Articles: Classic Cars Less Harmful To The Environment Than EVs, Studies Finds

[Peter Gariepy]

 

https://www.lelandwest.com/blog/listing.asp?2022/8/the-debate-over-carbon-footprint

The Arguments for Classic Cars and the Environment

While classic cars aren’t built with the latest technology designed to produce fewer carbon emissions and burn less gas, they offer your carbon footprint different ways to reduce your impact.

 

 

Less driving

The owner of a classic car tends to drive their vehicle less. Insurance companies that provide coverage for classic cars report that their drivers put on less than 2,500 miles per year, which is far less than the typical modern vehicle which is often on the road for more than 10,000 miles per year. Driving fewer miles means putting fewer emissions in the air, reducing the impact of driving around a vehicle with less technology to prevent carbon buildup.

Already assembled

Classic cars were made years ago. Buying a used car or a classic car is similar because you aren’t making auto manufacturers produce their own emissions when making a new car in the factory. As mentioned earlier, repeating those efforts by buying a new, modern car is less energy efficient.

In many ways, the life of a modern vehicle tends to be short. A study out of Japan indicates that most vehicles are built and scrapped within 13 years. Older, classic vehicles tended to be made to last longer - which is a major reason why they are still around and sought after.

Another study out of the United Kingdom indicates that it will take quite a while - 47 years, for a classic car to produce the emissions of building a modern car.

 

Additional Resources

1. "Classic Cars Found to be Less Harmful to the Environment Than EVs: Study" - https://www.carscoops.com/2022/06/classic-cars-less-harmful-to-the-environment-than-evs-study-finds/
2. "How Classic Cars Compare to Electric Vehicles in Environmental Impact" - https://www.footmanjames.co.uk/blog/classics-are-less-damaging-than-electric-vehicles
3. "Are Classic Cars Good for the Environment?" - https://www.providentprotectionplus.com/are-classic-cars-good-for-the-environment/
4. "Is Restoring a Classic Car Bad for the Environment?" - https://www.goldeagle.com/tips-tools/is-restoring-a-classic-car-bad-for-the-environment/
5. "Classic Cars Emissions: Petrol, Diesel, Electric Vehicles Research" - https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/1626431/classic-cars-emissions-petrol-diesel-electric-vehicles-research
6. "EVs More Harmful to the Environment Than Classic Cars: Study" - https://www.driven.co.nz/news/study-finds-evs-are-more-harmful-to-the-environment-than-classic-cars/
7. "How Green are Classic Cars?" - https://ccbank.co.uk/newsroom/how-green-are-classic-cars/
8. "Classic Cars: Are They Greener than Modern Cars?" - https://www.motorious.com/articles/features-3/classic-cars-greener/
9. "Classic Cars: Annual Emissions Equivalent to Drinking Three Cups of Coffee" - https://www.iaea-online.org/news/2022/10/average-classic-cars-annual-emissions-equivalent-to-drinking-thre
10. "Classic Cars Less Damaging to Environment Than Modern Internal Combustion and Electric Vehicles: Automotive Sector Report" - https://automotiveindustrydigest.com/latest-fleet-news/classic-cars-less-damaging-to-environment-than-modern-internal-combustion-and-electric-vehicles-proves-automotive-sector-report/auto-news?
11. "New Report Shows Classic Cars are Better for the Environment" - https://somersetapple.co.uk/news/new-report-shows-classics-cars-are-better-for-the-environment
12. "Classic Cars Less Damaging to the Environment Than Previously Thought" - https://uk.news.yahoo.com/classic-cars-less-damaging-environment-094454069.html

[Peter Gariepy]

Here is an extensive study by FOOTMAN JAMES, classic car insurance company In the UK.

 

https://www.footmanjames.co.uk/the-indicator-report-download

 

[MotiveLensPhoto]

15 minutes ago, Peter Gariepy said:

 

https://www.lelandwest.com/blog/listing.asp?2022/8/the-debate-over-carbon-footprint

The Arguments for Classic Cars and the Environment

While classic cars aren’t built with the latest technology designed to produce fewer carbon emissions and burn less gas, they offer your carbon footprint different ways to reduce your impact.

 

 

Less driving

The owner of a classic car tends to drive their vehicle less. Insurance companies that provide coverage for classic cars report that their drivers put on less than 2,500 miles per year, which is far less than the typical modern vehicle which is often on the road for more than 10,000 miles per year.

 

That's a specious argument. If I don't drive a newer ICE at all then it isn't emitting any chemicals. The argument should be made on emissions per mile driven.

[Paul Dobbin]

26 minutes ago, MotiveLensPhoto said:

That's a specious argument. If I don't drive a newer ICE at all then it isn't emitting any chemicals. The argument should be made on emissions per mile driven.

   

26 minutes ago, MotiveLensPhoto said:

That's a specious argument. If I don't drive a newer ICE at all then it isn't emitting any chemicals. The argument should be made on emissions per mile driven.

    The point was that the classics are driven so little and infrequently that they are not causing the problem or even         contributing in any suggnificant amount.   I would love an EV if built before 1918.   I drove 2 in the past, a Milburn

     and a Chevy Volt.   I only wish the Milburn had a steering wheel, the tiller was ackward.

Edited October 4, 2023 by Paul Dobbin
reposition text: Why does this happen???? (see edit history)

[zepher]

26 minutes ago, MotiveLensPhoto said:

That's a specious argument. If I don't drive a newer ICE at all then it isn't emitting any chemicals. The argument should be made on emissions per mile driven.

Why would you not take into account the amount of environmental damage done just to produce the vehicle?
Cars don't just materialize out of thin air.

[Paul Dobbin]

19 minutes ago, Bills Auto Works said:

  Paul...I am wondering if my experience with my big zero turn mower would help with driving that Milburn? LOL

 

   I pride myself on my ability to drive Any & All vehicles when I transport them, but I have to admit....Every one of the 2800+ I have transported ALL had steering wheels if I drove them into the trailer!😃

 

   Back to things that affect the AACA...Frankly I am shocked! This is the 2nd thread started by a particular Mod who would rather see our ICE powered cars go by the wayside & both have done the opposite, awakening members to those who have an agenda to make them disappear, so that folks could aid in the fight against these whackos!!!

 

 

God Bless

Bill

https://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/nationwide-single-car-transport-hauling-open-or-enclosed.614419/

     Just because someone supports EV's and clean air, that does not make them "Wackos or people with an agenda" to take away your 

     hobby, rights or your vehicles or make them disappear.   Blasting them as Wackos is like labeling them Liberals or Communists

     because disagree with their politics.   If you have a better idea for cleaner air & water, let's hear it,   Name calling has not worked

     very successfully recently.   Plus it's not nice or allowed on this Forum

[Peter Gariepy]

13 hours ago, Bills Auto Works said:

Back to things that affect the AACA...Frankly I am shocked! This is the 2nd thread started by a particular Mod who would rather see our ICE powered cars go by the wayside & both have done the opposite, awakening members to those who have an agenda to make them disappear, so that folks could aid in the fight against these whackos!!!

Bill,

 

You assumed wrong. I started this discussion forum in 1998 and have managed it for 25 years because I am entirely an antique automobile fanatic and have been since I was a kid.

What I am against are those who don’t see the benefits of clean air, water and land.  
 

For us to defend our hobby to the rest of the world requires logic and science.  Not unfounded opinions by many in this hobby that filled with personal attacks, hyperbole, and sensationalism. 
 

Being both for antique automobiles AND supporting the inevitable wave of electric cars in the future is not mutually exclusive. 

As one of the linked articles above states, most car enthusiasts feel the same way. 
 

Peter

[Peter Gariepy]

1 hour ago, zepher said:

Why would you not take into account the amount of environmental damage done just to produce the vehicle?
Cars don't just materialize out of thin air.

The articles do. 

[Peter Gariepy]

13 minutes ago, Bills Auto Works said:

  Logic & Science are great things, except when a certain group deny them completely to push their agenda! Let’s take Climate Change for example....The planet's climate has been changing for hundreds of THOUSANDS of years as proven by geologists who don't have any money to be made by claiming humans are affecting it. The earth will continue to change its climate long after we are gone REGARDLESS of anything we do...

Your response to @Paul Dobbin and above just made my point:

 

”For us to defend our hobby to the rest of the world requires logic and science.  Not unfounded opinions by many in this hobby  filled with personal attacks, hyperbole, and sensationalism. ”

[Peter Gariepy]

20 minutes ago, Paul Dobbin said:

     Just because someone supports EV's and clean air, that does not make them "Wackos or people with an agenda" to take away your 

     hobby, rights or your vehicles or make them disappear.   Blasting them as Wackos is like labeling them Liberals or Communists

     because disagree with their politics.   If you have a better idea for cleaner air & water, let's hear it,   Name calling has not worked

     very successfully recently.   Plus it's not nice or allowed on this Forum

Well said. 
 

[Paul Dobbin]

4 minutes ago, Bills Auto Works said:

PLEASE follow the money Paul!

 

  Every bit of it is created so that Companies/Billionaires can make more money! If you do the research, there is ALWAYS a profit & NOT a significant reduction of anything...Other than a reduction in the average man's hard earned money! 

 

God Bless

Bill

https://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/nationwide-single-car-transport-hauling-open-or-enclosed.614419/

     Look at the good that game from cleaning up the water in the 60's, 70's & 80's.   Maybe someone made a profit, but

     the water that I fished in, swam in, sailed & water ski'd in,  in Florida and Europe was cleaned up and remains alot cleaner

     than it was in 1960.   Look at the Rhine River, once called the sewer of Europe.   Also the coastal Florida waters.   There

     were lots of skeptics then too,  but it worked very well.   Trust but verify science and try to be opened minded.

[CChinn]

Yes the climate on this planet has changed multiple times over the billions of years of its existence. That has occurred over hundreds of thousands to millions of years on a gradual basis, not at the rate seen in the 150-200 years since the Dawn of the Industrial Revolution and in particular over the past century. It’s the rapidity of change that is alarming

Edited October 5, 2023 by CChinn (see edit history)

[Gunsmoke]

Thank you Peter for posting the original post, it plainly describes what most of us in the hobby understand and agree with in respect to the minimum impact the old car hobby and it's vehicles have on climate. But there is always the 1% who don't take the time to fully read and digest the content, but rather use the opportunity to vent their anger at you, or others they don't agree with on anything. I like especially a couple of your reminders, which perhaps Bill should reread (or read for the first time).  (1) Before you speak ask yourself if what you are going to say is true, is kind, is necessary, is helpful. If the answer is no, maybe what you are about to say should be left unsaid. (2) Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools because they (think they) have to say something.

[Peter Gariepy]

2 minutes ago, Bills Auto Works said:

But you are the Mod & I am an actual car guy who is going leave for a  show early tomorrow morning, so you can continue to push your agenda while I actually live the hobby. Instead why don't you show pictures of a classic car you are working on or are taking to a cruise this week??????

Bill. 

I laughed when I read this.  Another personal attack. 
 

Want proof I’m an actual car guy? please refer to:  Https://forums.aaca.org. 

[Fordy]

Statistics don't lie. For example, I have never lost a Wimbledon tennis final or a Formula 1 race. True I have never competed, but it is equally true that I have never lost. 

The people that push their agenda onto others can find "facts" to support them just as the other side can also find "facts".

Now a couple of "factual" points.

- carbon is now pollution and since we are mostly made of carbon as is every other life form on the planet that we are aware of then "life" is a pollutant.

- consumerism drives economies and encourages new for old and this also requires population growth - more of the biological pollutants as above.

- humanity as a whole is the greatest threat this planet has and frankly the place would be much better off without us.

- if we are to survive, we need to have better housekeeping and seriously reduce our numbers so the only place we have to live can keep sustaining us.

 

The tit for tat clash of personalities and opinions in this thread is not why I joined this forum or the AACA for so will the combatants please pull their heads in and agree to disagree.

 

Peter - as a moderator your role is to smother flames before they take hold and to remain impartial whilst you do so, not to add fuel. I take it from your comments that you started this forum and for that you have thanks from many people but, and it's a big but.... Whilst it may be your "baby" it now has a life of its own and trying to use it as a platform for anything other than discussion on old vehicles should be discouraged. In the last 24 hours, you have started 2 topics which seem to "push an agenda". Yes, they are relevant to the hobby but clearly stirring up a hornet's nest, please consider how you present them, so they do not degenerate into what this one has now become.

Thanks 

Steve

[Peter Gariepy]

9 minutes ago, Fordy said:

Peter - as a moderator your role is to smother flames before they take hold and to remain impartial whilst you do so, not to add fuel.

I started this topic to share sources of data that defends our hobby.  Defend that (or not). 
 

Just because I’m moderator doesn’t exclude me from having an opinion. 
 

As to the flames to which you refer… call them out. Personal attacks have no place in this forum. 

[victorialynn2]

We have classic cars and a Tesla in our home and we peacefully coexist. I think there is room for both. Weather is changing much more rapidly since the industrial revelation. My research has shown that by far and large the issue is industry, commercial use and things like private jets that are contributing most of the pollution. All residential use is just 20%, but it feels we are disproportionately being zeroed in on to conserve. However, the people that own or profit from industry and have jets want to point fingers at those of us who have gas powered cars. Sure every bit contributes, but the same people who drive the green agenda are some of the absolute worst offenders. Don’t make me give up my classics when you travel the world in your private jet. 
 

https://www.americangeosciences.org/critical-issues/faq/what-are-major-sources-and-users-energy-united-states#:~:text=The industrial sector [32% of,agriculture%2C mining%2C and construction.

Edited October 5, 2023 by victorialynn2 (see edit history)

[1935Packard]

A significant problem with the studies Peter is pointing to is that they are looking only at C02 emissions.   The environmental challenge with classic cars isn't so much the C02 emissions as it is the carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, ozone-producing evaporated gas and particulate matter emissions.   

 

So the studies aren't really suggesting that classic cars are better for the environment than electric cars (which is a weird comparison anyway; classic cars are for fun, and electric cars are for transportation).  Rather, they're showing that the CO2 emissions for existing classic cars given their low use is smaller than the CO2 emissions for making electric cars.

Edited October 5, 2023 by 1935Packard (see edit history)

[victorialynn2]

6 minutes ago, Bills Auto Works said:

That is absolutely the most immature quote I have ever heard! The truth is rarely kind or nice! Those that think that way have their heads firmly buried in the sand!

 

  Honestly I would LOVE to NOT have to debate any of this crap! I build cars, I cruise cars, I show cars, I race cars, I have for decades & for the last 41 years I have transported other peoples collectors cars. I do not however have any kind of stomach for those that seek to ruin our hobby.

 

   Now I will be leaving very early in the morning for a car show/ get together in central Kentucky with 100 or so guys from the HAMB. My Wife & I have been looking forward to this for a few months now, so all you folks who don't build cars you can continue to bash those of us that defend this great hobby with a passion from your basements/ safe spaces while I am out enjoying this great hobby & the folks in it

 

God Bless

Bill

https://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/nationwide-single-car-transport-hauling-open-or-enclosed.614419/

Hey Bill, I think we can all have our opinions and be nice and kind in the way we share them. Also, I don’t think that it’s an us and them situation here. As far as I can tell, everyone commenting on this thread enjoys the hobby. 
 

I share your feeling of wanting to defend our right to have classic cars and I think everyone else commenting does also. 

[zepher]

3 hours ago, Peter Gariepy said:

The articles do. 

That comment was directed at the person I quoted, not the articles.

[Fleetwood Meadow]

Peter, it was a nice but misguided attempt to present this material. We all know electric vehicles have become a political agenda because our politician, including the President of the United States has decided to force them by 20__.. That makes them political. This topic has been deleted many times due to the aggressive approach of responses and personal attacks brought up by it. Unfortunately they did not allow the consumer to decide if they want electric vehicles, they are attempting to force them upon us.

We have seen in this very thread that the debate is as sensitive as the abortion topic. So I think it would be in the best interest of this forum that you do what you do when other threads get aggressive and remove it. 

[Peter Gariepy]

49 minutes ago, Fleetwood Meadow said:

…misguided attempt to present this material.

I posted well researched material providing logic and science we can collectively use to defend our hobby against potential legislation and regulations that could negatively affect our hobby. 
 

How is that misguided?

 

I’m at a loss at all the attacks, finger pointing, and off topic comments. 
 

 

[Studemax]

The pollution problem with EV's is not while they are driving - but while they are being built. Constructing the batteries is incredibly destructive in the mining and refining processes. And afterwards, the lithium battery becomes a fire hazard with as yet unrealized dangers to the environment. 

[Peter Gariepy]

37 minutes ago, Studemax said:

 

The pollution problem with EV's is not while they are driving - but while they are being built

 

Agreed.  Some of the articles factor that in. 
 

“A battery-electric car creates 26 tonnes of CO2 during its production, emissions that would take a typical classic more than 46 years to achieve”

[Fleetwood Meadow]

50 minutes ago, Peter Gariepy said:

How is that misguided?

I’m not calling the information you gave misguided. I’m saying bringing it up to a crowd that are already feeling attacked was misguided. I thought the information was good because any research that proves fact is important. Unfortunately in todays society we are supposed to “believe the science” until it isn’t what we want to hear. So no matter how much fact and research we provide to say we aren’t the cause of all of life’s issues they will still say that we are. You and I have argued in the past about things but I didn’t have an issue with you saying that we aren’t the problem.
The main message of my post was lost. If this is going to be used to pit members against members then it may not be worth the argument, at least here. 

[Peter Gariepy]

3 minutes ago, Fleetwood Meadow said:

If this is going to be used to pit members against members..

That was not the intent.  These are well thought out arguments in the hobby’s favor.  That’s a good thing.  

[TAKerry]

I saw the headline and thought twice before I decided to read. Yes it has interest in the antique auto hobby but it is also politically motivated, much the same as the post about carbon credits. Neither in my opinion (not that it matters) belongs here. This should be a forum to bring people together with the love of old cars, not divide them. Read the many posts above mine and there is nothing but division. Does this sound familiar? I do appreciate what the moderator does on a daily basis to keep this forum going as I get a great deal of entertainment out of it and have met and maintained several friendships, but I will stand by that posting topics of this nature is irresponsible. LETS GET BACK TO CARS.

[Peter Gariepy]

38 minutes ago, TAKerry said:

Read the many posts above mine and there is nothing but division.

The articles are important and should be shared.
 

The division comes from just a few people. Please, call them out it. 

[TAKerry]

Just now, Peter Gariepy said:

The articles are important and should be shared.
 

The division comes from just a few people. Please, call them out it. 

I see nothing positive with this statement or this thread, quite frankly.

 

[Peter Gariepy]

Just now, TAKerry said:

The articles are important and should be shared.

How about this statement?

[Peter Gariepy]

1 minute ago, TAKerry said:

nothing positive with this statement or this thread, quite frankly.

We collectively need to have good debates on how to see our hobby address negative issues.  
 

sweeping them under the rug to appease a few ignores the silent majority. 

[MotiveLensPhoto]

17 hours ago, zepher said:

Why would you not take into account the amount of environmental damage done just to produce the vehicle?
Cars don't just materialize out of thin air.

It wasn't my data.

[MotiveLensPhoto]

18 hours ago, Paul Dobbin said:

   

    The point was that the classics are driven so little and infrequently that they are not causing the problem or even         contributing in any suggnificant amount.   I would love an EV if built before 1918.   I drove 2 in the past, a Milburn

     and a Chevy Volt.   I only wish the Milburn had a steering wheel, the tiller was ackward.

The real point is that carbon emissions are a problem. Transportation emissions are second only electricity production, currently, in the US. https://climatechange.chicago.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions

 

The worldwide numbers are a little different, with agriculture nearly equal to energy and heat production

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data

 

The overarching issue is that the climate is warming, and it is caused by humans burning stuff and drowning ourselves in garbage. If we want to fix it, we need to get every nation on earth to do more. We (all humans) need to get the oceans cleaned so they work the way they're supposed to. We (and I mean all humans everywhere) need to fix this.

((steps off soapbox))

 

[Pfeil]

4 hours ago, Peter Gariepy said:

We collectively need to have good debates on how to see our hobby address negative issues.  
 

sweeping them under the rug to appease a few ignores the silent majority. 

The only one that has the ability to sweep anything under the rug is the moderator. 

[Packard enthus.]

CLASSIC CARS AND THE PLANET?

Since all used vehicles are now "classics",   hack - we even have a "Classic Plumbing" down in Phoenix...........i think we should all accept blame for hurting those poor bunny-wabbets...

[JACK M]

19 hours ago, Peter Gariepy said:

As mentioned earlier, repeating those efforts by buying a new, modern car is less energy efficient.

In many ways, the life of a modern vehicle tends to be short.

After reading this quote I quit reading.

In my experience of my youth a car that had 100K on it was probably used up. These days 500K is more realistic.

You guys can argue all you want.

I'm out.

 

[drhach]

If we reset the whole world right now, what would be better for the environment? Making EV's or not making anything and maintaining the existing stock of vehicles that are in the world?

 

 

[Pfeil]

6 hours ago, JACK M said:

After reading this quote I quit reading.

In my experience of my youth a car that had 100K on it was probably used up. These days 500K is more realistic.

You guys can argue all you want.

I'm out.

 

Got to agree with you there. Had to go down to Phoenix this past Wednesday from Prescott. Took the 11-year-old daily driver sedan. A car that gets 41mpg at 72MPH (level ground) and can do 140 MPH. Going to lunch and driving around down there, and when I got back, took less than 1/4 tank round trip.