EVs DO NOT EMIT MORE PM
Recently @OECD published a report about particulate matter (PM) from road transport. Newspaper headlines blared that electric vehicles where worse than combustion vehicles. That conclusion was wrong according to the report itself.
Let me show you.
The table comparing electric and combustion engines is on page 92. I took averages of low and high values to get the graph in the first tweet.
We have ignored this problem for too long, and there's more here than simply exhaust!
1) Electric vehicle weight
It estimates batteries at 10 kg/kWh when in reality it's already below half of that. So it makes electric vehicles much too heavy and doesn't take into account that in 2030 they will be much lighter still.
We know that the stuff that comes out of the exhaust pipe is really bad for your health.
How that compares to sand and rubber from the road (gram for gram and particle for particle) is still completely unclear. They state this clearly themselves.
But how much is how bad and what is the impact of particle size? For the stuff that's not from the exhaust we basically have no idea.
We know particles emitted from the road and the wheels of cars make us sick but that's about it. More research is urgently needed so we can avoid millions of deaths.
By switching to electric vehicles we are probably eliminating some of the most harmful emissions (from tailpipes and brake pads).
We could try to make tires more wear resistant (probably not a top priority of manufacturers).
We can construct roads in a way that traps part of the particles or we might even vacuum them up before they are released out into the open.https://t.co/mxA62vhuDG
More from Economy
What a year: 203 essays about degrowth in English since the beginning of March. Here is a selection of some of my favourites. Thank you @fem_degrowth, @beth_stratford, @thedownshifters, @corbinkbarthold, @degrowth_info for these brilliant texts.
THREAD/
https://t.co/1lFaJM52RX
https://t.co/i5HOfZ19r7
https://t.co/DuPSrrqnzz
https://t.co/0ANveWdvFO
THREAD/
https://t.co/1lFaJM52RX
https://t.co/i5HOfZ19r7
https://t.co/DuPSrrqnzz
https://t.co/0ANveWdvFO
1/ To add a little texture to @NickHanauer's thread, it's important to recognize that there's a good reason why orthodox economists (& economic cosplayers) so vehemently oppose a $15 min wage:
The min wage is a wedge that threatens to undermine all of orthodox economic theory.
2/ Orthodox economics is grounded in two fundamental models: a systems model that describes the market as a closed equilibrium system, and a behavioral model that describes humans as rational, self-interested utility-maximizers. The modern min wage debate undermines both models.
3/ The assertion that a min wage kills jobs is so central to orthodox economics that it is often used as the textbook example of the Supply/Demand curve. Raise the cost of labor and businesses will buy less of it. It's literally Econ 101!
4/ Econ 101 insists that markets automatically set an efficient "equilibrium price" for labor & everything else. Mess with this price and bad things happen. Yet decades of empirical research has persuaded a majority of economists that this just isn't
5/ How can this be? Well, either the market is not a closed equilibrium system in which if you raise the price of labor employers automatically purchase less of it... OR the market is not automatically setting an efficient and fair equilibrium wage. Or maybe both. #FAIL
The min wage is a wedge that threatens to undermine all of orthodox economic theory.
1/4 Most people, especially academic economists, think that the controversy over the minimum wage is a contest over facts. It's not. It's a contest over power, status, and wealth. It is just like the contest over racial and gender justice.
— Nick Hanauer (@NickHanauer) January 17, 2021
2/ Orthodox economics is grounded in two fundamental models: a systems model that describes the market as a closed equilibrium system, and a behavioral model that describes humans as rational, self-interested utility-maximizers. The modern min wage debate undermines both models.
3/ The assertion that a min wage kills jobs is so central to orthodox economics that it is often used as the textbook example of the Supply/Demand curve. Raise the cost of labor and businesses will buy less of it. It's literally Econ 101!
4/ Econ 101 insists that markets automatically set an efficient "equilibrium price" for labor & everything else. Mess with this price and bad things happen. Yet decades of empirical research has persuaded a majority of economists that this just isn't
5/ How can this be? Well, either the market is not a closed equilibrium system in which if you raise the price of labor employers automatically purchase less of it... OR the market is not automatically setting an efficient and fair equilibrium wage. Or maybe both. #FAIL
