this post was submitted on 26 May 2024
105 points (98.2% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

5245 readers
222 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world. About 1C of total warming. Second chart: about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability. Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases. About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
silence7@slrpnk.net
105
Research puts dollar figure on climate savings from electric school buses | A substantial portion of the half-million school buses in the United States are “highly polluting old diesel vehicles” (wapo.st)
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
6 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Replacing the average diesel bus would generate a benefit of $84,200 per bus, split nearly evenly between health and climate effects. Such a replacement would cut 181 metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions per bus and reduce childhood deaths and asthma cases from diesel emissions, the researchers conclude.

The paper is here

all 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] hissingmeerkat@sh.itjust.works 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Those numbers are colossally lower than what NYC and London came up with for transit buses ages ago (about $1.2 million/£1.7 million). I haven't looked at the article yet but it's probably due to the lower use and lower population density.

[–] holycrap@lemm.ee 10 points 5 months ago (2 children)

School busses are running fewer hours than transit busses, so that may account for the discrepancy.

[–] ares35@kbin.social 2 points 5 months ago

most transit buses are also larger and/or heavier, with larger engines that burn more fuel.

[–] admiralteal@kbin.social 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Batteries have also seen huge price drops.

https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2021/ee/d1ee01530c

Even in the past 10 years, the cost per kWh has gone from something like $270 to $180. These prices maybe aren't quite in the full freefall solar has seen, but they're declining very rapidly even absent any technological quantum leaps.

Unlike transit busses, school busses only need to be in service a couple hours a day and can basically trickle charge overnight. They require far lower range on top of the declining battery prices. While I don't know the original NYC study being referenced, it is zero surprise that the school busses are a lot lot lot cheaper.

BEV transit busses are, frankly, a stupid fucking idea. Almost as stupid as battery trains. Put up a pantograph and electrify it properly -- it costs a fraction as much over relevant lifecycles.