• Saff@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    How is this news? Yes, you need more energy to move a larger heavier object…Granted, the older engines might not be the most efficient but they weren’t that bad that you can compensate a weight increase of this magnitude!

    • silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Individually, sure, but there are a lot more SUVs. Enough that they account for more total emissions.

    • silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That it is massive means it needs to use more energy to accelerate. Choosing big vehicles where smaller ones will do is a real problem

      • Miclux
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Also wrong. A big car doesn’t have to be heavy. Especially in comparison with old cars. It’s all about how you drive a car not what car. That “study” is biased as fuck.

        • silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          “doesn’t have to be” but in practice they in fact are. I wouldn’t call this a bias problem; it’s that people are making and selling and buying huge and inefficient vehicles.

          • Miclux
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Inefficient? A modern car no matter what size is always more efficient than a small car from the 90s. Just look at the euro emission standards.