255
Real-world CO2 emissions of cars are 20% higher than indicated. For plug-in hybrids they are 350% higher.
(climate.ec.europa.eu)
Better car:
this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2024
255 points (97.0% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5244 readers
244 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:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
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
I’m not disputing the results, but I would be really interested in a follow-up study that looks at why. From this data it would seem that only 10% or so of people with plug ins actually use the plug, which seems really odd. You have to pay massively more for it, and at least anicdotaly the dealers will try and steer you away from them allmost as hard as they do EVs. Given plug ins are often more expensive than both traditional hybrids and EVs, it seems really odd to spend a lot of money on somthing and then waste even more money to not use it.
Given the small battery size any wall outlet will charge them fine, which would seem to rule out infrastructure. So why does it seem that almost everyone who goes through the trouble and cost of getting one apparently not using it?
The only thing I can think of would be people believing that european electrical prices are higher than fuel prices, but while european electricity prices are higher so are gas prices.
It could be due to subsidies encouraging people to buy hybrids and people just ignoring the plug in feature. There's more discussion on this here
So you think the EU study was almost exclusively looking at places where the subsidy actually came close to covering the price difference between Plug In’s and traditional hybrids? And people just ignore the plug because plugging your car into a normal wall outlet is too much bother to save five hundred to a thousand dollars a year?
With a quick google I've found that subsidies for plug in hybrids can be around €5,000, and yes I do believe that people would be lazy enough to not plug it in. I'm not sure how many dollars one would save by doing this in Europe anyway.
But also, it's just a suggestion, I'm not asserting that this is definitely true.
A quick google also shows that for instance the price difference between the Hyundai Ionic hybrid vs plug in was about €6000 so while thouse subsidies would come close to covering the difference you would still be paying more to then pay even more by not plugging it in.
I also really don’t think 90% of people are willing to throw that many hundreds of euros away just to avoid the few seconds it takes to plug something in.
Completely off-topic - was scrolling past on Kbin and the image for the thumbnail reminded me of this stupid meme from years back
That doesn't mean what you think it means:
"For plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, the real-world CO2 emissions were on average 3.5 times higher than the laboratory values, which confirms that these vehicles are currently not realising their potential, largely because they are not being charged and driven fully electrically as frequently as assumed."
This is mostly an infrastructure issue. If these cars had readily available charging points, that wouldn't be the case.
If these cars had readily available charging points, that wouldn't be the case.
If you live low enough you have multiple 230V 16A charging points
Ok, but if charging port infrastructure is the issue, then if you solve that, you don't need hybrids at all, just electric vehicles. So hyrids are still not the answer and need to be phased out. So it's still a hybrid issue.
It's not though. Plug in hybrids address two issues that plague electric vehicles: range anxiety and limited supply of lithium for batteries.
You can make 7 plugin hybrids for 1 fully electric vehicle. Solve for charging infrastructure, and this is still a problem to be solved.
This is mostly an infrastructure issue.
The Netherlands used to have loads of plug in hybrids. There were more than enough charging points. Most of those hybrids were owned by people where the company would pay to fill them up.
People were lazy and preferred filling them up with gas, most never used anything other than gas. That resulted in the government charging the tax benefit for hybrids.
The Netherlands has a huge amount of chargers. In e.g. Rotterdam there's at least a charging point every 50 meters.
It isn't an infrastructure issue.
I can't understand that logic: if I can charge for free at work and can charge at home for less than the cost of gas, why on earth would I ever want to use gas?
It's the other way around. Companies in the Netherlands lease cars for their employees here in the Netherlands. Usually for people that travel a lot with for their job or just as a bonus perk that comes with the job instead of salary. And the boss pays for all the gas and maintenance as well.
So either take the effort to charge, or even charge at home and get refunded the electricity costs. Or just fill it up with free gas which only takes a minute. Guess which happens the most?
The only time I saw some of those oversized and really popular Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV use a charge cable was if they wanted to take a good parking spot...
Well, that is both parts awful and makes sense.
One thing though that is often mentioned against charging points infrastructure is that today can only be used by upper-middle class families, while everyone else can't benefit from it.
So adding an additional line of buses and closing car lanes (at rush hour) to dedicate to them can be cheaper (considering impact per person), lower emissions and be accessible to everyone, but it needs to be treated not as welfare but as a competitive service. (IMO)
If I can vote for someone who will actively attempt to improve the working class why would I vote for a party whose only idea in 40 years is culture war?
I'm confused, was this for me?
I have a plug in Pacifica I use a tank of gas maybe once a month and drive around 1000 miles a month so more than half my driving is full electric. Only time I'm using gas is for heat on really cold days and long trips. All driving around the city is electric.
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?
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.