What would be some fact that, while true, could be told in a context or way that is misinfomating or make the other person draw incorrect conclusions?

  • Therefore@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Environmental damage from emissions doesn’t care about relative efficiency, 15 free miles is objectively more than 5 free miles.

    • absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      It you travel 50 miles at 5mpg, you use 10g of fuel At 10mpg you use 5g…a saving of 5g

      40mpg uses 1.25g 55mpg uses 0.91g a saving of 0.34g much less of a saving.

        • planforrain@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          but if we are trying to save the world getting the lowest mpg vehicles off of the road first will have a stronger effect

          if you already drive a 30mpg car and you are ready to upgrade then definitely look for better efficiency but I think we should have incentives in place to get cars that operate at for instance 16 mpg (my first car for instance, 1996 Chevy blazer, now deceased) replaced by even 10 year old models which are much more efficient

    • juliebean@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      but it’s not like a person in a 50mpg car is likely to drive 5 times as much per year as the person in a 10mpg truck. over consistent distances, improving the shitty mileage vehicle will save a lot more gas.

      swapping a 5mpg truck for a 10mpg truck will save 10 gallons per hundred miles, while switching a 40mpg car for a 55mpg car will only save 0.68 gallons per hundred miles. even going from 5mpg to 6mpg would save more than that.