that electricity?
@@nitsuareldas1386 10000kwh a month that 10000 kWh is only enough energy to charge 100 EVs how's that sound in perspective only 50 if you're talking about the hummer EV
@rob Everyone knows those things.
You can’t possibly be saying mining & drilling thousands of times more has no more effect. So what are you saying?
I highly recommend punctuation from now on. And spell check. And research. And psychotherapy.
@@J4Zonian wow personal attack, you must be an EV owner enjoy that
@@robincollis6349 I gave up driving many years ago. Not personal. No attack. Just facts & very very good suggestions. Please take all of them.
I drive less than 3K miles a year. Even with my leaded right boot, It would be much more friendly to the envirnonment for me to continue to drive a 1972 Cadillac Eldorado than it would be for me to go out and buy a new EV. Now, when I was a copier repair man, I really could have used a Toyota Prius.
@That Or rent.
@@J4Zonian Rental cars cost a blooming fortune. I looked into leasing a car, and, if you have the money, you get the best years out of a car for a song, but you can buy an old piece of junk, outright, for the price of a couple of payments and two months of the additional insurance cost.
This argument is always presented in unhelpful ways. They key thing to understand is that eliminating CO2 emissions in transport to maximize environmental benefit is a multi-part solution. You need both clean energy and EVs. That's the goal. To do this as quickly as possible, we should work on both at the same time. Are EVs better for the environment right now with your current local energy generation mix? It's really an irrelevant question in the long run. Sure, if you only build half a house, it doesn't work very well. Build the other half too, and then it works great.
We are working on both. But being an EV site we talk about... well EVs.
@EVPulse Seems to me that if you're joining in on the misconception that EV's cause more environmental damage in their manufacturing and not all the disctruction and environmental damage done by the exploration, extraction, transportation, refining (including using COBALT), not to mention the major worldwide accidents that has polluted rivers and oceans alike killing all wildfife in their path caused by the oil industry, you can't be much of an EV site.
@@EVPulse
A reference to "Master Plan 2006" (Now "Master Plan 1") would be good.
.
The gist is all there.
About how dirty is to produce an EV from time 2:15, yes the EV is not a produced with a clean process considering the entire chain. Mining is dirty and polluting, transport by large boats is also polluting (mind you, if mining is happening in China, the transport is not so far to the factory) and so on but I don't think it is worst than producing ICE cars. The steel is done with iron which is mined. China is producing over 50% of the world steel and have most of the mines. It doesn't make much difference whether we speak about iron, coal or other types of resources. Mining is polluting anyhow.
I would say the main thing that makes the EV's dirtiest is the battery disposal and the fanct that replacement batteries are expensive and difficult to find and expensive to change. As such, one may change the whole car just because of the battery. This is where we need to work it out for the environment. Exchange batteries should be something easy. If the 1st owner don't want the car, the next owners should have the chance to change the battery in a convenient way. As it is, the EV cars will be scrapped just because of batteries that will start loosing their life and this is the big fault for the EVs
Anything can pass smog if you know the right people.
Why the f does UA-cam have to keep labeling these videos with context about climate change (linking antiquated info) when this video is evaluating further info than what their articles dwelle into ? ?
- Keep the narrative grounded at the same old facts even if proven to be not completely accurate ? Sounds like the Google/Alphabet way !
UA-cam does this with other topics like the January 6th events. It’s mere context, and Wikipedia provides a relatively unbiased summary of the topic/facts. It’s a way to do your own analysis without solely relying on the video itself.
Equal time for ignorance and hate, fair, right?
Yes, but not as bad as gas cars.
Are ev repairs more expensive compared to ICE?
Same on similar components like suspension, 12v battery, Infotainment. Probably no maintenance on drivetrain. Almost 6 yr with 3 EVs
Tyres on 3 ton evs?
Lifetime of an ev before scrapping?
Black mass and recycling?
No ev technicians and write-off limits for insurers?
Depreciation and worth?
There are three-ton non-EVs on the road. Cars keep getting heavier.
They’ll last as long as most ICE cars these days. Battery degradation is different in a car than on your phone.
Recyclers exist and more are starting each and every day.
There’s an ICE tech shortage. Write off limits mostly due to Tesla’s gigacasting and not a whole industry problem.
All cars depreciate. Some ICE cars lose as much or more as EVs.
For EV to even be continued to be used new and different battery tech is required, Lithium is actually dangerous in many ways...
Not according to US transportation statistic.
@pas Gasoline is dangerous in many ways. Explosive, poisonous (benzene? nasty stuff.) Coal is dangerous in many ways. The dangers of gas & fracking are huge & still being discovered. Fossil fuels are 40% of shipping & the 2 main causes of known whale deaths are getting trapped & drowned in fishing nets...& ship collisions.
Fossil fuels kill 10 million people every year, seriously sicken 100 million more & kill uncountable others. They cause hundreds of serious conditions from cancer of every organ to dementia, depression, aggression, & lower IQ.
ICVs burn 20-60 times more often than EVs per 100k Vs, & hurt & kill more often when they do.
@@J4Zonian "Fossil fuels kill 10 million people every year..."
Name the exact people supposedly killed by the emissions from my 2016 Prius c.
Feel sorry for electric car drivers and future owners. They will simply have to learn the hard way .. as I did. These things are a huge hassle, all those lost hours sitting in those charging stations, huge anxiety, plus a outrageous expense in the long run. Good luck trying to sell a used Electric car with wore out battery modules. You'll find out nobody wants to pay the ridiculous price of batteries ... Batteries are very ... very expensive to replace ( thousands and thousands of dollars) ... and make no mistake, you will be replacing them. These batteries are highly toxic to our environment and a constant concern for fire, also a high potential for disaster to our surroundings. These new specialized automotive grade batteries ... are not green clean energy by any means... Don't fool yourself and certain don't listen to a manufacturer or salesperson, ... they will say anything, do anything to make a sale .
I wish I knew all this before I bought my car . For some of you younger people, you probably already made the mistake, but that's how you learn in life !
How much does the petroleum industry pay you to write that nonsense?
Joke
I'm almost 6 years into only EVS maybe someday I'll learn, I know someone who's owned a Nissan leaf for over 10 years, still going
@all Every part of that is false & absurd. Please get into psychotherapy.
Always a good start when they say "these things", as in nobody wants these things some of the exact wording you see in multiple comments as if the disinformation is coming from the same source
EV is undoubtably very helpful in reducing urban smog. In many cities, such as Los Angles, EVs will reduce air pollution drastically.
Ev manufacturers and dealers are saying ev batteries are safe, ? ... kind of reminds me of tobacco producers saying the same thing about their products,.... we all know how that turned out !! These batteries are highly toxic ! They vent toxic gas fumes when charging and discharging through the battery venting system. Batteries are not total sealed.
Manufacturers will say anything to make a sale... Get out of the EV market while you can, it's not safe !
Not if you consider the power source for LA is over 45% coal and Natural gas
No coal, 39% nat gas. Even off coal, EVs are far cleaner than gas cars. Increasingly renewable energy
@@jmmx69 No it’s not. Why are you lying?
EVs use far more renewable energy than their grids.
Lots of reasons; here are a few:
“Majority of EVs Powered by Solar”
The Weekly Driver, August 7, 2023
FYI because of the dangerous nature of current EV battery tech insurance is going through the roof, so no savings will be realized in using electricity at all
No it isn't, insurance is comparable to gassers. Insurance cost is based on replacement cost of vehicle, your record, and is more for high performance vehicles
@@rp9674 no, it is also based on cost to repair which has gone through the roof with all the added technical garbage on vehicles supposely for added safety...a simple windshield replacement was about $200 and now because of the useless extra gadgets it is over $1000, I worked in insurance and rate settings.
Okay but in real life I have three Eevees I've owned gas vehicles for decades, not seeing an increase in insurance
Another factor is EVs are most likely to be declared a total lost when involved in an accident. Decreasing the life of an average EV. Also, EVs don't last as long as internal combustion engine. So even if ICE cars pollute twice as much it last twice as long negating any benefits. Its much more environmental friendly to keep a car than to make a new one. Poor people buys old cars and you're a destroying their chances of getting a car.
@Der ICVs pollute far more than twice EVs. EVs are cheaper to own & run (TCO) & have fewer maintenance needs. EVs LAST LONGER than ICVs. Then the batteries can have a 2nd life as grid storage, then get recycled. Compare the mining & metals used by 1 EV to the fuel & materials used by 2 or 3 ICVs.
“Solar Waste Stream is Tiny, Compared to Current Fossil Fuels"
This Is Not Cool, October 9, 2023
“A Fossil Fuel Economy Requires 535x More Mining Than a Clean Energy Economy”
Michael Thomas, Distilled, March 29, 2023
There are 3 parts to a V’s life: making, running, disposing.
First & last are settled; the only thing that can make a significant difference for this existential crisis is reducing the amount an ICVs is used. Replacing it with not traveling, walking, biking, public transit including high speed rail, are all better than another V, but if a V is needed it must be an EV, as soon as possible while the worst of the rejected ICVs are recycled into EVs, wind turbines, heat pumps.
All those modes, in that order, must be enabled for everyone no matter what it takes. If it means buying EVs for people so be it. Buy em solar panels & a battery to go with it. Collectively owned by apartment dwellers. Community SWB for everyone who can do it.
It doesn't matter whether EVs are actually good for environment or not.
The problem is, letting environmental ideologists dictate what kind of cars people have to use.
Environmental ideologists have long history of harming our civilization by, for instance, attacking nuclear industries.
So allowing them have their way may lead us to another dangerous situation, which is the key concern of this problem.
I believe, however, EVs itself have a lot of benefits like low maintenance, energy costs and better ride quality.
So just stop mandating EVs, then people will adapt them without noticeable pushbacks.
It may be a surprise to you, but the planet doesn't care that you have to take longer to charge your ev compared to ice or that you don't want them to be mandated. We are already facing heatwave, stronger hurricanes, biodiversity loss, and melting ice caps.
We have to adopt lower emissions vehicles and then transition to an electrification of public transportation as opposed to personal vehicles.
We aren't waiting until 2050 to turn things around, evs already can easily replace the majority of vehicles on the road because nobody needs a 800 mile ev to go to work and back with 5 minutes charging. Norway has already proven this.
The main problem You overlooked was how the Fossil Fuel Industry has been subsidized and allowed to get away with causing destruction to the Environment. Nuclear Energy's main problem is what to do with the waste it generates. We don't have a perfect system to solve all the problems the Environment is facing. However, We need to realize the Fossil fuel industry isn't going to make the situation better. Clean renewable sources of energy offer a better solution and a serious transition needs to start happening now.
Yeah, heatwave sucks, I really hate that.
However, keeping our civilization up and running is by far more important than protecting environment.
You may argue that we need to protect environment so that our civilization can thrive but I doubt that.
I've yet to hear net-zero advocates actually talking about how to make our city thrive under extreme weather events in the foreseeable future, by, for example, improving flood control systems, installing ACs...
The only thing they talk about is reducing CO2, which implies protecting our civilization is out of concern of them.
I'm not opposed to aiming net-zero but we need resilient industry, economy and infrastructure to thrive under climate change, for that, utilizing fossil fuel is absolutely necessary for the time being.
We just cannot talk about energy transition when there are some people who are shivering in cold for the lack of affordable energy.
@ANONAAAAAAAAA How deranged... when there's no food and people are begging for their lives, does the economy matter then? Does your 5 minute fill up matter more than the heatwave in Australia causing birds to die of heat mid-air?
The problem is we value money over life, that's why water costs more than a soda these days. A tree has no value until its dead, sardines mean nothing until they are on a plate, and yet they are responsible for stirring up the ocean for nutrition circulation, which encourages phytoplankton to bloom and suck up co2.
Stop thinking like the 0.01% and maybe consider that our economy means squat when the ecosystems are collapsing. Everything we do right now is because of nature, not because of the economy.
@@ANONAAAAAAAAA That may be your perception and I can see why. With the decline of newspapers and magazines, we end up seeing headlines without the story details. Dig a bit deeper and you will find that there is a multiple-front attack on our climate crisis. There are systems like micro-irrigation and rain capture coming into use. Solar cells are becoming more efficient and nuclear fusion is finally getting to the real-world test phase. Sometimes gov't needs to use a stick instead of a carrot. We see one example in our beautiful high def TV system that was forced into existence to avoid a hodgepodge of analog + digital signals. Another good one is helmet laws (we know helmets save lives, yet many refused to wear them unless compelled).