this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2024
750 points (96.8% liked)
Technology
60106 readers
2325 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If there's a systemic reason Tesla drivers have more accidents in a Tesla than drivers of other cars, that car is inherently less safe.
You can't simply put it down to "Tesla drivers suck", that's irresponsible and flawed logic.
If it's the acceleration, maybe we shouldn't have cars that accelerate the way a Tesla can. But I very much doubt that is the reason except anecdotally. I suspect more that safety features may in fact serve to distract, or people "learn" to rely on them, and than they turn out to not be 100% reliable.
We've all heard the weird tendency of Tesla breaking for no reason, that is hazard, also the turn signals are placed wrong, causing them to be impractical in some situations like roundabouts. Also the instrumentation in general of a Tesla is centered very much around the touch screen, another source of potential distraction. AFAIK even the speedometer isn't placed where it should be to observe it quickly without looking away from the road for too long.
A lot of inherent safety feature in traditional cars, have been shaved away in Tesla cars. Even getting out in an emergency can be a problem, as the handles may fail because they are electric, and the "real" handles are hidden.
There a dozens of examples where Tesla is designed for less safety than traditional cars, and if (when) the safety features fail, I bet they are a lot less safe than if those features weren't there to begin with.
Tesla cars are designed with a VERY strong focus on reducing production cost, Elon Musk is even boasting about it, and how he has an uncompromising goal to simplify production. But Tesla also lack the experience about why things are like they are in traditional cars.
The systemic reason might just simply be "They were the kind of a person that would buy a Tesla".
If I wanted to buy a safe car to drive responsibly while respecting all the traffic rules, an EV with almost a thousand horses with a 0-60 time of 2.1-2.4 seconds wouldn't exactly be my first choice.
If you want a more environmentally friendly car, which would you prefer: A Tesla or a Prius?
A lot of Tesla cars were sold when there were very few to no alternatives if you wanted an EV.
Also 2.1-2.4 is not normal for a Tesla. That's the very fastest of them.
Prius. Teslas are way too large and heavy for my tastes.
Though preferably I'd swap my VW Up to an electric one, they were too expensive back when I got mine.
As for the acceleration figure, I took it from this review:
We have had an e-UP for 3 years. We have ended up driving more in that than in our "primary" car which is a Golf. Had an ID5 as a loaner once, and it was great to get our UP back instead. If only the ID3 could tow our 1200kg caravan, that would be an ideal replacement for the Golf some day. Most electric cars are too large and heavy for my taste as well.
Tesla seems to me like a performance car that's sold as a luxury car. I think a lot of drivers bought it when they might not be able to handle them. Anecdotally, I remember my mom spinning out at a light years ago after she bought a used luxury vehicle that was actually a powerhouse.
That being said, your points are more then valid and user error is at most a small part of the equation.
Neither. Consumption isn’t environmentally friendly, it’s liberal greenwashing from leaders who think we can continue to consume infinite resources on a finite planet.
That's bullshit. EU has halved pollution and energy consumption since 1985, don't tell me it doesn't make a difference to work towards sustainability.
The raw materials don’t grow on trees and aren’t renewable. EVs are a fantasy solution that doesn’t actually solve the problem. The batteries are full of rare earth metals and toxic as fuck.
The problem is consumption itself, but rich Europeans such as yourself pat yourself on the back for being so virtuous when really all you’re doing is replacing one kind of pollution (dead dinosaurs) for another (rare earth metals).
And as we’ve seen with environmental regulations for shipping, now that the ships burn cleaner fuel there’s less pollution, which means less particles for sunlight to reflect off of in the air leading to faster global warming. An unexpected negative side effect of reducing pollution.
Then there’s the freedom issues with EVs. They’re expensive as hell, you can’t work on them yourself or with an independent mechanic, and they can get bricked remotely whether by bad software update, because you missed your payment that month, or a cyber attack. Sorry but if they can brick my $500 phone with a software update there’s no way in fucking hell im allowing these tech companies access to a $25k car. The capitalists will find a way for planned obsolescence so this way the line forever goes up.
Fuck that I’ll take the ICE with minimal computer bullshit in it everyday. My 2013 Subaru Impreza with 230k miles on it is more environmentally friendly than buying some stupid new EV for $50k that I don’t have. Keeping an efficient ICE car on the road for as long as it will drive is more efficient than trading it in for any EV. Raw materials don’t grow on trees.
100 companies produce 70% of the worlds pollution (not including the US military which is the largest single polluter in the world) fuck this EV and no plastic straws or bags bullshit. It’s not on individuals. Capitalism itself needs to be fucking overthrown if we have any chance of stopping climate change. And it’s already likely too late - the time to overthrow was in the 90s and people tried. A whole lot of leftist groups in the US got thrown life in prison as “terrorists” for it. ELF and ALF.
Batteries can be repurposed and recycled, and new batteries are free of rare earth metals.
https://thenextweb.com/news/the-cobalt-free-electric-vehicle-batteries-are-here
The newer LFP (Lithium Phosphate) batteries already widely in use do NOT use rare earth minerals, and are better than older batteries.
Old fashioned car battery uses lead, and is heavily regulated in EU, and is recycled. The new LFP batteries will probably rid os this use of lead.
Although I do agree with some of your other points, I don't see any of them really relating to the better sustainability of an EV over an ICE. I also don't see an argument against working towards better sustainability.
“Recycling” at least in America is its own form of greenwashing.
https://www.npr.org/2022/10/24/1131131088/recycling-plastic-is-practically-impossible-and-the-problem-is-getting-worse
The only thing I know of that actually gets recycled is aluminum.
You've been listening to a lot of anti EV propaganda.
This myth has been thoroughly debunked multiple times, even from official sources:
https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths
No even if a Tesla drives on pure coal based electricity it's still slightly cleaner. Because powerplants are more efficient than a car engine and don't idle, and the emissions are more efficiently treated from a powerplant. This is also when accounting for transportation and charging of the electricity, but without accounting for the waste when producing and transporting the fuel to suit an iCE car. So there is a healthy margin in favor of EV and PHEV. So even when driving a Tesla in say Poland which is the most coal heavy country in EU, an EV still pollute less than an ICE car. When you drive it in for instance Denmark, France Sweden, the EV pollute less than a fourth of an ICE car.
Yeah an economy ICE is obviously not as bad as a NON economy. For more than half a century, We've had the option to mandate "economy fuel consumption" on cars, but haven't done so. I agree that that's a failure of policy.
I am convinced it’s the acceleration. Also because you have that ability, it influences you to take risks in traffic (eg. Pulling out of a stopped lane) that you might not take in an ICE car because you can’t hit a high scored fast enough. They opened Pandora’s box by making every family car a Porsche.
I haven't noticed that at all for Tesla, and I did absolutely notice with BMW and AUDI for many years. Not so much driving fast, as driving like assholes. Yes an EV often starts quicker at a read light, but I've never seen anything wild here that I recall, and we have a lot of Tesla and other EV cars here now (Denmark).
But to be honest, it may be different here, because ICE cars are generally manual, which is way more fun to drive. With A Tesla you just press the speeder like an Automatic. It just responds faster. But a Tesla can also be driven for comfort, and it seems to me that's what just about everybody does here.
Luxury car owners are rich so they behave like the privileged assholes they tend to be.
This killed a billionaire a few months ago… maybe not such a bad feature