this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2023
248 points (98.1% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5306 readers
556 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:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Neither of these are green energy.
Electric vehicle production is green energy in the same way that renewable powerplant construction is green energy. Both enable the US to reduce its reliance on fossil fuels and move towards a more sustainable energy grid.
Renewable powerplant produces renewable energy.
An EV is better than gas cars but it still may be using fossil fuel energy
Your comments hurt our brains. Are you implying that shifting the method of powering transportation to renewables is a bad thing or no better than putting gasoline into an internal combustion engine?
you're getting hung up thinking EV automatically means renewable energy. investing in EV's in no ways shifts the method of powering them. Investing in renewable energy does that.
You're technically correct on the surface. But people who get an EV are also probably more likely to get solar in their roof to charge that EV. I think your point though is that some states (I think Idaho?) power homes with fossil fuels, and buying an EV there will give the illusion of making a difference when it's really about the same.
I don't think most states are as bad as that though.
what? The US in general gets most of its electricity from fossil fuels by a huge margin.
The US is about 60/40 fossil vs non-fossil, with much better ratios in the places that the most EVs are being sold right now. This is also likely to greatly improve over the useful life of any new vehicle sold today.
On top of that, EVs are much more efficient at turning electricity into motion than fossil cars are in turning gasoline into motion, so you end up with a reduction in emissions even in fossil-fuel-heavy parts of the US.
As an EV owner, I don't have solar panels but I do have a 100% renewable electricity provider. I have a feeling a good portion of EV owners do something similar, either with solar, 100% renewable electricity, or both
So you’ve confirmed our worst suspicions about you. Good job.
You mean you've confirmed
lol. Weird hill to die on for you but whatever. Anyone with half a brain knows we have to transition to EVs so that renewables can power transportation. But I guess that concept is impossible for you to comprehend.
We dont have the renewables to power transportation. Theyre fossil fuel powered.
lol my EVs are 100% powered by renewables. You know that renewables are now cheaper than traditional fossil fuels, right? It’s not 1995 anymore honey.
Great, so why are we still getting most of our power from fossil fuels?
Are you asking why we haven’t switched to 100% renewables overnight unironically? It’s hilarious that you think your clueless points don’t make you look absolutely idiotic. Keep shoveling.
Yeah i said overnight
Congratulations, you just answered your own question.
The term used is green energy effected areas. An EV can be run with green energy without any problem. A gas powered car can not. That is the key difference.
Run, yes, manufactured, no
A guy who smokes 10 packs of cigarettes a day, and then switches 10 E-cigs is still harming himself with nicotine, and still paying money to those same Tobacco companies -- but he's no longer ingesting tar, and is slowly slowly weaning himself off the substance.
No true Scotsman doesn't help us.
They're greener than the existing alternatives.
Im not saying theyre green energy that dont deserve the title, im saying theyre literally not energy production. EVs are an energy use.
You don’t think green energy use qualifies as a green energy “category” that one could invest in?
it's not green energy use. it's just energy use. EV's predominantly run on fossil fuel energy in the US.
True. EVs plus those crappy fossil fuels power plants though are still more efficient at using energy, and thus better environmentally, than ice cars. We really need more nuclear and renewables here though. It's pretty bad and it doesn't have to be.
It’s the capability for green energy use, in a very energy-intense application. That possibility is not there with combustion engines.
We cannot have a green energy economy unless all the usage endpoints consume clean energy rather than hydrocarbons.
most things that use energy are capable of using green energy, you wouldnt call an investment in a coffee machine company a green energy investment. We need the green energy first.
Anything that already runs on electricity isn’t really part of the discussion then, because there’s no need to change anything at the point of use.
A better analogy to the car thing might be investing in (or subsidizing) heat pump production over natural gas furnaces.
Everyone having a hard ime on this, EV are not green energy production, widhout green poweplants very little changes with more EVs.
They are ways to use green energy, just not ways to create it.