SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Transportation accounts for a huge portion of US carbon emissions. As recently as 2014, it was behind the electricity sector — 26 percent of US emissions to electricity's 30 percent. But as the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) just confirmed, as of 2016, they have crossed paths. "Electric power sector CO2 emissions," EIA writes, "are now regularly below transportation sector CO2 emissions for the first time since the late 1970s."
This is happening because power sector "carbon intensity" — carbon emissions per unit of energy produced — is falling, as coal is replaced with natural gas, renewables, and efficiency.
The only realistic prospect for reducing transportation sector emissions rapidly and substantially is electrification. How much market share EVs take from oil (gasoline is by far the most common use for oil in the US) will matter a great deal.
[...] Today saw the release of a new study from the Grantham Institute for Imperial College London and the Carbon Tracker Initiative. It argues that solar photovoltaics (PV) and EVs together will kick fossil fuel's ass, quickly.
"Falling costs of electric vehicle and solar technology," they conclude, "could halt growth in global demand for oil and coal from 2020." That would be a pretty big deal.
The "business as usual" (BAU) scenarios that typically dominate these discussions are outdated, the researchers argue. New baseline scenarios should take into account updated information on PV, EV, and battery costs. (The EIA doesn't expect inflation-adjusted prices of EVs to fall to $30,000 until 2030, even as multiple automakers say they'll hit that within a few years.)
[...] If these forecasts play out, fossil fuels could lose 10 percent market share to PV and EVs within a decade. A 10 percent loss in market share was enough to send the US coal industry spiraling, enough to cause Europe's utilities to hemorrhage money. It could seriously disrupt life for the oil majors. "Growth in EVs alone could lead to 2 million barrels of oil per day being displaced by 2025," the study says, "the same volume that caused the oil price collapse in 2014-15."
Source: http://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/2/2/14467748/electric-vehicles-oil-market
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 05 2017, @02:08AM
My commute is 80 miles round trip, and when I left for work this morning, it was about 13 degrees F outside (some of us actually live in places where having heat during the winter is important - heat is free with an ICE, but it's going to drain battery in an EV). I don't have anywhere to charge my car at work, so in a best case scenario, by the time I get home, I have 120 miles left on your proposed 200 mile charge. I live around 100 miles away from my disabled mother and my young nieces. Occasionally, I end up having go there for an unplanned emergency.
Again, in that best case scenario, I just make it there, and then I'm stuck waiting how long for it to charge for the 100 mile ride home? If I don't have enough gas for my ICE, it'll take under 5 minutes to refuel...
I'm single and can afford one vehicle... that vehicle needs to be able to fit my all-purpose, every day needs. Yes, I can (and have) rent a truck for the rare occasion that I'm planning to buy something large at a store, but I need something that I know is going to take care of my unplanned, yet likely, needs.
I'm sure an EV could work for a lot of people, but, instead of calling people stupid, maybe you should realize that you're pretty ignorant yourself?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 06 2017, @04:07AM
> My commute is 80 miles round trip
That puts you in the 99% percentile for commuters.
If you think anything about your personal circumstances applies to this conversation then you are more than ignorant and stupid.