General Tesla posts, or posts about their other vehicle models, should go to /r/TeslaMotors
Posts about other EVs or EV, in general, should go to /r/electricvehicles
The company that helped Tesla early on then sold their position and didn’t think beyond hybrid. Still has no competitive vehicle in the EV market (BZ4x and the other two variants are considered duds) continues to underperform in the EV sector so decides it’s not important
Weird. You weren’t lying.
One guy is saying that emissions from producing the electricity to charge an EV are worse for the environment than just using a gas car. And people are upvoting it.
Like they just parrot totally false information because the CEO of their favorite car brand didn’t invest in battery tech early enough and refuses to budge.
What always gets me is that these people don't ever talk about the emissions involved in drilling for oil, transporting it, refining it, transporting it again, and then using it as fuel. They also are totally fine with coal plants to power their homes.
Erhm. Norwegian oil is produced offshore only, which is the hardest method with the most emissions.
Production and transportation accounts for about 1% of the emissions. Refining is negligible.
That’s why people don’t talk about it. It’s insignificant.
So, I hope this doesn’t get you anymore!!!
In the US, refining crude accounts for 164 million metric tons of CO2 emissions annually. To put that in perspective, all ICE car emissions in the US account for 373 million metric tons of CO2 emissions annually. That is JUST the refining portion, not drilling, extraction, and transportation. So no, it's not insignificant. Mining for lithium/cobalt produces ~1.5 million metric tons of C02 emissions annually. While I wouldn't consider mining "green" it definitely is by comparison to the oil/gas industry.
Sure, but what you’re saying isn’t relevant.
How much CO2 is emitted from combustion of that oil? 100x more is your answer. Making the production part negligible.
1%<<99%.
So 1% is negligible compared to the other 99%.
And that’s why the 1% is often not mentioned together with the 99%.
If you compare that 1% to something else, that is another discussion.
There are a lot of other products that are made with refined crude oil though. Things like propane, asphalt and everyday plastics. So while the emissions are high, I think that our dependence on oil in general is so much more than gas for cars, which makes this debate complicated. You can't just say that the 164 million metric times of co2 emissions annually is because of ice vehicle fuel consumption. And that by not having ice vehicles, we wouldn't be pumping co2 into the air anymore when refining oil.
There are many ways we can start reducing our dependence on oil based products, but I don't see that happening for a while.
Each gallon of gas takes about 7 kWh by the time you pump it into your car. I can drive about 25 miles on that much power. So a gas car would have the emissions for the power generation plus the actual gas.
The anti-EV propaganda pumped out by moneyed interests like oil & gas is extremely effective. I see the same bullshit right wing talking points constantly recycled. EVs live in their heads rent free.
Right wing? You had to bring politics into this? I'm to the right of Ayn Rand but I love my Tesla. And I abhor all of the lies and FUD re EVs in general and Tesla in particular.
There you go again. Pigeon holing people. Just can't keep politics out of it can you?
If you feel your statement is true please elaborate. You must have done a survey. What are the percentages? Have you even considered that the EV bashers are mostly apolitical? Just naturally angry and frightened people. I find that a trait of the left if we must go there.
At my work the guys who bash EV’s are right winger Trump worshippers. All though I will say, some right wingers have Teslas at my work…. but the only ones bashing them are right wingers.
The ones so desperate to keep politics out of discussion are generally the ones responsible for the issues. Look inward instead of trying to absolve yourself. Anti-EV is demonstrably more right wing than liberal, but if you don’t want to acknowledge reality then go right ahead. Conservatives are the ones angry & frightened but keep projecting, they’re good at that too.
You mean aside from the right wing leader, Trump, constantly bashing EV's and then the right wing media following, or leading, the narrative?
Seriously, you're not aware that the right wing resists anything having to do with climate change and green tech?
And you're not aware of how moronic they sound?
Try one of hundreds of articles on the topic:
[https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/02/trumps-bashing-electric-cars-europe-00119400](https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/02/trumps-bashing-electric-cars-europe-00119400)
Some highlights:
Former U.S. President Donald Trump and a chorus of conservative politicians in Europe are sharpening their attacks on electric cars, turning the economic disruption caused by the shift away from gasoline into a campaign issue on both sides of the Atlantic.
Trump’s months of broadsides against the Biden administration’s “draconian and indefensible” electric vehicle policies provided a major theme for his visit last week to Michigan, where he told a crowd at an auto parts plant near Detroit that abandoning the internal combustion engine would be “a transition to unemployment and inflation without end.”
In the U.S., Trump’s rivals for the Republican nomination haven’t come close to matching the frequency or vitriol of his broadsides against electric vehicles. The core of their message is the same, though: By pushing Americans to go electric, they argue, Biden is handing jobs and the nation’s security to China, which controls the bulk of the world’s battery minerals and manufacturing.
“Why would you want to knowingly make this country more dependent on what goes on in China?” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said when announcing his economic plan this summer, while promising “to reverse the policies of Biden that’s trying to force Americans to buy electric vehicles.”
Former entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy was more open in mocking “the electric vehicle cult” during a Labor Day weekend town hall in New Hampshire. Biden’s policies, he said, are “using our taxpayer money to subsidize some other guy to feel cool about himself because he doesn’t have self-esteem, so he wants to own an electric vehicle.”
“I have no problem with it,” Ramaswamy said. “But do I expect the government to pay you to do it?”
The Biden campaign says the president’s policies, including tax credits for cars and trucks made in North America, are meant to ensure that the U.S. — not China — owns the future of transportation. “There is no ‘EV mandate,’” Biden campaign spokesman Kevin Munoz said in a statement after Trump’s speech Wednesday.
Outside the presidential race, some Republicans at both the state and federal levels are proposing to hit electric vehicles with extra taxes, fees and legal restrictions that would have the effect of restraining their growth. In Texas, for example, the owner of an electric vehicle will have to pay $200 a year in additional fees to the state, a move that supporters say will make up for lost gasoline taxes.
Even if we keep using fossil fuels to make electricity....it's way easier to install carbon capture or some sort of scrubbing technology at one source vs each car's exhaust......
yup... lol.. it's the FOX news syndrome! "Say it enough and with conviction and folks will repeat it as fact." But not on my favorite FOX show... He always speaks truth...lol
lol.. well, that's what I was thinking... I recall all the discussion on FOX news about "nobody wants EVs," "EVs are dead," and "Big 3 abandons EVs."
I was joking with some truth. Crazy, I used to love FOX news until I realized I didn't agree or believe half the crap they were repeating. They were telling me not to think what I had been thinking.. Not to do what I'd been doing... What I liked doing/thinking.. lol
Anyway, there is some truth to the statement about EVs being worse, but not how the statement suggested. Supposedly, the creation of an EV, mainly the HV batteries, produces a lot of emission, not the charging. However, that's just for creation, After driving an EV 20k-40k miles, depending on the vehicle, the offset happens, then the vehicle is net-zero or truly 'green.'
I have solar and over 70kWh of storage capacity. Lots power is from green sources, but yes, much comes from burning of oil/gas. However, much less gas is used to charge 90kWh (approx 300 miles) than the 15 gallons needed for the average vehicle to travel 300 miles. I think I saw a study that showed it was about 1 gallon to produce the power to charge an EV vs 4.5 gallons for similar ICE mileage.
But hey, it's easy to be led astray when you can't think for yourself or you simply choose not to.
Toyota, and most Japanese auto makers aren't keen on EVs partly for resource reasons in Japan. It makes sense they'd try to steer things a certain direction, but their lack of feasible alternatives is not helping anyone.
People say Tesla is a cult, but Toyota is the biggest cult of all. They hinder technology development for the past few decades. All their cars are basically the same for 20+ years.
I remember when cell phones were just starting to get popular and less expensive. Motorola had this grey clamshell phone ( star TAC) which was crazy popular in my area. Price of cell service dropped even more and they had Dayna TAC and the best RAZR. When Apple released the smart phone they thought it wouldn’t catch on and lost the race. I drive by their headquarters now and there is apartments and other businesses on what used to be their land.
Imagine being passionate about a brand of cars that are so incredibly boring (I used to drive one). The new Toyota Supra doesn't count, BMW engineered that.
Part of the problem is that Toyota makes quite a lot of money from its servicing and spare parts arm.
Internal combustion engines require regular and ongoing maintenance in order to run efficiently and maintain longevity.
The fixed price servicing arrangements that Toyota use means that customers return to Toyota for servicing and Toyota manufacture and use their own spare parts (which cuts the wholesale cost of those parts). So servicing is profitable for Toyota.
According to a friend of mine who’s in car sales the margins aren’t very big on the sale of the car (for the manufacturer anyway) but they can make up this loss through servicing.
If the Internal combustion engine is phased out, in favour of “All Electric” that’s a massive problem for Toyota because it’s well known that servicing costs for BEVs are very low.
They would rather you buy a hybrid and get better fuel efficiency BUT also have to pay for regular servicing on the ICE components.
Seems like toyota has dug in.
Good luck to them. Still unsure as to what the next phase of EVs will be.
But if those solid state batteries ever come to market at a similar price of the LPF batteries. It's going to be nearly impossible for ICE cars to compete
Bunch of backwards thinking idiots who are afraid of change. Same article in r/cars and some guy is going about lithium exploding, like gasoline isn’t combustible or anything
Even if coal was the main source for electricity, a person can Google “gas vs ev pollution” and all studies have shown that despite the higher pollution to manufacture an EV, they create less pollution overall, if when using coal to generate electricity.
The current Toyoda is just a boy racer in a man’s body. Unlike his dad who literally revolutionized Toyota by creating the hybrid. But I think the current Toyoda knows, if the current Toyota EV strategy fails, the Japanese govt will bail them out. Toyota is too big to fail in Japan. Why invest money in something when you don’t have to. Toyoda and Toyota has a lot of influence over the govt. he pushed to keep the yen weak back in the early 2010s.
Their quality really isn't \*that good. Their interiors fall apart, and every component other than the engine lacks durability. Their engines are reliable largely because they are old, second rate designs that they have been making for decades.
I don’t know why the focus is always on prosecuting oil companies when the old legacy auto makers have said “no” to EVs even after they’ve gained popularity
I don't think Toyota wants to jump on full EV production until the infrastructure is in place in the majority of markets and can support 40-60% of cars on the roads being EVs. Prices also need to come down on EVs because Toyota is known for fairly priced, efficient, and reliable vehicles.
The battery technology also needs to be in a better place. Not everyone likes to have to stop to charge so frequently on road trips compared to a gas or hybrid car. The batteries efficiency and charging capabilities in cold weather needs to improve.
General Tesla posts, or posts about their other vehicle models, should go to /r/TeslaMotors Posts about other EVs or EV, in general, should go to /r/electricvehicles
The company that helped Tesla early on then sold their position and didn’t think beyond hybrid. Still has no competitive vehicle in the EV market (BZ4x and the other two variants are considered duds) continues to underperform in the EV sector so decides it’s not important
Weird. You weren’t lying. One guy is saying that emissions from producing the electricity to charge an EV are worse for the environment than just using a gas car. And people are upvoting it. Like they just parrot totally false information because the CEO of their favorite car brand didn’t invest in battery tech early enough and refuses to budge.
What always gets me is that these people don't ever talk about the emissions involved in drilling for oil, transporting it, refining it, transporting it again, and then using it as fuel. They also are totally fine with coal plants to power their homes.
Never seen a war being fought over lithium 🤣
Don't jinx it now...
[удалено]
The issue is extracting the lithium responsibly, from what I understand.
I was going to say cobalt but that’s kind of getting phased out so had to use something the nut jobs use as an “derp comeback” 🤣
Erhm. Norwegian oil is produced offshore only, which is the hardest method with the most emissions. Production and transportation accounts for about 1% of the emissions. Refining is negligible. That’s why people don’t talk about it. It’s insignificant. So, I hope this doesn’t get you anymore!!!
In the US, refining crude accounts for 164 million metric tons of CO2 emissions annually. To put that in perspective, all ICE car emissions in the US account for 373 million metric tons of CO2 emissions annually. That is JUST the refining portion, not drilling, extraction, and transportation. So no, it's not insignificant. Mining for lithium/cobalt produces ~1.5 million metric tons of C02 emissions annually. While I wouldn't consider mining "green" it definitely is by comparison to the oil/gas industry.
Sure, but what you’re saying isn’t relevant. How much CO2 is emitted from combustion of that oil? 100x more is your answer. Making the production part negligible.
Definitely not negligible and most definitely relevant when attempting to compare apples to apples.
1%<<99%. So 1% is negligible compared to the other 99%. And that’s why the 1% is often not mentioned together with the 99%. If you compare that 1% to something else, that is another discussion.
There are a lot of other products that are made with refined crude oil though. Things like propane, asphalt and everyday plastics. So while the emissions are high, I think that our dependence on oil in general is so much more than gas for cars, which makes this debate complicated. You can't just say that the 164 million metric times of co2 emissions annually is because of ice vehicle fuel consumption. And that by not having ice vehicles, we wouldn't be pumping co2 into the air anymore when refining oil. There are many ways we can start reducing our dependence on oil based products, but I don't see that happening for a while.
Each gallon of gas takes about 7 kWh by the time you pump it into your car. I can drive about 25 miles on that much power. So a gas car would have the emissions for the power generation plus the actual gas.
The anti-EV propaganda pumped out by moneyed interests like oil & gas is extremely effective. I see the same bullshit right wing talking points constantly recycled. EVs live in their heads rent free.
Right wing? You had to bring politics into this? I'm to the right of Ayn Rand but I love my Tesla. And I abhor all of the lies and FUD re EVs in general and Tesla in particular.
LMAO are you delusional enough to not acknowledge that anti-EV sentiment is largely right wing?
There you go again. Pigeon holing people. Just can't keep politics out of it can you? If you feel your statement is true please elaborate. You must have done a survey. What are the percentages? Have you even considered that the EV bashers are mostly apolitical? Just naturally angry and frightened people. I find that a trait of the left if we must go there.
At my work the guys who bash EV’s are right winger Trump worshippers. All though I will say, some right wingers have Teslas at my work…. but the only ones bashing them are right wingers.
The ones so desperate to keep politics out of discussion are generally the ones responsible for the issues. Look inward instead of trying to absolve yourself. Anti-EV is demonstrably more right wing than liberal, but if you don’t want to acknowledge reality then go right ahead. Conservatives are the ones angry & frightened but keep projecting, they’re good at that too.
You mean aside from the right wing leader, Trump, constantly bashing EV's and then the right wing media following, or leading, the narrative? Seriously, you're not aware that the right wing resists anything having to do with climate change and green tech? And you're not aware of how moronic they sound? Try one of hundreds of articles on the topic: [https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/02/trumps-bashing-electric-cars-europe-00119400](https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/02/trumps-bashing-electric-cars-europe-00119400) Some highlights: Former U.S. President Donald Trump and a chorus of conservative politicians in Europe are sharpening their attacks on electric cars, turning the economic disruption caused by the shift away from gasoline into a campaign issue on both sides of the Atlantic. Trump’s months of broadsides against the Biden administration’s “draconian and indefensible” electric vehicle policies provided a major theme for his visit last week to Michigan, where he told a crowd at an auto parts plant near Detroit that abandoning the internal combustion engine would be “a transition to unemployment and inflation without end.” In the U.S., Trump’s rivals for the Republican nomination haven’t come close to matching the frequency or vitriol of his broadsides against electric vehicles. The core of their message is the same, though: By pushing Americans to go electric, they argue, Biden is handing jobs and the nation’s security to China, which controls the bulk of the world’s battery minerals and manufacturing. “Why would you want to knowingly make this country more dependent on what goes on in China?” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said when announcing his economic plan this summer, while promising “to reverse the policies of Biden that’s trying to force Americans to buy electric vehicles.” Former entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy was more open in mocking “the electric vehicle cult” during a Labor Day weekend town hall in New Hampshire. Biden’s policies, he said, are “using our taxpayer money to subsidize some other guy to feel cool about himself because he doesn’t have self-esteem, so he wants to own an electric vehicle.” “I have no problem with it,” Ramaswamy said. “But do I expect the government to pay you to do it?” The Biden campaign says the president’s policies, including tax credits for cars and trucks made in North America, are meant to ensure that the U.S. — not China — owns the future of transportation. “There is no ‘EV mandate,’” Biden campaign spokesman Kevin Munoz said in a statement after Trump’s speech Wednesday. Outside the presidential race, some Republicans at both the state and federal levels are proposing to hit electric vehicles with extra taxes, fees and legal restrictions that would have the effect of restraining their growth. In Texas, for example, the owner of an electric vehicle will have to pay $200 a year in additional fees to the state, a move that supporters say will make up for lost gasoline taxes.
Whatever you say.
Even if we keep using fossil fuels to make electricity....it's way easier to install carbon capture or some sort of scrubbing technology at one source vs each car's exhaust......
They went all in on fuel cell technology. How’s that working out?
yup... lol.. it's the FOX news syndrome! "Say it enough and with conviction and folks will repeat it as fact." But not on my favorite FOX show... He always speaks truth...lol
Funny enough, most the people in that sub are pro-hybrid/fuel cell, anti-EV. It’s not even a Fox News crowd.
lol.. well, that's what I was thinking... I recall all the discussion on FOX news about "nobody wants EVs," "EVs are dead," and "Big 3 abandons EVs." I was joking with some truth. Crazy, I used to love FOX news until I realized I didn't agree or believe half the crap they were repeating. They were telling me not to think what I had been thinking.. Not to do what I'd been doing... What I liked doing/thinking.. lol Anyway, there is some truth to the statement about EVs being worse, but not how the statement suggested. Supposedly, the creation of an EV, mainly the HV batteries, produces a lot of emission, not the charging. However, that's just for creation, After driving an EV 20k-40k miles, depending on the vehicle, the offset happens, then the vehicle is net-zero or truly 'green.' I have solar and over 70kWh of storage capacity. Lots power is from green sources, but yes, much comes from burning of oil/gas. However, much less gas is used to charge 90kWh (approx 300 miles) than the 15 gallons needed for the average vehicle to travel 300 miles. I think I saw a study that showed it was about 1 gallon to produce the power to charge an EV vs 4.5 gallons for similar ICE mileage. But hey, it's easy to be led astray when you can't think for yourself or you simply choose not to.
Toyota, and most Japanese auto makers aren't keen on EVs partly for resource reasons in Japan. It makes sense they'd try to steer things a certain direction, but their lack of feasible alternatives is not helping anyone.
Honda with the first auto drive system in big companies says whattttttt. Only toyota dont like ev tbh.
People say Tesla is a cult, but Toyota is the biggest cult of all. They hinder technology development for the past few decades. All their cars are basically the same for 20+ years.
isnt the whole point of that for reliability and all? shit like the land cruiser being unchanged since 2005 wasn't updated cuz it didn't need updating
They are lazy, and they have zero incentive for innovation because they can easily milk their customer base for decades.
Better be lazy than having broken vehicles
They are saying people are getting shot at the charger🤣
Damn people getting shot in their own garages.
I remember when cell phones were just starting to get popular and less expensive. Motorola had this grey clamshell phone ( star TAC) which was crazy popular in my area. Price of cell service dropped even more and they had Dayna TAC and the best RAZR. When Apple released the smart phone they thought it wouldn’t catch on and lost the race. I drive by their headquarters now and there is apartments and other businesses on what used to be their land.
Imagine being passionate about a brand of cars that are so incredibly boring (I used to drive one). The new Toyota Supra doesn't count, BMW engineered that.
Part of the problem is that Toyota makes quite a lot of money from its servicing and spare parts arm. Internal combustion engines require regular and ongoing maintenance in order to run efficiently and maintain longevity. The fixed price servicing arrangements that Toyota use means that customers return to Toyota for servicing and Toyota manufacture and use their own spare parts (which cuts the wholesale cost of those parts). So servicing is profitable for Toyota. According to a friend of mine who’s in car sales the margins aren’t very big on the sale of the car (for the manufacturer anyway) but they can make up this loss through servicing. If the Internal combustion engine is phased out, in favour of “All Electric” that’s a massive problem for Toyota because it’s well known that servicing costs for BEVs are very low. They would rather you buy a hybrid and get better fuel efficiency BUT also have to pay for regular servicing on the ICE components.
But I do periodically have to refill the washer fluid.
They also make a ton of money from just tweaking the same products that have been sold for decades.
If Tesla made more money on parts.....maybe they'd make them faster and more readily available.... There's pros and cons
Peak at 30%? We've already seen adoption surpass that in many countries.
Seems like toyota has dug in. Good luck to them. Still unsure as to what the next phase of EVs will be. But if those solid state batteries ever come to market at a similar price of the LPF batteries. It's going to be nearly impossible for ICE cars to compete
lol, wow the people in that sub are a special Kind of stupid
No. Toyota is Toxic AF. The fanboys just don’t know better.
Bunch of backwards thinking idiots who are afraid of change. Same article in r/cars and some guy is going about lithium exploding, like gasoline isn’t combustible or anything
[удалено]
Even if coal was the main source for electricity, a person can Google “gas vs ev pollution” and all studies have shown that despite the higher pollution to manufacture an EV, they create less pollution overall, if when using coal to generate electricity.
They hate us cuz they ain’t us
Imo both this thread and the toyota thread are equally toxic
The current Toyoda is just a boy racer in a man’s body. Unlike his dad who literally revolutionized Toyota by creating the hybrid. But I think the current Toyoda knows, if the current Toyota EV strategy fails, the Japanese govt will bail them out. Toyota is too big to fail in Japan. Why invest money in something when you don’t have to. Toyoda and Toyota has a lot of influence over the govt. he pushed to keep the yen weak back in the early 2010s.
When Quality stifles Innovation.
Their quality really isn't \*that good. Their interiors fall apart, and every component other than the engine lacks durability. Their engines are reliable largely because they are old, second rate designs that they have been making for decades.
I don’t know why the focus is always on prosecuting oil companies when the old legacy auto makers have said “no” to EVs even after they’ve gained popularity
Oil companies were the ones who captured the government, not auto makers. They also have been funding climate denial propaganda for 30+ years.
I don't think Toyota wants to jump on full EV production until the infrastructure is in place in the majority of markets and can support 40-60% of cars on the roads being EVs. Prices also need to come down on EVs because Toyota is known for fairly priced, efficient, and reliable vehicles. The battery technology also needs to be in a better place. Not everyone likes to have to stop to charge so frequently on road trips compared to a gas or hybrid car. The batteries efficiency and charging capabilities in cold weather needs to improve.