for example my dad isn't really convinced about "climate change", but would love for the air to get cleaner. and for this reason he installed solar, a battery, even got a hybrid car.
In winter air quality is simply horrible (my Grafana instance shows an average of 240 µg/m³ PM2.5 for January of this year). I have a t-shirt that was hung out to try at the beginning of this year and it still smells of burnt coal and rubber.
The government spent a pretty penny subsidizing installation of natural gas furnaces. Guess what, almost nobody is actually using that now since coal is noticeably cheaper, so people went right back to burning it. I understand they don't care about anybody else, but in winter their own kids breathe air that is literally black and reduces visibility to a few dozen meters. Good luck trying to convince them of anything.
But the West reacts violently to "installing carbon-emitting natural gas in developing countries" and it doesn't happen.
Of course people will oppose gas when we have a better and cheaper alternative.
It doesn't solve the storage problem, but it increases the price differential between electric and fossil fuels. That differential could be used for batteries, solar water heating, etc, etc.
Cooking off battery and using a heat pump water heater is pretty feasible at this point (feasible == cheaper than fossil fuels).
Heating the house and charging vehicles are the big energy hogs. Unfortunately, they're also big polluters.
If instead you try to build solar or wind and provide electrical for heating, maybe some of the rich will do it, but most everyone else will continue to burn coal (or tires).
The infrastructure and sophistication also just doesn't exist for highly insulated and heat-pump conditioned homes like in the West.
The population of India in 1965 was 500 million. Getting back to this level would dramatically increase the quality of life and resources available to each person.
not sure, could be. with a hybrid he was happy that he got to spend less money on fuel, and in turn produce less pollutants. he would've bought an ICE (and charged it from their own solar), but those were much, much more expensive than the car he got.
nonetheless the point was that some people might not be convinced by climate change, but a lot of people want to breath cleaner air.
Some people just want to watch the world burn.
That's at least two metric tonnes of fuel saved over the lifetime of the car compared to ~150kg of additional components. The process of making them would have to be especially dirty to reach the environmental footprint of such an amount of fuel.
Does it not depend on the driving style?
The i3 was an extreme example of that.
I have yet to see any EREOI impact study of gas vs. battery electric that shows gas vehicles to be anywhere close to hybrid or electric.
who said poorer?
> trying to force people in developing countries to “buy an EV!”
who's trying to force anyone?
i'm sorry, but what i wrote has to do with convincing people (via marketing for example) that it's much better to switch to clean energy because of clean air. and i was referring to "developing countries", a huge list: https://www.worlddata.info/developing-countries.php, aka a huge opportunity.