Alt text:
An idling gas engine may be annoyingly loud, but that’s the price you pay for having WAY less torque available at a standstill.
You must log in or # to comment.
The motors have never been the problem, it’s always been the battery. See train engines, they are a diesel generator with electric motors.
This is where history pisses me off. We should have been headlong into battery research after the oil embargoes. Could have been 40 years faster.
I think people forget that petroleum is condensed and distilled solar energy. One gallon of gasoline is the results of years of solar energy.
Spelling
Non renewable solar energy unfortunately.
Renewable fuels exist and are used today, but the efficiency and pollution aspects still apply.
If you’re making your diesel from CO2 pulled from the air, pollution aspects don’t really apply (at least, CO2 emission issues don’t, there’s still NOx, but that’s what cat piss is for).
Problem is, converting atmospheric CO2 back into fuel makes the efficiency issue drastically worse. Maybe with enough solar panels and windmills, and use the Fischer–Tropsch process with the excess energy that the grid isn’t consuming.
Of course, that would be for mobile fuel, if solar plants were going to do anything like that for later use generating electricity during peaks, making diesel is dumb; you’d want to use hydrogen or ammonia for in-place energy storage.
I was thinking about fuels like HVO. They work well, but have their own ecological implications.
Ah. I’m generally skeptical of any plant-based ‘green fuel’ because they generally take up agricultural capacity that would otherwise be producing food
No, it’s renewable. But… not in any practical timeframe.
That’s not the definition of renewable.
It is iv we use it sustainably.
Not really. Its trees from a time before micro organisms evolved the ability to eat dead trees. These days, the solar energy collected by trees will get used to power the metabolisms of fungi before those trees can get buried and eventually become new coal & petroleum.
I suppose an impact from a sufficiently large asteroid could turn the entire crust of the planet into magma, sterilizing it and therefore opening the possibility that new oil might be created some day.
IIRC it is actually mostly from algea. A small amount from some fern-like plants. By the time trees existed, they were being broken down by bacteria.
I think I read somewhere that oil will not be produced anymore because now bacteria can break down that biomass that it previously didn’t. Hence, non-renewable even on long timescales.
Only if we bring back the dinosaurs. There are six movies (and counting!) explaining why this is not a good idea.
Technically no. Only if we erase bacteria capable of breaking down trees.
Energy density is a huge advantage which most people find hard to give up especially when the biggest problem that we face is invisible to most people. We can’t fix a problem if we ignore the cause.
Happy cake day!
A lot of people have been having their cake days recently. Guess it’s the first anniversary of the Reddit exodus.
oops you posted irrelevant pedantics that verge on misinformation 😧
sure it’s distilled solar energy that cannot be renewed. relevant language highligted. no one “forgets,” this. literally no one. it’s just not relevant to a timespan less than millions of years. cheers! ☀️
Petroleum can’t be renewed, but biofuels can be.
v true but i also dislike how biofuels get smorked into yet more CO2 which is kind of a problem rn
Biofuels are carbon-neutral. They release CO2 when burned, but it doesn’t matter because that same CO2 had recently been sucked out of the atmosphere by the plant they came from.
In theory true. In reality not true.
While U.S. biofuel use rose from 0.37 to 1.34 EJ/yr over this period, additional carbon uptake on cropland was enough to offset only 37 % of the biofuel-related biogenic CO2emissions. This result falsifies the assumption of a full offset made by LCA and other GHG accounting methods that assume biofuel carbon neutrality. Once estimates from the literature for process emissions and displacement effects including land-use change are considered, the conclusion is that U.S. biofuel use to date is associated with a net increase rather than a net decrease in CO2emissions. study
Not passing judgement on anything, just putting the facts out there that I happen to know :) Biofuel may or may not be a good tool to move toward more sustainability, and it’s certainly better than petrol.
My biofuel of choice is biodiesel produced from byproducts of chicken rendering that would otherwise become waste/pollution anyway. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The way I see it, we should electrify all the things that can be (urban driving, both freight and passenger trains, etc.), maximize the use of those things (e.g. by shifting long-haul freight away from trucking and back towards rail, and shifting airline travel to high-speed rail), and then use biofuels for the relatively-niche stuff that’s left instead of spending excessive effort trying to get electric to cover 100% of cases.
Um piss off. It is not irrelevant or misinformation. That is exactly what petroleum is.
You clearly can’t understand a factual statement from an opinion I never said it was good I never said it was bad I just said it was. If you’d bother to take a moment to think about it. You would realize that I was referring to the fact that petroleum is extremely energy dense. For the very reason I stated. That is fundamentally why petroleum has become a successful energy source and why it’s been so difficult to replace.
You’re welcome to point out where I said it was renewable. I think you’re going to have a difficult time finding that statement.
As for being a pedantic ass that’s clearly your territory. A pedantic ass that it likes to put words in other people’s mouths.
Your post was bordering on irrelevant to the original comment. In light of that the information you provided can really only be interpreted is as pro-fossil fuel.
Just because you can only interpret it that way doesn’t mean it is true.
mean comment alert 🚨 opinion invalidated
I hope you are not talking about battery locomotives.
With overhead wires the train has a practically unlimited battery capacity.
Oil is honestly an amazing product, chemistry wise there is so much we can do with it and energy wise it’s a extremely concentrated and easily transported form of energy.
Energy wise one liter of oil is equivalent to 10 person working for a day !
I repeat, using one liter of oil is like having 10 “slaves” working for us for a day.
Its easy to see why oil became the base of our modern civilization, and easy to see why we don’t manage to stop using it even though it’s destroying us.
Not really. Battery tech has always been advancing. Even today electric vehicles have barely come up with anything new, battery wise. Everyone wants something better than lithium base. No one can get anything to market.
pretty sure most trains are powered by either overhead wires or third rails? considering that urban rail systems are always electrified and those have A LOT of trains.
Freight trains are diesel electric.
Not in America
okay? i’m talking about the world though, so typical for people to just assume america is all that matters lmao
The point is about utilization of electric motors, if it happens anywhere on earth it’s possible. You’re trying to insinuate that it isn’t true. And it is. Being American has nothing to do with it you dunce
Exactly this. Imagine if gas powered motor could recharge in mere 12 hours and run for up to half the distance. Ah, that would be the dream.
And if you and 5 of your neighbors decide to refuel at the same time during peak hours you have a real chance of overloading your neighborhood grid. And your fuel tank is dead in 5 years, replacing which is more than half of your used cars cost.
Everything non-portable uses electric motors from the time the first wire was invented.
Boy it sure is easy to win a debate when you use fictional information
deleted by creator
“On the other hand gas has a much higher energy density than batteries and a much faster refuel rate.”
But remember, electric motors also require next to no maintenance and can last for many years of runtime. Pros and cons.
Real answer: power density. Pound for pound, gas still contains more energy than our best batteries. The weight of energy storage is still a massive deal for anything that cannot be tethered to a grid or be in close practical proximity for frequent recharging, from rockets, planes and cars (sometimes) to chainsaws and lawnmowers (sometimes).
The price. The price is the problem for all us poors.
It wouldn’t be so bad if they paired small batteries with backup generators.
But nooo, its 7000lb all electrics or overly complicated ICE-hybrids, nothing in between.
Wait how is what you’re proposing different from ICE hybrids?
-
An ICE hybrid is a gas car with a little electric motor shoehorned inside.
-
A “plug in” hybrid as they are called is a full electric drivetrain, with a gas generator like you’d buy at Lowes stuck in the boot .
It seems trivial, but the difference is massive. The former is super complicated, heavy, and expensive, as you need all the junk a gas car needs and the electric stuff to go with it.
The later is hilarously efficient. It takes the best part of electric cars, the dead simple drive train, and solves their achilles heel: the massive battery. You can get away with a dirt cheap 3 horsepower generator in such a setup and shrink the battery massively, whereas a ICE hybrid needs a huge car engine and (like I said) all the expensive junk that goes with it.
You don’t see more of the later because:
-
Car manufacturers are geared to produce ICE cars, and reserve the electric drivetrain capacitry for profitable luxury vehicles first.
-
This is just speculation on my part, but a gas range extending generator “taints” a full electric car, making it unpalatable to people who think it ruins the image, eco friendliness or whatever, when it’s actually better for the environment because the battery isn’t so freaking big.
Gotcha, thanks for explaining!
Of course!
Another point I was getting as is that pure electric cars suffer from the same problem space rockets do: most of their weight is fuel.
Hence they are heavy, need a lot of raw material and manufacturing. Read: Expensive and bad for the environment, compared to a cheaper plug in hybrid.
And a tiny, 5 horsepower gasoline generator is hilarously efficient compared to a car engine. And dirt cheap, and weighs virtually nothing. There are technical reasons for this, but basically it’s not even in the same league, and produces a fraction of the emissions as a full ICE car.
Maybe truth is they started talking about doing a car like that and by the time it was ready for production they ended up with a regular ICE car because they nearly doubled the HP of the generator every time the design got reviewed like you are doing now. Before long it will be a tiny 98 HP generator…
You really don’t need 90hp. Coasting on the freeway takes less than 10hp, depending on how big of a block you drive, so as long as the average is around that, the generator can keep the battery charged forever, and the battery handles any surge in power you need. It’s only a problem if you drive like a jerk, and floor it out of every light or speed down the highway at 100+mph, and do it long enough to drain the battery.
But the brilliant part is that you can design the generator motor for single, constant RPM. I can’t emphasize how much easier and more efficient that makes everything, vs. having to engineer a huge power/rpm range that can handle a dynamic load.
They were a fantastic idea but:
- too many people never plugged them in, so you just have a slightly heavier ICE car
- they would have been a great transition to full EV, but full EVs are now functional enough for most people (we need to get the volume up to get the price down)
I suppose they’re still right for some people but generally it’s just Toyota looking back to do what they should have been doing ten years ago
I disagree. I have folks who are relatively well off, but can’t get an EV due to range anxiety.
And again, a tiny engine running constantly is still massively efficient if it’s done right.
-
7000lb all electrics
This idea overlaps the big truck mentality: most EVs are much lighter. The weight penalty averages only about 20% over an equivalent ICE, so the type of vehicle you get can be a much bigger impact. My EV is a mid sized SUV that may be the biggest car I’ve ever owned and it weighs 4,000 lbs. I’m not claiming it’s light, but it’s much better than you seem to think
Yeah that was a hyperbole.
Still, there is a weight penalty depending on how much range they try to squeeze in.
And I’m one of those people that gets super salty about ICE cars getting so heavy too, especially crossovers and city SUVs that everyone seems to run now. A small or mid sized SUV should not be 4,000lb with modern tech, ICE or not.
the price gap is slowly closing, esp if you take into account total cost of ownership. It agree that the upfront cost makes it out of reach for many people.
Really the biggest part of the price gap now seems to be volume. Not enough new cars to offset the R&D and bring prices down. Not enough new cars for there to be a healthy used car market. And especially not enough non-premium cars
The barrier in my Canadian city isn’t even purchase price, it’s that I cannot charge at my apartment
Its still very much a barrier for most of us poors
Yeah I get it
But what im trying to say is that you can get an EV for like 20k cad, but charging requires home ownership (1.1m average in this shithole country)
Ahhhhhh sorry i misunderstood. I stand corrected
Hybrids are more affordable than full electrics, and have some of the benefits… I have a Kia Sorento and its torque was enough to climb out of a pretty deep rut that would have required shifting into low4 on my dad’s 4x4… Plus it gets about 600 miles on a tank.
I’m with you that we need phev’s to bridge the infrastructure gap, but electric motors provide more torque at lower speeds without the need for gears.
Yes, and hybrids have that advantage too, that’s the point I was trying to get across…
Purchase price, higher maintenance costs (EVs eat tires due to the increased weight and higher torque), installation of charging infrastructure (some us need expense electrical service upgrades and added wiring; we don’t all have 200 amp panels and garages with 30 amp 240v service already wired in)
I’d love an EV, but I won’t be afforded Int one for a bit. And used ones, even if cheaper, will have massive battery degradation cutting range way down.
I always heard the concern about electrical service but wonder at the reality. A level 2 charger is the same as a stove circuit: do none of you have electric stoves? You don’t even need that: some people are fine with just an extension cord, some people need a “dryer outlet”, I have never come close to needing the level 2 charger: is it really important that my EV charges in a couple hours vs by morning?
Also, hasn’t 200a service been standard for new homes for a couple decades? If someone can afford an EV, they are much more likely to have a newer home so already have 200a service
Nope. Everything is gas. Range, water heater, dryer, and heat. The only 2 pole breaker I have is for central AC.
My house was built in the 1940s. 200 amp service didn’t become standard until the 80s.
I know level 1 charging is there (although I also only have one exterior outlet), ~3 miles per hour of charging is tight. I need to be plugged in at least 10 hours for just my commute.
And, yeah, you hit on the big problem. EVs are expensive and are only really accessible to those already at the upper end of the spectrum. Belief that gas engines are more powerful or have more instant torque is not what is keeping people from EVs, so the point Randall makes is pretty stupid.
Same here. House built in 1946, gas everything.
But I had a lucky start in a previous owner upgrading to 200a service …. Maybe to install central air? When I moved in, I got all gas appliances, but 20 years later, everything is coming up for replacement. Times have changed. Technology is changing. Our understanding of our impact on the environment is changing.
The timing is perfect.
- I replaced my old gas stove with induction, and a big rebate
- i have teens just starting to drive so I let them use my old Subaru and bought myself an EV, and a huge rebate
- I installed a level 2 charger, with a rebate
My furnace and AC are past their life expectancy and there are huge rebates on heat pumps ….
Only thing stopping me having one is cost.
Gas engines have decent range. Gas engines are cheaper (as the electric engine prices are artificially inflated, just look at Chinese prices), with gas engines you can listen to the sound of the engine to diagnose problems before they occur, batteries don’t degrade (you still have car batteries, but when they degrade, you can still drive a car for as long as with the new battery. You can refuel it in a couple of seconds. Anyone can make one sided arguments. There isn’t a best thing for everything.
Gas engine makes good noises. Checkmate.
This comic is clearly about lawn mowers people. Who discusses cars when wearing a hat like that?
Definitely stovetops
I do love how much torque my electric stove can put out while stopped
He is not wrong, but he is not adressing the actual criticism of electric vehicles, so it is kind of pointless.
It’s about the battery, nerd. 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄
Yeah but petrol cars go brum brum
Gasoline motors can be recharged in a couple of minutes.
My EV sits in the driveway and soaks up excess production from my PV setup.
My main problem is it’s never really empty enough.If I’m on the road, a high voltage DC charger gets me from 10% to 50% in about 10 minutes. Barely enough time for a coffee and a leak, then it’s another 2 hours of driving. Rinse, repeat.
Sure, you can’t barrel down the Autobahn for 10 hours straight without stopping but who wants that?
I make a 9-10 hour drive to see my family multiple times a year. I normally stop twice to get gas and use the bathroom, and that’s it. Sounds like you’d be adding most of an hour to my travel time each way. I’ve tried stopping longer and grabbing food, it’s not worth it for me.
With that said, I drive 25-40 miles a day the other 360+ days of the year, so it’d really make much more sense for me to have a short range EV and rent something for travel when I have too much luggage to fly.
Maybe don’t do that? Catch a train it’s significantly cheaper anyway.
No passenger rail. It’s car or a once a week bus that doesn’t even stop in the town my family lives in.
That’s an infrastructure problem you can help solve and regardless going on long trips for most people is 100% optional.
That would become a 15+ hour trip then…
Edit: On further investigation, it’s also not significantly cheaper than flying, and is much more expensive than fuel for driving.
But much better for the environment, sometimes others matter more and when more people use rail it’s more likely our country will catch up and build hyper train networks.
Sadly, yes. I live in Germany, and here you need a BahnCard50 (or better) for the train to be cheaper than the gas for driving.
you really ought to be stopping a few more times, i don’t understand how so many people are just completely fine with driving for 3 hours nonstop
You should just live near the place you’re driving to.
Oh my God, why didn’t I think of that! Simply have more money, thank you internet stranger. My problems are solved!
Well I just think you should live closer but that’s a great idea too. You should try that.
Real shit though, I can solve your problems. Just tell me what they are, I’ll give you my best answer.
I’m glad you think I can afford to triple my rent, but that’s not happening.
Edit: If you mean the road trip scenario, my family works in various different industries, and the opportunities are better in different cities. That’s also not happening.
who wants that?
I do. We have family that we visit a few times each year. If I leave at 2am and drive straight through, we get there in 7-8 hours. If I make the drive during the day, it takes 10-13 hours.
Sounds like you need a train. Not a car.
Sure. But first you need to build one that takes me there.
For various reasons a car is often better for that kinda trip
Some real examples that are specific to the trip I take:
There is no rail service that goes there. It would be a combo of trains and busses that takes significantly longer and costs more than the gas.
Our dog comes with us, generally isn’t allowed on mass transit, and the much longer trip would stress her out if she was.
There is little to no mass transit in the town they live in to get around once we arrive so we’d end up borrowing or renting a car anyway.
With limited amounts of time off, making the trip overnight adds a full day of getting to see our family to the trip.
The only other realistic means of getting there is flying but, I enjoy driving and hate everything about air travel. It’s a pretty cheap flight for one person but becomes more expensive once you add in the rest of the family and the dog can’t come.
Edit: formatting
I’m not wealthy enough for a PV setup.
And I love road trips. Some of the most beautiful areas of my country are 3000+ km from me.
My EV sits in the driveway and soaks up excess production from my PV setup.
Yeah EVs are a great solution for homeowners.
Sure, you can’t barrel down the Autobahn for 10 hours straight without stopping but who wants that?
As an Uber driver, I want that. I want to be able to gas my car back up and go back on he road and keep earning money.
Congrats your are not the market target for EVs then, guess what that doesn’t mean that the majority of the population isn’t though.
I plug my car in in seconds
Driving to work 110 miles a day meant I had to get gas once per week, driving out of my way, stopping to get gas cost me 500 minutes per year as opposed to the two seconds to plug in at home. Totally a no brainer. I HATED stopping for gas on the way home from work at 11 in the evening, or whatever hour really. I think of people tied to ICE engines the way people were tied to outhouses a hundred years ago.
And then wait an hour to get acceptable charge levels for range. Filling up at a gas station is much faster.
This is not to say electric vehicles aren’t a good idea, the charge rate and convenience while traveling are issues we need to improve on.
You can’t fill your gas tank at home while you sleep…
I’m not at home sleeping when I’m out traveling. I’m referring to multi hour or multi day drives. This is an extremely common use case where I live.
Also not everyone has access to a charger where they sleep.
I don’t need to
I hear this complaint a lot about charging times, but for 99.99% of people they are never in a single day going to drive beyond their cars range, meaning even a standard level 1 slow charger over night at home can manage their entire car usage.
It’s only people doing long distance road trips that have to worry, and that’s by far a minimum. Instead of boosting gas cars for that we could be looking at investing in rail so people don’t have to make the longer trips in a car anyway.
Not only that, people going on those long trips are going to be looking for something to eat in a similar time frame that their EV takes to fully discharge. It takes EVs about 15-20 minutes to get from 0-80% charge. That’s less time than it takes to sit down and eat at a restaurant
This is incredibly short sighted. I usually bring my own food on a long trip because I dislike stopping or buying crappy food. I eat while driving on long road trips because I have a schedule and want to get where I’m going. My gas car gets double the range of an electric car, so I’m stopping less often as well. I’m often in places where getting gas or food isn’t within an hour’s drive, and almost none of those places have the ability to charge a vehicle anyway.
Look, everyone has different use cases. I think electric cars for the in-city drive around town use case are great, and we should continue to encourage their use. I’m just saying that for wider adoption we’re going to have to solve the charge rate, range, and charger accessibility issues.
I rarely go inside restaurants to eat on a long trip. I grab a burger and wolf it down and go again. I eat the fries while I’m driving and they’re gone in an instant, and i’m still going.
Sounds like a you problem then
sounds like they have different priorities and values than you, is that intolerable?
And for about 50% of Americans, they don’t have a place to plug in an electric car at night. It’s only people above a certain level of wealth who have the luxury of their own parking space with a charger.
For the rest of us, we must take time out of our day to sit in a grocery store parking lot while the car charges.
EVs generally have adapters that allow you to plug into a standard home outlet, it’s just significantly slower to charge to full due to the lower amperages. And even if you only have 1 plug in your garage, it’s not hard or expensive to add more.
The only real hurdle for that is if you rent a house and aren’t allowed to make those easy changes
And even if you only have 1 plug in your garage, it’s not hard or expensive to add more.
Yeah this is losing the plot. I believe they’re talking about the tens of millions of Americans who don’t have private garages.
99.99% of people they are never in a single day going to drive beyond their cars range, meaning even a standard level 1 slow charger over night at home can manage their
You’re saying 1 in 10,000 people will never drive more than ~200 miles in a single day? What country is that statistic for? Source?
I love the idea of rail, but it doesn’t work in large spread out countries like where I live. Sure cities can be connected, and we should definitely do that, but the idea that I could get to all the natural and wild places I love in this beautiful country by taking mass transit is impossible.
The point is that, for most journeys, you just charge at home overnight. It’s rare to plug in and wait for it to charge. With petrol / gas, you always have to wait
*If you have a homecharger
It is faster to refuel your car with petrol.
A 120v standard Ac adapter is all you need for overnight charging, and I’m pretty sure those come with the cars.
Lv 1 charges are pretty shitty…takes my car about 12 minutes to get a mile-worth of charge on a 120v. I could still make it through a week of commuting doing that, but my range was a little lower each day until the weekend when I didn’t have to commute. That being said, I ponied up for a 220v outlet in the garage, and the Lv 2 charging is much better. Takes about 15 minutes to recharge from a days-worth of driving (usually 30-40 miles between work and running the kids around to all their activities).
How much did the 220 outlet and the L2 charger cost to put in? Was it a turnkey thing from an electrician or something or were you able to do it yourself?
“when you are empty, and you have to drive right away, its faster to refuel your car with petrol”
My relatives dont have a charger at home, they just plug their car into an outlet, and get ~40km range over night. That more than enough for the daily commute.
And my relatives don’t have personal parking spots.
Poor people’s time gets no respect, because the rules are made by rich people with tons of time conveniences and they just aren’t conscious of how the other half lives.
They ban our shopping bags, failing to realize that for someone with a car and a garage, a disposable plastic shopping bag doesn’t have much utility over re-usable bags, or dispsable paper bags. But for a person with no car and no garage, a disposable plastic shopping bag means they can carry like three in each hand and walk miles home in foul weather.
And if you want to just bring bags with you in advance, you gotta carry them with you all day.
It’s doable, don’t get me wrong. But it’s more of a hassle. And the amount of hassle that it adds is far greater for poor people.
I rent a car for Uber. I’m working up to buying a car, but until I do I have to rent. Uber has decreed that all rentals must be electrics. To save the planet. The electrics cost about $100 more per week to rent than the gas cars did, and as a poor person I can’t charge them at home because all I have is street parking.
This means that every day I work driving for Uber, I have to stop about once a day to charge the car. So that’s about $25 a day I’m losing to charge instead of refuel my vehicle, so $125 a week I’m losing and then the other $100 per week it costs because it’s a special car, I’m losing $225 per week due to this decision.
So I’m doing my part, but unwillingly. And I strongly, strongly suspect that the people who made this decision at Uber, that their contribution to climate action was going to come out of my cut, didn’t think the cut would be so big because they live in houses or in fancy apartment buildings with chargers.
I just feel like nobody talks about how time poor poor people are. We lack time just as much as we lack money, and when we get new rules imposed on us that take up more of our time to comply with, the people creating the rules don’t realize how must time it’s costing us, because their own lives are relatively time rich. Many of the forms of their wealth come in the form of time conveniences, and those change the equation. They think the electric car’s hassle consists of having to charge it occasionally on long trips, because they have a home charger.
Just across the board, we need to be aware of the time cost of these changes, and also to be aware that the time cost is often many times higher for poor people than it is for middle class people.
Overnight isn’t “right away”. “I have to get to y right away!” “Sure! I’ll just charge the car and you can leave tomorrow!”.
Listen, I’m not saying that EVs are shit but they are currently not my cup of tea. It’s just all this BS. Of course it’s faster to refuel a car with petrol than to charge a battery. Would you also deny that it’s faster for me to fill up a glass of water than you charging your phone? I ENVY the great fuel economy that EV owners get. This sucks for petrol cars.
Not at home it’s not. Where’s your back garden petrol station lol.
I don’t know what to do with you people… We both have 5km range left. You plug in the cable juice and I plug in the gas to refuel. Who leaves the station first?
Charged at home and never needed to stop. Ten mins down the road already. Go shout at clouds old man.
Wow. Awesome. Only takes a few seconds to plug it in. Good on ya bud
If you’re driving more than 300miles a day you’re just admitting your a much larger slice of the shitty pie.
This is a bit inaccurate. What about truck drivers? They are extra shitty then. But they wouldn’t be extra shitty if they didn’t deliver your Charmin to Costco for you to purchase.
Don’t blame the end-user, blame the system.
Short range point to point trucking (day trucking) is necessary, pretty much any other truckload is better taken by rail both faster and cheaper in countries other than the US because oil companies didn’t intentionally kneecap American rail.
Fuck you, I drive so other people don’t have to.
By being eager to gauge people’s location in “the shitty pie”, you’re just admitting your (sic) a much large slice of the shitty pie
That just isn’t true, you just said you could ride a train. You choose not to, that’s a big difference.
But saying rail is significantly slower you narrow your nationality to maybe 5 major nations one happens to be significantly more represented on Lemmy. The “need” to drive safe over reaction to the guess means I’m almost certainly correct. Am I not?
Tbf to the guy you’re responding to, getting the extra 2-3 days of PTO necessary to take the train may also be a contributing factor. There’s a hidden work reform issue baked into this that also needs addressing.
There absolutely is, the fact that most other major countries get 6 weeks mandatory minimum and we have zero mandatory minimum is crazy.
They said they’re an Uber driver…
An optional “profession” that steals money from qualified taxis and is also super abusive towards its employees. That’s not an excuse, that’s an explanation an kinda of a bad one at that.
An optional “profession” that steals money from qualified taxis
It’s not stealing if it doesn’t take it out of their wallet. Maybe the issue is instead the expensive restrictions on becoming a taxi driver? Or the virtual monopoly many taxi companies have. Or just that almost always a taxi is a worse experience.
That’s literally what it does. Taxis didn’t have monopoly, they have a licensed job specifically because unlicensed taxis were dangerous and people at the time were getting shanghaied.
If it’s not a concern for my phone, why should it be for my vehicle? It is so nice never having to go to a local gas station, when all I need to do is plug in at night
Why on earth do you get down votes? This is the truth. Downvoters just straw man argue pointing out that ‘just charge your car at home’, which isn’t the matter of discussion. There isn’t even a discussion to be had - it is faster to refuel a car than recharge. Might this matter to you? Maybe, maybe not.
If the car is recharged at home, you may never need to stop to add gas. Electric is the future bro, get over your hangups.
Charging the car at home is for middle class people and above, generally speaking. Not everyone gets to park their car next to an outlet.
You’re just using any scenario to claim the win. You’re generally speaking for the least likely group to have electric cars atm.
You can plug into the standard 120V outlet at home. You don’t require the high amp charging and the installment costs associated
… Again, not everyone parks their car next to sn outlet. Actually, I feel like probably most people don’t
So what? Doesn’t matter for most people
Electric cars is not the solution. Sure, it’s an improvement, but for a real solution you need to get people out of personal vehicles on onto public transportation. Trains, trams, busses, whatever. Build it in a way that doesn’t suck. Assuming american, the US had (past tense) amazing train/tram networks decades ago. Every warehouse had a rail spur, and since walking was considered ok people weren’t obese fatasses.
I drive a scooter. It is possible to live without a car, although it does have some difficulties sometimes. If your job is within 10 miles of your home or less, then you don’t need a car for your commute. If I can do it so can you. I’d still rather take a bus, if it existed.
Just came back from Tokyo. Tokyo’s public transportation is awesome. You do also need to walk a lot at times and the first few days our legs were quite sore. But towards the end of the trip I can feel my leg strength again, felt healthier, and did not miss my car at all. To go to certain places, you do have to plan a little bit ahead, for example, a day trip out to Mt. Fuji area requires booking tickets because right now there’s a ton of tourists. But within the city, the subways are so convenient.
I want an EV. I think its 98% the right choice for me. I also 100% with you. Cars are a terrible solution at a certain density, which is what most industry and thus where people live makes sense.
My job is within 10mi of my home. If I walk there, I get there in 2 hours. If I take public transportation, it takes me 1h45m to 2h20m depending on the day.
I also live in a community where our electricity is from 90% renewable resources, 10% nuclear. Switching to an electric car is a 100% reduction in carbon usage for my commute. Using the bus isn’t.
Why not get an electric bike then? Reasonable price tag, will get you to work within a reasonable timeframe, significantly less congestion on roads, and charges with that renewable energy without using a lot of it.
Also, their point was that adding infrastructure for public transport (aka improving the public transport you’re complaining about) will have a huge effect on reducing greenhouse gas emissions across a population and is more easily electrified. Your focus on an individual case is irrelevant to their argument.
Removed by mod
Because building non renewable power doesn’t have a carbon cost right? And buying a petrol powered car doesn’t have a carbon cost, right?
I’m talking about my commute. The carbon cost of driving to work from my home.
Don’t strawman if you want your argument to be taken seriously - because what I read above translates to
The issue with this stance is that it’s one of those all-or-nothing points of view. Sure it’s better to have good public transportation, but in a lot of places there won’t be for the foreseeable future. Sure it’s better to use bicycles, but sometimes it’s just not an option.
Electric cars won’t fix traffic, but for the planet they’re still a vast improvement. It’s like a viable 95% solution that is dismissed because there might a 100% one somewhere in the next 200 years.
The issue with this stance is that it’s one of those all-or-nothing points of view.
Not it isn’t. Every single individual person who decides to live without a car is an improvement. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing.
I think they were trying to say that every individual who uses their car less is an improvement.
I live outside Boston, which has among the best transit in the US but it doesn’t take me everywhere. My town is quite walkable but also hilly and with weather. I do choose to walk, or ride the train when I can, but I still need a car. Improving this enough for most prople to dispense with cars will be a very long time. In the meantime, my use of EV, walk, train is a huge improvement of my brother in the Midwest using ICE car for everything
I drive a scooter.
Friend and coworker of mine was recently in a deadly accident on her way to work on a scooter. Those vehicles are great but on a road that is still primarily built for cars (and is now inhabited by ever more massive giant pickups) it can be a serious safety risk.
you need to get people out of personal vehicles on onto public transportation
This is really the heart of it. It’s an infrastructure problem. Frustratingly, this is the most difficult and time consuming problem to solve.
I’ve lived in a city with really good transit, and even then, I’d prefer a car if it were affordable here.
TINY ELECTRIC GO CARTS
Idk why ppl are down voting this, bro is literally just advocating for public transportation
Ig it’s all the insecure pickup truck bros
Edit: typos
I think people (not me, I agree with glitchdx, overall) are probably down voting because it’s a classic example of letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, with a healthy dose of smug mixed in. Smugness is a great dialectical tactic if you hope to entrench people deeper into their views, rather than convince them to consider alternatives through reasoned discussion.
Do I agree that ideally we’d have robust public transit and increased usage of smaller, greener personal transport solutions? Of course I do.
But, incrementalism is progress. Valuable progress. We could argue whether it’s more likely to get us to the aforementioned vision of robust public transit or not, but history has proven time and time again that progress takes time and is resisted tooth and nail by monied interests. I don’t like it either. I want to wave a wand and have everything change. OP is right. Electric cars are not the solution. But treating symptoms while you work on curing the disease is best practice.
bro is literally just advocating for public transportation
Seems to me that bro is arguing against EVs when that may be the best choice in an individuals control. Even if we’re all for public transportation, that takes years and millions to improve, so EVs may be the best choice available for the time being
Not everyone lives where public transportation is really feasible. He’ll EVs aren’t even practical where I live.
So we shouldn’t bother with it anywhere then?
You’re missing the forest for the trees
I never said that, thanks for speaking for me I really appreciate it though. I am simply saying moving away from ICE just isn’t feasible everywhere right now.
From personal experience, you also need a garage to keep an electric car in if you’re in an extreme cold climate, those batteries can fail if in the deep cold for long enough and those car companies do NOT have the replacement parts in stock to fix it quickly.
