• jol@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    6 days ago

    What I’m reading is they can save 57 euros per car by not doing it, which means saving the shareholders millions.

    Why are we still expecting for-profit multinationals to do what’s right just for the sake of it? Either we force them to do it through regulation, or nothing will get done.

    • BruceTwarzen@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 days ago

      Either that or they just produce 120k dollar cars with it. Or put an extra 10k on a normal car.

  • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    Too expensive, they’ll mark up every vehicle by thousands because it’s just so difficult to implement

    • MrMakabar
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      6 days ago

      Hence the EU thinks about just forcing them to use it.

    • astropenguin5@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      Depends how you do it, currently absolutely not because it uses coal coke usually for the heating and/or carbon infusion. To have it be carbon capture you would have to heat it with an arc furnace or something, completely powered by renewables (this is actually very hard to to because of the ridiculously high temperatures involved) and then find some way to use captured carbon to put into the mix, or potentially using very pure charcoal or something

      According to the article the way they define green steel is using arc furnaces or hydrogen to heat the steel, idk how they do the carbon input tho.