Electric car owners causing more emissions overall, research shows

The Florida Hurricane Milton has reminded folks that water will kill an EV.  Worse, it could cause a fire and explosion.  That is the good news.  Many bought an EV to “save the planet”.  Instead, THEY have made it worse!

I know progressives and science use junk science to make decisions.  So here are the real scientific facts:

“The researchers reported that the “high purchasing cost was perceived as one of the major drawbacks of electric vehicles.” Prices look set to increase in Europe after the European Union imposed tariffs on Chinese-made EVs, which are less-expensive than other models, a difference the EU contends is down Beijing’s hefty subsidies undercutting European car-makers, who have also warned that Europe does not have enough electric charging points.

China’s power grid relies far more on coal and other fossil fuels than Europe’s, where policymakers are implementing rules requiring increasing use of wind and solar power and are setting targets for the car industry to phase out combustion engines in favour of EVs.

China is also the world’s biggest coal-burning nation and accounted for more than 90% of the world’s new coal-fired power plant construction last year, according to Global Energy Monitor.”

So the EV you bought, if made in  China will kill the polar bears, melt  the icebergs and cause floods,  earthquakes and hurricane’s—LOL.  Seriously, EV’s are more polluting than a gas powered car.  That is a scientific fact—not a deranged statement from grifters like John Kerry, Al Gore or the high school dropout, Greta Thunberg.

Electric car owners causing more emissions overall, research shows

DPA, 10/8/24  https://www.yahoo.com/news/electric-car-owners-causing-more-130346934.html

While electric vehicles emit less carbon than other cars, their drivers typically cause more overall pollutant emissions than those who drive petrol or diesel, a team of researchers in Finland has found.

The reason is that electric vehicles (EVs) are usually more expensive than a petrol or diesel equivalent. This means they are beyond many household budgets and largely limited to people whose so-called carbon footprint is higher than the general population due to them having more money to spend.

In work published by the journal PLOS Climate, the researchers said “electric vehicle owners on average are richer, drive more than the general population, and have a higher than average carbon footprint due to higher disposable income.”

“Owning an EV reduces their traffic related emissions, and their personal experience of EVs is linked with positive attitudes and purchase intention,” according the University of Turku team, which surveyed almost 4,000 people in Finland.

The researchers reported that the “high purchasing cost was perceived as one of the major drawbacks of electric vehicles.” Prices look set to increase in Europe after the European Union imposed tariffs on Chinese-made EVs, which are less-expensive than other models, a difference the EU contends is down Beijing’s hefty subsidies undercutting European car-makers, who have also warned that Europe does not have enough electric charging points.

China’s power grid relies far more on coal and other fossil fuels than Europe’s, where policymakers are implementing rules requiring increasing use of wind and solar power and are setting targets for the car industry to phase out combustion engines in favour of EVs.

China is also the world’s biggest coal-burning nation and accounted for more than 90% of the world’s new coal-fired power plant construction last year, according to Global Energy Monitor.

The PLOS report came hot on the heels of a report by a Cambridge University-led team of researchers that showed the carbon footprint of the poor as being “vastly” exaggerated while that of wealthy people is played down.

Published in the journal Nature Climate Change and drawing on a survey of over 4,000 people in Denmark, India, Nigeria and the US, the researchers found the “vast majority” of people “grossly” underestimate the carbon footprint of society’s richest people while “drastically” overestimating that of the least well off.