Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00
This is still pushing the same argument though. A Hummer EV running on 100% clean power in Quebec will still have better lifecycle emissions than a Prius. It won't even be close.
|
I don't think it's part of the same argument at all. The first incorrect argument is that EVs are bad because they aren't an improvement over ICE cars. The second argument is that EVs are a big improvement but not the only thing to consider in terms of sustainability which is not only 100% correct but an important thing to remind people who think the only thing that matters in terms of climate change is buying an EV. Buy an EV, and that's it. All our problems are been solved!
That's actually quite interesting about the lifecycle carbon though. Not too surprising in a region dominated by hydro power I suppose, but I'm still interested in seeing the source.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00
Moreover, worrying about vehicle size largely seems like a pointless distraction when the public is already massively upsizing with gas vehicles. A gas F150 is a much bigger threat than an electric F150. If anything, the public seems to tolerate smaller vehicles on the EV side far more. There's more sedans and compacts sold (proportionally) in the EV world than than ICEV world. Putting the burden for reducing vehicle sizes on EVs, will simply see more large gas vehicles sold.
The gas guzzler tax was about emissions. Not about vehicle size per se. This isn't a problem with EVs. Especially in a country where most of the power generated has little to no emissions. Also, we have a gas guzzler tax: the carbon tax. Doesn't seem to have stopped people buying Silverados to get groceries from Walmart.
|
And of course when i say vehicle size, I primarily mean battery size and energy consumption which is correlated with vehicle size, but it's not a direct relationship. However, both are closely correlated with price.
In terms of the carbon tax, sure it doesn't stop people from buying ICE gas guzzles but neither does a subsidy. That's just part of living in a free country where we use incentives and disincentives rather than outright mandates. Some people will be persuaded and many won't. The point is finding the best policy to accomplish the goal.
My position isn't that I'm certain expanded, generalized EV subsidies is a bad policy; It's that others shouldn't be so certain that it's a good one. Until we need some more data I'm personally undecided. It would require a study showing dollars in tax credits spent vs total carbon reduction under the current limited subsidy regime compared to with subsidies expanded.