[illiac786]

Yeah. We’re talking about the burning of gas in cars. Production of electric cars is worse that production of ICE cars in terms of CO2. So, really, we’re discussing the fraction of a fraction here.

To be clear, I am still astonished and pleased at the success of EVs.

But let’s keep it in context, it’s one battle amongst many many battles.

[toomuchtodo]

> Yeah. We’re talking about the burning of gas in cars. Production of electric cars is worse that production of ICE cars in terms of CO2. So, really, we’re discussing the fraction of a fraction here.

This is factually inaccurate. In all cases, EVs are superior to combustion vehicles with regards to lifecylce emissions (construction + operation).

https://about.bnef.com/insights/clean-transport/no-doubt-abo...

> As electric vehicles become a bigger part of the global car fleet, a contrarian take seems to surface every few months: are electric vehicles really that clean?

> When it comes to lifecycle emissions, the answer is a resounding yes. According to a new report by BloombergNEF, in all analyzed cases, EVs have lower lifecycle emissions than gas cars. Just how much lower depends on how far they are driven, and the cleanliness of the grid where they charge.

[illiac786]

You didn’t read the article you’re citing and you didn’t get my overall point.

To make it clear: my overall point is, the burning of gas in cars is a fraction of co2 emissions in transport, which itself is a fraction of the overall co2 emissions.

That’s my point.

Now to the detail you are mentioning (detail!), your article actually agrees with me. Production of electric cars is more co2 intensive than from ICE cars. Read it. There’s even a break even point because of this. Over their lifetime, electric cars emit less co2 though.

[triceratops]

> Production of electric cars is more co2 intensive than from ICE cars

Collectors aside no one builds a car and doesn't drive it. Once you start driving both cars, the EV pulls ahead on emissions very quickly, which you admitted too. Repeating only that manufacture is more co2 intensive (and that's only today, it could change in the future) is a lie by omission.

[illiac786]

I agree, it’s just not my point at all…

[triceratops]

[flagged]

[illiac786]

Read the guidelines of HN please, your comment is antagonising, offers zero value. The article cited in the other response actually confirms this statement is correct, just read it.

[tomhow]

> Politely, stop peddling horseshit.

You can't comment like this on Hacker News, no matter what you're replying to.

The comment you're replying to would be easy to respond to with a link containing refuting evidence. We understand this topic is an important one, and one that people get passionate about. But any topic that's important deserves to be discussed with solid evidence rather than personal abuse. Please make an effort to observe the guidelines if you want to keep commenting here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[triceratops]

You're right. I offer two points in my defence. The sibling comment already had solid evidence. And I didn't think telling someone to stop lying constituted "personal abuse". I considered GP's comment a lie by omission.

But you're correct that this type of comment isn't good for the site and I'll be more mindful.

[tomhow]

Thanks. It's fine to disagree and respond with opposing arguments, we just don't want the swipes, and the guidelines ask us to "assume good faith", even when it's hard. If others are breaking the guidelines, you can flag their comments and/or email us.