The Tesla Model S Apparently Puts Out More Whole-Life Emissions Than A Petrol Supermini
Oh dear. The electric-powered Tesla Model S has been found to produce more whole-life carbon dioxide than a petrol supermini.
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), which whom Lamborghini is working on future battery tech, studied a group of cars’ production methods, exhaust emissions, potential for recycling and any emissions produced by power plants for the quantity of electricity required, if any.
While the researchers say that emissions from distant power plants are the lesser of two evils when it comes to city centres, the Model S was responsible for 226g/km of CO2 during its lifetime compared to just 192g/km for the humble Mitsubishi Mirage supermini.
Admittedly, we know which one of the two we’d rather put on our driveways, but 34g/km is a significant difference. It’s fresh evidence to back the theory that electric cars are actually no cleaner overall than small petrol ones, although we’d like to see a fairer-looking comparison between, say, a Nissan Leaf and a Volkswagen Golf.
Against a more comparable car, the BMW 750 xDrive, the Model S was reportedly some 159g/km better for the planet over its entire several hundred thousand kilometre lifetime.
It also matters how the Model S in the study gets its energy. In the American Midwest, it may be coal-fired power stations. Parts of northern Europe, for example, are now heavily supplied by renewables. The argument will rumble on…
Source: Auto Express
Comments
“50 sec. ago” New record!
I think if we want a low emission car, some car must be hybrid not full electric
I don’t know this for sure, but I would think a hybrid would be worse because you have all of the emissions from building two complete drivetrains, plus it is still emitting while it runs
Customer advice - it’s more environmentally friendly to maintain and run your old car than it is to buy a new electric one!
Let’s all drive classic cars!
I’ve been thinking about this for years. Now I know the truth. Thank you for guiding me.
I’ll keep driving my Jeep without the catalytic converter
For absolutely most cases, yes! :) People miss out on this alot.
Obviously dependent on how much the old car emits. It’s the same as the space ship paradox, do you leave now and go slow, or do you wait for better tech, then leave and maybe get there ahead of space ship 1 because you’re quicker. It’s complex is what I’m saying.
Of course it is. No one would say any different. But most EV buyers are in market for a new car and would have gotten a Fossil burner if EVs were not there
[DELETED]
I’m happy to own a 1.0 econobox for now. They are really fun to drive. :D
You and me both lol
[DELETED]
Who would’ve thought…
Not surprised, not all electricity is derived from cleaner ways, it’s basically like moving emissions that are usually caused by cars to somewhere else (from cities to related facilities) but it still does no good. #KeepICEalive.
It does change a lot. The assumption that is doesn’t matter where pollution is caused, as long as it is caused, is wrong. Pollution in cities, where the concentration of people susceptible of suffering from it, is obviously way worse than in rural areas. In that sense it is indeed necessary to move pollution away from cities.
Monty4248 call your engineer friend, I think he’s gonna hate seeing this
Hey, thanks! :) You’re right, I hate seeing people misinterpret facts and presenting them to others as truth.
I mean, it’s not EXACTLY a fair comparison is it. A tiny Mitsu supermini vs a high end sedan which can seat seven doesn’t really day much
Exactly my thinking
Topics
Manufacturers
Sponsored Posts