this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2026
110 points (98.2% liked)
Climate
8384 readers
250 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Are we still pretending strip-mining lithium and powering cars with coal-boiled steam to turn generators to transmit electricity (of which at least 30% is lost as heat) is environmentally friendly?
Yes, because despite both being extracted out of the ground, fuel you don't get to keep once spent, while lithium you can!
Coal is becoming super uneconomical for power generation, with a relative abundance of natural gas which itself (talking about the byproducts after burning it for electricity) is far better for the environment and doesn't require a complete overhaul of the boilers. Renewables are becoming cheaper every year so long term, despite Republicans' best efforts to play big government when they feel like it and go against the free market, renewables will proliferate increasing the impact of electric cars over gas. Better transport alternatives like bikes buses and trains are the best way, but EVs are a marginally acceptable alternative for car-brained societies.
It is a net positive than what we're doing now. But doesnt resolve the problem of individual vechile reliance.
Is that clear? What I’ve heard (and believe) is that keeping your old clunker is the most environmentally friendly thing to do. If you don’t think the environment begins and ends at the tailpipe, that is.
Well, the most environmentally friendly thing you can do is move to a walkable neighborhood, work from home, and ride a bicycle to drop the kids off at school.
People want to vote with their dollars and feel smug without doing any research or making any compromises to their lifestyle, though.
It depends on the electricity fuel blend. So in the past if you had a lot of coal it could take a long time to "pay back" the carbon cost of a new EV. But as more and more renewables are coming online that payback period is getting shorter and shorter. In most places if they've put at least some effort into bringing down carbon emissions, EVs are a substantial improvement.
Of course, walking, biking, transit are all far superior. But if those aren't viable for some trips then EV is the next best option.
I mean, 21% renewable isn’t great. And I’d argue hydro has some environmental impact.
They all have environmental impacts but every serious modern study I've seen concludes EVs are better, often substantially better.
How many 20plus year old cars do you see? People obviously are replacing them. And theres other reasons to replace old cars other than fuel economy such as safety improvements.
Where do you get “20 years?” And what does that matter? I mean, yeah, I do. Some prime mid-2000s Altimas with destroyed bumpers roll around my neighborhood.
The average lifespan of a car is 10 years. I buy 5-year-old cars and keep them for another five. If it’s undriveable, a scrap yard can part it out and keep similar cars on the road longer.
I notice you conveniently ignored the points I made about things that would actually be good for the environment. Your EV isn’t reducing all the other harmful effects of driving aside from carbon dioxide, and even that’s not a clean win.
10 years sounds shockingly short. My impression is that the average car lasts about 20 years. Lots of older cars still on the road.
Great.
Ok... so when you drive every single vehicle into the dirt now what? Stop being dense.
Also i didnt ignore your point. You just expanded on my point. So thanks i guess.
I already said “now what.”
One of us dense — that we can agree on.
You litterally said the "average lifespan of car" is 10 years. Which means wait for it... people replacing them with new vehicles. You and I in agreement that the true solution is reducing personal vehicles dependency. But you trying to discourage EV adoption isnt helping anyone.
Where did I say people shouldn’t buy an EV? I said keeping your current car, given it’s driveable, is more environmentally friendly than buying a new car.
Are you able to win an argument against anyone but a strawman?
Speaking of strawmans... Point me at the person that ever said replace functional vehicles with new EVs?
Its better than a gas car by a lot, if nowhere near as good as a bicycle or mass transit
Electric cars are going to be a piece of what we do to get off fossil fuels
Electric vehicles overall are environmentally friendly. They aren't perfect and have some costs but they are overall a step in the right direction.
Good (though long) overview of the benefits of electric vehicles and renewable energy here: https://youtu.be/KtQ9nt2ZeGM
Sure, agree, but definitely not enough, and this AI nonsense really does encourage more dirty generation at the source. It is all just very bleak.
Yes because electric cars can use renewable energy, petrol and diesel cars cannot.
Key word being can. You're right that a lot of people charging at home are buying coal/gas power to charge their cars, however a lot of people are also charging with renewable power. Some people are charging exclusively with renewable power. And that number is only growing.
I mean, they make cars. That makes the headline misleading, at best.