this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2024
255 points (97.0% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

5244 readers
251 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world. About 1C of total warming. Second chart: about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability. Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases. About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
255
Real-world CO2 emissions of cars are 20% higher than indicated. For plug-in hybrids they are 350% higher. (climate.ec.europa.eu)
submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
27 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://feddit.it/post/6569904

It's not a typo: plug-in hybrids are used, in real word cases, with ICE much more than anticipated.

In the EU, fuel consumption monitoring devices are required on new cars. They studied over 10% of all cars sold in 2021 and turns out they use way more fuel, and generate way more CO2, than anybody thought.

The gap means that CO2 emissions reduction objectives from transport will be more difficult to reach.

Thruth is, we need less cars, not "better" cars.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 14 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It means exactly what I think it means. The reported emissions are way off those that are actually achieved in real life.

If we assume your assertion is actually correct (the study says nothing about the availability of charging infrastructure), how much do we need to build? And are we sure that once it is built, people will actually use it? Would it not be better to instead invest in infrastructure for other modes of transport that don't involve 2 tons of vehicle to transport one person?

[โ€“] [email protected] 11 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Well, my point was that hybrid cars only will "realize their potential if there's infrastructure to support it".

Your point is good though: We should use pragmatism and review if it's cheaper to build charging points or expand public transportation, especially in non-urban scenarios.

What I often see missing in most places that does exist in Eastern Asia, are services from shops to bring you stuff home relatively cheaply and with better quality than just throwing a package in your lawn.

I'm also not seeing public transportation projects trying to compete with traditional options, which does happen in Eastern Asia.

I'll choose the car unless public transportation is a better option.

In Tokyo, that's almost never the case, but in EU or the US, I've often seen public transportation (except from some selected cities) as an option for people without a car.