[fridental]

This is a typical green propaganda dumbass calculation .

You assume that people drive BEV as often and as far as they drive ICE. They don't.

You assume people always charge BEV from the grid. People can also use solar panels.

You assume gasoline forever has to be fossil. It does not need to be.

You forget the carbon footprint of manufacturing of either kind of cars.

You assume all people can afford buying new cars. They don't.

You assume there will be as big second hand market for BEV and it is now for ICE. It won't be, because of the battery degradation.

You assume that current grid can handle simultaneous loading of all BEV. It can't, and you don't include the carbon footprint of grid extension and increase of the generation power in your calculation.

And last but now least, a typical green propaganda trick, you are only calculating one variable and ignoring negative effects in another variables: - people waste more time waiting for charging - people forced to switch to inferious means of transportation - people reducing their leisure travels - a two-class mobility with the lower class of poor people living in apartments without own charging possibility who cannot afford a BEV or are forced spending hours per day charging at public stations, and the higher class of home owners with solar panels, charging their cars for free - higher prices for taxi, delivery services (and therefore all retail prices), facility management, mobile nurses, construction worker and other people who drive more miles per day as one over-night charge can give. - special service vehicles like firefighting trucks, police cars, military vehicles, super-heavy trucks etc. cannot use fragile battery energy only, and need to use gasoline, which becomes very expensive and hard to get, if 99% of other cars are BEV and so all gas stations are closed.

So you should either stop publishing shit or invest a lot more time in your calculation.

[wuliwong]

I couldn't be further from a pusher of "green propaganda."

I just thought I'd go after the lowest hanging fruit, like if EVs didn't even lower emissions when ignoring everything else, then it's a slam dunk. But after doing this rough first pass at the calculation, EVs at least seem to pass that test.

The thing is, I may not include everything but you can easily see how I came to my conclusion. That was a large motivation for this. To actually put out easily accessible numbers and have a discussion. It sucks that you can't present your critique in a reasonable manner but I appreciate you commenting.