this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2023
35 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

7307 readers
575 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


πŸ’΅ Finance, Shopping, Sales


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Sales targets meant to ensure automakers ramp up EV production to keep up with demand, says source

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 year ago (3 children)

We've still got to contend with the horrible environmental effects of tire dust - EV or ICE.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And the urban sprawl from car dependancy, the salting of the roads, stormwater run off from roads, the wasted urban space that is massive surface parking lots, and noise pollution from the tires. EVs solve very few problems related to cars.

[–] OminousOrange@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's really the biggest issue that's unfortunately not at the forefront. Sure, EVs are much more energy efficient and therefore less polluting in the form of fossil fuel burn, but the way we travel is incredibly inefficient given the available technologies. Our country was literally built on the railroad, yet there is very little reasonable passenger rail alternatives in much of the country.

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

EVs are much more energy efficient

Isn't the lifetime difference something like 30% better than ICE? It's definitely better, but it isn't significantly better.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Turns out bringing 3000+ pounds of steel with you everywhere you go is ineffecient regardless how it is powered.

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

I've heard cars described as metal overcoats. People slap them on for the slightest reason.

[–] OminousOrange@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'll use my two, similar sized cars as an example (Subaru Outback and Hyundai Ioniq 5). Typical driving gets me around 8 L/100km in the Outback and 20 kWh/100km in the Ioniq. This NRCan site gives a conversion factor of 8.9 kWh/L of gasoline.

So, the Ioniq, at 20 kWh/100km is then about 72% more efficient than the Subaru at its equivalent 71.2 kWh/100km.

Even when considering lifetime emissions, EVs still have roughly 50% less emissions than ICE vehicles.

However, going back to my original point, person vehicles are still incredibly inefficient overall, given the potential alternatives.

[–] mp3@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Is there any notable development on that front?

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago

Trains? Trains are great - and buses produce a lot less tire dust per passenger.

[–] psvrh@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago

Building communities that are walkable? I mean, we could try that, but it wouldn't make rich people richer.

[–] Mossheart@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

One crisis at a time PLEASE. Affordable EVs first, THEN flying cars.

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Trains. Trains are the solution.

The answer has been right in front of us the entire time!