[WA]

> It is not even close to "waste", it is saving the planet in maximum comfort.

It is 100 % waste and you don't "save" the planet. Saving the planet = no car. Yeah, an EV is less wasteful than an ICE. Just don't think you save the planet.

[TheSpiceIsLife]

Plus the break-even for an EV vs ICE car is around the 100,000k mark, if I recall correctly, due to the energy required to build the battery in the EV.

So: it’s complicated. It’d take me over ten years to do 100,000 kilometres, so probably the best car is the one I already have.

[tashbarg]

This [1] claims 21,725km for the US and only 13,518km for Norways energy mix. The 100,000km number is quite old and was corrected down and down again several times due to more efficient battery production and changing energy mix.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/when-d...

[TheSpiceIsLife]

Excellent, thanks for the update :)

[TacticalCoder]

> Saving the planet = no car.

Saving the planet = maximum one kid per couple.

[tashbarg]

While we are a lot of humans, we are nowadays far away from having too much kids.

Worldwide, we are already close to the replacement rate and projections see us falling below by 2070.

Most of the population growth is actually not "new kids getting born", it's "folks getting older than the generations before".

So, if population growth is your concern, don't tell people to have less kids. Tell them to stop getting so old.

Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/06/17/worlds-popu...

[TheSpiceIsLife]

You might enjoy this book, in which philosopher Ken Wilber humorously suggests we should tax incentives euthanasia for the elderly:

Boomeritis: A Novel That Will Set You Free is a polemical 2002 novel by American philosopher Ken Wilber, principally designed to explain Wilber's integral theory and to explain his concept of "Boomeritis". Wilber characterizes this as the deadly combination of a modern egalitarian worldview with a deep unquestioned narcissism commonly held by Baby Boomers and their children in the green meme of Spiral Dynamics, as opposed to Wilber's universal integralism.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boomeritis

[imtringued]

Saving the planet = every human commits suicide

Do whatever you can. The most effective strategies are often the least interesting.

[trhway]

that is a fallacy. Passenger vehicles are responsible for 10% of global emissions - so whether to drop it 4x (100mpg instead of 25mpg) to 2.5% or drop it to 0% wouldn't matter much. And using renewables for electricity we basically drop emissions to the rounding error around 0.

[adrianN]

Using global emissions is a neat trick here, because globally almost everyone can't afford a car.

[morsch]

Emissions will have to be reduced across all sectors, so if you merely manage to drop it to 2.5% of current emissions, that'll be a larger percentage in 2030 and 2050. If the trend continues and more people get more cars and drive them more (saving the world all the while), the share will increase further.

Of course an infinite supply of green energy would solve everything, but unfortunately that's not available. We're not supplying enough green electricity to cover current demands, much less enough to cover the roughly doubled demand if we were to shift all transportation to EVs.