400
submitted 2 years ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

1.8 Million Barrels of Oil a Day Avoided from Electric Vehicles::Sign up for daily news updates from CleanTechnica on email. Or follow us on Google News! We love covering electric ... [continued]

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] WidowsFavoriteSon@lemmy.world 28 points 2 years ago

Let's be straight about this: It ain't electric cars. Its e-bikes

[-] Metype@lemmy.world 45 points 2 years ago

I'll take a bike over a car any day, but for people who were going to drive? An electric vehicle will save oil usage over an ICE one.

[-] reddig33@lemmy.world 25 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

This article says there are 2 million electric cars on the road in the US.

At 20 gallons of gas per month x 12 months x 2 million, that’s…

480 million gallons of gas saved.

That’s just the US.

There’s also no motor oil in these vehicles.

https://sensiblemotive.com/electric-car-statistics/

[-] sorghum@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 years ago

My Bolt EUV uses automatic transmission fluid in the transfer case to reduce the RPMs of the motor to the wheels. Traditionally ATF is refined from crude, but you can use a synthetic replacement. As far as I know it doesn't have any grease fittings either, so it's all sealed in on bearings and the like. Don't get me wrong though, it's a massive reduction in petroleum usage though.

[-] dgmib@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

It’s helpful to remember too that the problem isn’t using petroleum, the problem is burning it.

As long as it’s properly disposed of using petroleum based lubricant doesn’t cause climate change.

[-] astropenguin5@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

Exactly, and petroleum really is a wonder material, it has so many amazing uses besides burning it but instead we decide to do the absolute worst thing with almost all of it

[-] Pretzilla@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

31.5 gallons in a barrel so your math shows 15Mbbl saved

Article says 1.8Mbbl

I'm missing the discrepancy

[-] nxdefiant@startrek.website 7 points 2 years ago

The article says 1.8 per day

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] jennwiththesea@lemmy.world 21 points 2 years ago

Well, it's both. From the article, 2-3 wheelers do account for 60% of the drop:

[-] aeharding@lemmy.world 15 points 2 years ago

Oh this is so fucking typical. “EV” or electric vehicles never means e-bikes when it would benefit e-bikes (for example, EV subsidies = electric car subsidies) but when it conveniently makes electric cars look better, oh look an e-bike is an EV! 😒

[-] HaoBianTai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 years ago

Isn't this article very clearly referring to Asian adoption of scooters, not a bunch of New Yorkers on e-bikes?

[-] adrian783@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

does that invalidate the point?

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] poopkins@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

Strange that the parent comment is downvoted for highlighting the fact that electric bikes (and scooters & trikes) continue to make more of an impact.

For me personally, since I got my electric bike 2 years ago, I use it at least 90% of the time to commute to work (unless the weather is too miserable).

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] ExLisper@linux.community 7 points 2 years ago

I go to work 50/50 by electric car or analog bike. Most of those barrels saved it's me

[-] Gregorech@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

Still a vehicle in a pure sense.

[-] jumpinjesus@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

Yeah which is always weird. How many of those people weren't just riding normal bikes before vs downsizing from a car. I'm on my 3rd EV and would love to bike if it were an option where I live, but if I went with a bike, I'd just be replacing another EV.

[-] astropenguin5@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Assuming you could feasibly bike, it would probably still be environmentally better to use the bike, mostly because it is more energy efficient at moving a single human places because it doesn't have to move a whole car frame, and in most places a fair amount of power is still from fossil fuels, so less would be needed. Also the other benefits of biking.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] jenny_ball@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago

but also factor in what it takes to charge those batteries because that is fossil fuel somewhere down the line.

[-] ExLisper@linux.community 38 points 2 years ago

You're soooo behind the schedule. That was the anti-EV talking point 5 years ago. You were supposed to move to 'but did they factor in the battery production??' (which they do) and now use one of 'but is the grid ready for so many EV?' or 'there are no EVs below $30.000'!!. You're welcome.

[-] mriguy@lemmy.world 20 points 2 years ago

No, even those are the old talking points! Now it’s “EVs have batteries that are very heavy, so they generate lots of tire particulates, which is way worse than the tailpipe emissions of ICE cars, which somehow magically don’t also have tires or something, and aren’t also getting heavier every year.”

[-] ExLisper@linux.community 9 points 2 years ago

Why wasn't I told about the new talking points? I though we agreed all new talking points will be shared during Monday meetings. I will have a word with Kevin about this.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

You skipped brakes. For a short time generating brake pad particulates was the talking point, until they discovered what “regen” meant

[-] I_Fart_Glitter@lemmy.world 25 points 2 years ago

They did.

Naturally, less oil being burnt means less CO2 emissions. BNEF estimates that electric vehicles currently prevent 112 million metric tons of CO2 emissions per year. And this is net emissions reductions, also taking into account the emissions from extra electricity generation.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] oversea@lemmings.world 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

edit: so the article claimed to have factored electricty generation. Cant believe you are the one being downvoted this hard. As someone who worked in the renewable energy research institute, each time people equal ev to 'clean' automatically I get crazy. The article especially mentioned china, who has a significant portion of electricty generated by coal. Even its by oil, it would produce more co2 for energy loss in conversion. The article has no merit with such flawed comparison

[-] seang96@spgrn.com 7 points 2 years ago

The article literally states they factored in charging the battery, which is the main reason they are being down voted. Read the dang article if you are going to criticize it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] federatingIsTooHard@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

is less oil dug up and burned?

[-] clearleaf@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago

Why did feel a need to poohpooh electric cars for such a weird reason?

[-] federatingIsTooHard@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

if there is no difference in the actual oil extraction and burning, then it does no good.

[-] astropenguin5@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

A little less yeah, considering that there has been an increase in renewables for grid power, also it's much more efficient burn oil/natgas/etc. in a big powerplant than in an ICE car, so less is needed overall.

So yes. It does help. But electric trains are still better lol And we need more renewable grid power

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Wersab@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

This is bullshit where is the proof also the electric batteries are mined by.kids in.the cpngo

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2023
400 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

73534 readers
2894 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS