More horrible climate demagoguery coming from the AAAS! This is written by a senior editor of Science!
Reminder: So called greenhouse gases (a propaganda term) gases are trace gases!
What is perhaps the most significant cause of climate change/global warming: Varying solar activity and cycles!
"Over the last 3,000 years, Earth experienced two major notable ... warm periods—the Roman Warm Period (roughly 1st to 3rd centuries AD) and the Medieval Warm Period (roughly 950 to 1250 AD)" (Google Search)
This research is most likely ideologically driven junk science! It was written to give some politicians pseudo science arguments for government subsidies and government paternalism!
This pamphlet of a journal article was written by only two authors!
"When should you switch to an EV? Right now!
H. Jesse Smith, Senior Editor, Science
Campbell, J. E. & Geyer, R. The climate benefits of retiring a fully operational internal combustion engine vehicle. Science 393, 591–595 (2026). 10.1126.science.adv5441
Internal combustion engine vehicles are a major source of carbon dioxide emissions and therefore there has been a strong push to increase the proportion of electric vehicles (EV) in the transportation sector.
Operating an EV [???] typically produces much less CO2 per-mile than driving a “gas-guzzler,” but knowing when to replace a combustion vehicle with an EV in order to minimize lifetime CO2 production is complicated by the fact that considerable emissions are produced in the manufacturing of a vehicle, before it ever hits the road.
An accurate assessment also must consider emissions from the activities that support manufacturing, such as mining for component materials, and end-of-life management requirements like disposal or recycling.
In order to answer the “When is the best time to switch?” question, at least from the greenhouse gas perspective [???], Campbell and Geyer employed a wide range of scenarios. Ultimately, they found that retiring even a brand-new combustion-driven car for an EV can result in lower total CO2 emissions. [???] ..."
From the editor's summary and abstract:
"Editor’s summary
Electric vehicles (EVs) produce much lower emissions of greenhouse gases than internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs), but when in the life cycle of an ICEV does it make sense to replace it with an EV? Campbell and Geyer conducted life-cycle analyses of different vehicle types and concluded that the energy impact benefits from swapping an EV for an ICEV begin to accrue as early as the first day of the life of the ICEV [???], and that replacement early in the life cycle consistently provides reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Financial considerations will also affect when people choose to make the replacement, of course, but from the perspective of emissions, it is almost never too soon to switch. ...
Abstract
Internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles represent the single largest source of carbon dioxide emissions for most US households. Although battery electric vehicles (BEVs) considerably reduce use-phase emissions, the transition poses a fundamental life cycle optimization challenge:
Is there a net climate benefit to retiring a functional ICE vehicle before its end of life? Retiring a functioning ICE vehicle incurs a fundamental trade-off between BEV manufacturing emissions and decreased vehicle operation emissions.
In this study, we evaluated this trade-off across a comprehensive range of retirement scenarios and found that scrappage-and-replacement yields consistent emissions reductions across most contexts, including the retirement of new ICE vehicles. Although scrapping a functional asset remains economically prohibitive under current market conditions, these results demonstrate a major mitigation potential for policy interventions [???], such as enhanced scrappage subsidies, to address the emissions of an increasingly durable ICE fleet."
No comments:
Post a Comment