That's for damn sure!
Posted on 06/23/2022 12:57:38 PM PDT by grundle
According to Footman James' study, reality is far different because classic cars with those evil, gas-burning engines are better for the environment than new electric vehicles. The thing is people who believe the opposite just look at tailpipe emissions, behaving as if that’s everything in the equation. They don’t consider pollution generated by the manufacturing process.
In the study, Footman James mentions that in the UK a classic car on average is driven 1,200 miles a year and puts out 563 kg of CO2 as a result. But a new VW Golf is made by generating 6.8 tonnes of CO2e. Even worse, a Polestar 2 (a Swedish electric car) generates 26 tonnes of CO2 during the manufacturing process. That means you could drive your classic car for over 46 years before it generates as much CO2 as the “green” electric vehicle. Let that sink in for a moment.
Footman James rightly points out that within that 46-year period, the Polestar 2’s battery will need to be replaced, maybe even swapped for a new one twice or more. And what happens to the battery? Can it really be recycled? The answer for now is no. Meanwhile, the classic car keeps running without contributing significantly to a landfill.
I wish the study dug more into the human and environmental costs associated with the extraction of raw materials to build electric cars. There’s also the fact many of these minerals are mined in authoritarian countries like China and Russia where many accusations have been levied that slave labor is used in the process.
(Excerpt) Read more at autos.yahoo.com ...
Plus classic cars are way cooler looking and sounding, especially when they have large V8s.
1,200 miles a year? Lots of people in the US put on that milage in a month.
When I had classics, they were every day drivers that got 20,000 / year put on.
My ‘94 Roadmaster (not really a “classic” yet, when I had it had shockingly high numbers to fail emissions in Phoenix (though I don’t think CO2 was anyu different).
But rightly so, there have been numerous studies showing that electric cars are about 1.8% more enviromentally friendly that the average car. 500,000 lbs of dirt strip mined to create just one car battery. Please shipping, processing, etc.,
But making Electric Cars employs Hundreds of Thousands of Child Slaves, should they just be left to starve on the unemployment line?
350 miles per year.
This fits gas powered motorcycles as well as many models get 40, 50 and 60 miles per gallon.
My 2 work Trucks average 60K miles each annually, but my wifes jeep I bought her in 2015 only has 28K miles on it.
For a 4 year period I did 1200 per week in my other life in the LA area. LA is a distant memory now.☺
🥰👍
Just don’t let the insurer who underwrote your classic car insurance policy know...
That's for damn sure!
The study is flawed, but yes if you track all the CO2 generated in manufacture and use, ICE cars are still greener by a long shot. Not even counting the battery generated waste. But who really cares, cars are about image and making yourself feel good about you.
I used to know a guy who raced — yes, raced — Duesenbergs. “That’s what it’s made for!”
Kinda like mailing a letter with an Inverted Jenny stamp.
A classic Olds 88 convertible vs something with four wheels that has faggot written all over it.
I’d be satisfied if a new R majority and president required EV owners to utilize ONLY so-called “green” generated electricity. At least they would legitimately pay for their advocacy and maybe the self-adulatory preening would abate.
I want a muscle car.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.