this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2023
97 points (97.1% liked)

Memes

44922 readers
2682 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 45 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] McScience@discuss.online 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

Or just be me, WFH and never leave the house

[–] Pheonixdown@lemm.ee 5 points 11 months ago

If only employers cared. It has been nice, now my employer is rolling out a arbitrary but mandatory 4 days return to office policy. In like 8 years of employment I never needed to be there that much. Whatever, 100% remote job market looks decent for me, hopefully find a better place soon.

[–] agoseris@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

I mean, you still need to leave the house for groceries and other stuff

[–] frezik@midwest.social 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Most of the criticisms that come from the right are solvable problems, such as lack of chargers, electricity coming from dirty sources, or lithium mining. We pretty much know how to solve all those at this point. Just a matter of doing it.

Criticisms that come from the left tend to be more fundamental. Things like car-based cities being too spread out, infrastructure costs spiraling out of control, or having the average person operate a 2 ton vehicle at speeds over 60mph and expecting this to be safe. None of those are specific to EVs, and are only solvable by looking at different transportation options.

[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 3 points 11 months ago

But solving problems costs money! We need to be transferring those dollars to our wealthy donors, not spending them on public improvements!

[–] Goodtoknow@lemmy.ca 4 points 11 months ago (3 children)

People don't want to change the status quo or inconvenience themselves slightly in any way for the greater good. People want a magic drop in replacement that magically "fixes/solves" the environmental crisis and allows life to continue on as is. (So they don't have to take "yucky" public transit)

What really needs to be known though is life has to somewhat drastically change so we can make the world a healthier place for generations to come in the future.

[–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You're being downvoted because you're right. I've had people argue that EVs still aren't a good alternative because they may require a bit more effort every once in a while. Like, charging for 30 minutes at a charger on a long road trip vs just gassing up. Other than that they are pretty much a drop in alternative and people still balk at them.

Then trying to get them to use public transit instead? Doesn't even matter if it's more convenient, they're stuck in their ways and will refuse to change ever.

Get out of your ruts people. Just because "this is the way things are" doesn't mean it's the best way. Ffs the amount of midwesterners who come to my city to visit and think we're being "unsafe" by using the train, just get out of your mindsets.

[–] Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net 2 points 11 months ago

get out of your ruts

But thinking critically is hard and I'm lazy!

[–] johnthedoe@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I tell people yes do get an EV for your next car. But also use this chance to really think about if you need the car at all. Or does every adult in the household need a car each. Our city is trash for everyone having to own a car.

Best is to run your car to the ground. Then get an EV if you must own a car.

[–] drdalek13@lemmy.ml 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

If I could guarantee that my job is remote forever, or have it written in my contract, I would sell my car.

[–] johnthedoe@lemmy.ml 2 points 11 months ago

I live a short bike ride away from the shops. I have some side bags for the ebike I built so lugging groceries isn’t too much of an issue.

The biggest shift is learning you wouldn’t shop the same way you do with a car. With a car you go to a big supermarket and load up a trolley. Spend over a hundred for a week’s worth and drive home. With a bike you kinda just buy as needed for the next couple days. You do more trips throughout the week which is kinda nice too. Forces you to get out of the house more. Benefit I realised when doing this was vegetables were less likely to just die out in the fridge since I bought as needed. Which meant I spent a little less overall.

[–] RushingSquirrel@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago

Do you have access to food, stores, etc using public transport? How do you go about buying stuff and bringing it back home?

[–] Lintson@aussie.zone 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Unfortunately mass transit that works for everyone is the enemy of vehicle manufacturers.

[–] Titan@beehaw.org 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

And the rich. They need to differentiate themselves somehow from the poor

[–] django@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Optional first class for higher price could be used for this.

[–] Titan@beehaw.org 1 points 10 months ago

That's a good idea

[–] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I'm entertained by the fact that everyone gets hung up on how EVs are still not totally green because the electricity comes from coal fired plants or that there's still manufacturing emissions and stuff....

It's like, yeah, but compared to an ICE car, which has all the same problems (environmental cost of manufacturing the vehicle, mining and refining the fuel, transporting it, etc) but EVs don't actively pollute nearly as much during use, and they speak as if these are of equal environmental cost, and they're not. Additionally, ICE vehicles need a lot more oil to operate that needs to be changed and disposed of every few thousand miles.

It's like doing less harm isn't valuable to the people arguing against it, but then again, those are probably the same people who drive their V8 truck to get groceries.

[–] vithigar@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Plus there are plenty of people, like myself, who live in areas where the electricity comes from mostly renewable sources.

[–] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago

Me too. I'm pretty well surrounded by nuclear and hydro-electric here in southern Ontario.

[–] pingveno@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago

Also, charging from the electrical grid means EV's immediately get future improvements in CO2 usage when the grid improves its mix of power sources.

[–] KeenFlame@feddit.nu 1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

That argument will be thrown at every god damn step we make towards a better planet. It's not valid.

[–] drkt@feddit.dk 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Electric cars will not save the planet. Electric cars will save the car industry.

[–] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

But they're a whole lot better for the planet than gas cars. And cars won't go away till we make alternatives. Which we should do as quickly as possible, but will still take a while.

[–] drkt@feddit.dk 1 points 11 months ago

It's not good enough. Cars are a bigger problem than their immediately obvious issues like pollution.

[–] Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The problem is that the real way to cut down on emissions would be to accept that not every good can be available at any time and that's a bitter pill to swallow.

We have tuna caught in South America, hauled to Thailand for canning and hauled back to the US to be sold. Turns more profit than local catches because the megacorporations can save a couple bucks on worker salaries. And that is just an example, it's not just the food industry, hauling shit to hell and back and back to hell and back is common practice.

[–] Fogle@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Doesn't even have to be unavailable at times. They could can it in north America if they wanted to. Outsourcing jobs (read: exploiting foreign countries and their workers) should be heavily taxed if not banned in most industries

[–] arlaerion@lemmy.ml 0 points 11 months ago

You mean exploiting, right? :)

[–] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago

EVs are basically cars, but more expensive.

[–] Nioxic@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Public transport is awesome..

It just doesnt always go where everyone needs to go

Bikes are great right until you have to do large grocery shopping or get to a place far away.

I cant do without a car where i live.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You live in a place designed around cars, that's the problem. Society worked fine without cars for a good long while. We could have adopted trains, bikes, and buses without the car and things would be going swimmingly. The idea is to fix our bad town planning so that it's reasonable to get to any destination using any mode if transportation.

[–] Polar@lemmy.ca -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You live in a place designed around cars, that’s the problem.

Exactly. Then Europeans downvote people who say they need a car, because their country/city/state/whatever has terrible planning or public transit.

Not my fault I need a car. Stop blaming me. I didn't design the city. I didn't plan where the public transit will go.

Do you really think I love paying $1200+ per year for insurance, $120+ per week for fuel, and $20,000-80,000 for a new vehicle when mine borks itself?

[–] greenmarty@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

I partially agree but you forget that every country = its people and people can either not give a crap or start complaining. Politics are same everywhere, they want to secure their position, so they will follow those who are heard. Otherwise they will follow their own interests.

[–] Polar@lemmy.ca 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

It's not as easy as people complaining, though. What are people going to do? Move to a city in 2500KM away in the next province over, because that province has slightly better infrastructure?

No, they'll complain, nothing will be done, and they'll stay where they are because they have friends, family, and a job here.

I understand that it's easier to do in a lot of European countries, but I can literally drive for over 25 straight hours, and still be in my province in Canada. It's nearly impossible to do any kind of proper public transit, and it's not feasible to move over it.

[–] HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Canada really stifled its non-car mobility when it basically cut all intercity rail service after WWII though, especially for the interior and west coast. We used to have a pretty good train network for getting between nearby cities like Calgary and Edmonton, Calgary and Vancouver, Kelowna and Vancouver, and even Victoria and Nanimo. We don't even have a proper Vancouver to Abbotsford commuter rail despite them being right next to each other. There were obviously even longer routes like Toronto to Vancouver but that can't really compete with planes so no real surprise they went (I don't count that one Via Rail tourist service as a proper Vancouver-Toronto line). Pretty much the only remaining part of Canada with decent intercity rail is on the Toronto Ottawa Montreal corridor, and it does get decent ridership because of it.

Also, within many Canadian metro areas, which if you live in one you'll most likely stay inside of it for the vast majority of your daily travels, you could actually reasonably live without a car depending on where exactly you live and what you have to do. I for one live in the Vancouver area and don't own a car. I take the bus and metro almost everywhere, and on the rare occasion I need to go somewhere that's straight up without public transit access I just take an Uber or something. I think the fact that many of the largest Canadian cities are investing now more than ever in building more public transit, and those projects are more often than not praised by residents with high ridership to back it up is a sign that there is a high demand for non-car travel at least within urban areas. And even for smaller towns, the infrastructure is already there for good bus services like most small towns in Europe have, and if we want to go beyond that and upgrade particularly high demand routes, streetcars and tram-trains are also tried and true options for lower density urban areas. Canada even had plenty of streetcars before we decided to rip them up.

I get that this doesn't really help people in rural or remote Canada but if we can work to reduce the need for cars in a city, where the majority of people live, that's still a win and sets a precedent for future transit expansion into lower density areas. Non-car dependency isn't an all or nothing deal for the entire country.

Obviously there are many challenges to Canadians finding car free alternatives. If you're in a situation where you do need to own a car, then you need to own a car, and you shouldn't feel bad for that. But I think that simply saying that there is no other way in Canada or that we're just hopeless and doomed to car dependency forever due to our population density is missing a lot.

I will also recommend the YouTube channel RMTransit for really good Canadian public transit content.

[–] CrowAirbrush@lemm.ee 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yeah but everyone "needs" an e bike nowadays, which compared to regular bikes is another step back.

[–] sour@feddit.de 0 points 11 months ago

If it makes the difference between someone using a bike and not using a bike, it's still a step forward.

[–] sub_ubi@lemmy.ml -1 points 11 months ago

Yes, we should tax ev owners so we can afford more sustainable infrastructure