Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

7580 readers

238 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

silence7@slrpnk.net

133

US: Used E.V. Sales Take Off as Prices Plummet. Electric vehicles on the used market often cost less than comparable gasoline models, making the technology affordable to many more buyers. (www.nytimes.com)

submitted 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) by HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org to c/climate@slrpnk.net

18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Archive link:

https://archive.ph/o500u

New electric vehicles cost thousands more than similar models that run on gasoline. But a growing number of shoppers are discovering that for used cars, often the opposite is true.

Used battery-powered vehicles often sell for less than comparable cars with internal combustion engines, making them a good deal even before calculating savings in maintenance costs and fuel. That is expanding the number of people who can afford to buy such models.

Sales of used electric vehicles rose 40 percent in July from a year earlier, according to Cox Automotive, a research firm.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org 26 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

To be clear, electric vehicles are not a silver bullet. In cities, bikes are often the better option. However, they do save carbon, and as such, they are one of the many puzzle pieces of the big puzzle that humanity needs to put together in order to survive as a civilization. There will be no single solution because it is such a devilish complex and widely ramified problem. For a matter of survival, we need to grasp every puzzle piece we can.

Also, emissions from cars are a surprisingly large proportion of individual emissions - much larger than many people are aware of. They are like 120 Grams per kilometer per person. If you drive a combustion car to a supermarket nearby to get a pizza, the CO2 cost of the travel there will likely be higher than that of the food.

Edit: typo

[–] Killercat103@slrpnk.net 10 points 6 days ago

Not to mention that cars seem to be one of the largest sources of microplastic. Me personally am hoping for a lot more infrastructure built to suit walking, biking and taking the train. Imagine free public transit that properly covers the city, is free and goes frequently enough you dont even need to worry when you arrive at the stop. Its real convenient and has much much less emissions.

[–] quick_snail@feddit.nl 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Depends if the pizza has dead animals on it or not

[–] HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org 1 points 4 days ago

I am not so sure about that one. If your pizza has a 80 gram ham topping, and you drive four miles and back, I'd guess it is still the car use which weights heavier. Even if avoiding meat is better, of course.

Ultimately, one has to do the math. Carbon reduction is essentially a quantitative endeavour, and many outcomes when one actually measures and counts are counter-intuitive. For example, ship and truck transport of food over large distances can cost far less carbon than your car trip to the supermarket.