361
Mr Bean actor Rowan Atkinson blamed for slow electric car sales (news.sky.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world
132 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 48 points 2 years ago* (9 children)

The rule of thumb is: if your ICE car is still in working order, it's less damaging to the environment to just keep driving it. If you absolutely must buy a new car, get an electric. That being said, I don't trust that Rowan won't be "Mr. Car Guy" and promote his bias towards ICE cars due to his extreme wealth and love of exotic whips.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The thing is that cars have a huge secondhand market.

    So if you buy a new car, you sell your old one to someone else, who sells their car to someone else, who sell their car to someone else, ... all the way until one of the horrible gas guzzlers at the bottom gets finally replaced.

    So in a way it is improving the environment if you look at the whole picture.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago*

    Yeah there is far more game theory than the other post implies. Supporting companies in producing EVs and are driving EV technology in a healthy way, and considering down pressure effects for the secondhand market are far more important than your individual emissions over a short period of time.

    Also, not fully convinced by the rule of thumb. It works well when considering the sustainability of static things, but I think it falls apart when considering things that have active impact like cars.

    Here is an article where Reuters found that you only need to drive 13500 miles before an EV is cleaner than an ICE in the US. At a certain point, it is better to push ICE cars into retirement and build EVs.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (2 children)
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    There are a lot of issues with his calculations.

    For people driving 12,000 miles a year their mpg will be higher, more highway miles.

    The 10mpg difference in new car vs old for similarly sized cars is over 20 years. The 2001 impala I used to have got 25 mpg.

    People that buy new cars typically have cars less than 10 years old that they are replacing. People typically don't go from a clapped out 20 year old car to a brand new one. The "old" car most people are trading in is getting 30-35 mpg.

    I'd put the number at 5-7 years for a car that's less than 5 years old.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    You can drive 6k miles a year and based on averages you'll be carbon negative after about 8 or 9 years. The sooner people switch the better, even if it means "wasting" gas cars that are still road worthy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent