Study shows EV owners have bigger carbon footprint than average because they are wealthier

phys.org Study shows EV owners have bigger carbon footprint than average because they are wealthier

A pair of psychologists and an economist at the University of Turku, in Finland, have found that because the average electric vehicle (EV) owner is wealthier than the average person, they still have a bigger than average carbon footprint.

Maybe EVs are not a comprehensive climate solution??

Fuck Cars @lemmy.world

Study shows EV owners have bigger carbon footprint than average because they are wealthier

phys.org /news/2024-10-ev-owners-bigger-carbon-footprint.html

51 36

Fuck Cars @lemmy.ml

Study shows EV owners have bigger carbon footprint than average because they are wealthier

phys.org /news/2024-10-ev-owners-bigger-carbon-footprint.html

12 17

You're viewing a single thread.

42 comments

Perhaps there should be policies in place to lower the cost of electric cars so more average income people can replace their ice cars?
- Perhaps the tax credit should be down payment assistance of the same value for those who purchase the EV if they have a household income below 150k. Maybe limit it to vehicles below a certain total cost as well.
  Up front cost is a bigger road block than taxes.
  
  Aren't your just describing the current credit? There's a mechanism for the dealer to provide the incentive at the time of purchase vs during tax filing the following year. There's also an income limit for eligibility.
  That being said, the whole point is to move battery supply chains to the US, not to actually make cheap cars for folks.
- Perhaps there should be policies to even out the wealth distribution.
  
  Yes, but that's not specific to EVs.
- This is why I'm frustrated with the US and the EU, who are placing heavy penalty tariffs on Chinese EVs.
  
  Uyghur slave labor should not be seen as the solution to our emission problems. Tariffs are the right thing here, albeit for the wrong reasons.
  
  That is a very good point I had not considered, thanks for pointing that out!
- Exactly. I don't drive an EV because I can't afford one. That's literally the only reason. I'd like to have one.
- Can also eliminate all corporate offices, if your job can be done on a computer, there shouldn’t be an office. Unless you need to be physically at your job, no need for you to be commuting at all.
  The concept of corporate buildings isn’t even that old.
- There are, with the federal government alone paying 7k on most EVs sold in the US. The problem is that they are neoliberal flat subsidies applied at the point of sale that needed Republican support to enter law and as such companies just tack on 7k to the price customers are willing to pay anyway.
  What we need is to incentivize manufacturers to focus on bringing down costs by focusing on things like LFP batteries and smaller vehicles, but manufacturers are currently incentivized to make larger vehicles because people are willing to pay a lot more than the added space cost to make, thusly increasing margins. At the very least making the full subsidy only available on vehicles under 25k, with a decreasing subsidy for vehicles under 50k would probably help, but you would need to be ready and willing to call manufacturers on their near certain attempts to get around it.
  Some actual price wars between manufacturers would help too, but US auto manufacturers will fight tooth and nail to forestall that possibility.

42 comments