this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2023
525 points (70.8% liked)

Memes

45891 readers
2275 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
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 153 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (39 children)

Electric cars don't solve every problem with private vehicle ownership but they're certainly a step in the right direction. Most EVs average an equivalent of more than 100mpg versus most ICEs, which are around 30-40. You can also power an EV with renewable resources. This isn't possible with ICEs (yes, I know you can power certain diesels with biofuel, but it's horribly inefficient).

"Buying a new car is worse than keeping an old one" is an incredibly situational phrase that has a million exceptions for so many people.

[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 50 points 1 year ago

Buying a new car is worse than keeping an old one

Also, what do you think happens to your car when you replace it with an electric car? Do most people just drive their old cars into the ocean when they upgrade?

load more comments (38 replies)
[–] bitsplease@lemmy.ml 133 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Remember kids, if you're not solving climate change entirely in one single step, there's no point in trying.

Seriously, what a brain dead argument lol

[–] PilferJynx@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Plus, ev's keep the pollution out of the cities and places we tend to live in.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] CaptPretentious@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think it's under the premise of, of you have a functional car. It you got rid of that and bought an electric, you aren't helping anything.

https://youtu.be/MQLbakWESkw?si=IGV7CRjQslRSI-er

[–] Tak@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 year ago

There's a lot wrong with this video as most videos on EVs from 2016. The data is sources for electricity production is actually over a decade old now (Sep 2013) and it rationalizes that the electric cars will break down before the grid ever moves towards greener sources. This is a very silly notion considering solar is straining the grid with too much power at times, times where EVs could charge. They can also charge over night encouraging nuclear power to be more financially feasible as nuclear relies on a base load as they don't like to turn off.

They're not a silver bullet and in some cases like the Hummer EV they are worse than an old car but if you have to drive a lot it is completely less carbon intensive than an ICE for most EVs.

Here's a still pretty old but more nuanced video: https://piped.video/watch?v=6RhtiPefVzM

The greenest car is a train car.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] winterayars@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Every car on the road being converted to electric with magic wouldn't fix climate change. If you didn't also get trucks and SUVs it may not even move the needle Personal car use is not a major cause of climate change. It just doesn't matter compared to industrial and commercial emissions.

[–] bitsplease@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Of course it won't fix climate change in one go, but doing so would remove a major fossil fuel dependency for your average Joe and make them much more likely to vote against fossil fuels.

Put another way, how many people driving gas cars would vote in favor of heavy taxes on fossil fuel use?

Now, how many would vote that way if they personally didn't have any dependencies on fossil fuels?

Also, highway vehicles account for 1.5 billion tons of GHGs being emitted each year, that's 11% of the global yearly GHG emissions, so yeah, it definetely would "move the needle". In the US specifically it's as much as 20% of our nations emissions.

And yeah I already know the next argument "bUt YoUr JuSt UsInG fOsSiL fUeLs To ChArGe It" - except you're not necessarily, in my area (part of CA), you can choose to have 100% of your electricity provided by renewable sources for a small monthly premium ($18/month). Additionally in CA, all new homes are being built with solar power, which further increases your ability to charge without fossil fuels.

And in the areas that isn't true, it's at least getting groundwork laid down to make it true. An electric car can be powered by renewable energy, a fossil fuel car must be powered by fossil fuels.

There are a lot of steps to solving climate change beyond "buy an electric car", and you're right that industrial and commercial pollution accounts for the majority, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be pushing on all fronts.

We've already waited way too long to act, we can't afford as a species to say "well, I'm not going to change my car until the industrial polluters get their shit together", we have to push in Every possible direction, all at the same time to make progress, and electric cars overtaking fossil fuel cars is a big part of that.

There's a lot of work to be done globally until electric cars are 100% green, both in terms of power infrastructure and the processes to create them, but there's no way forward with gas cars, so we need to start moving over as a society now, phasing out the production of gas cars with electric

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 114 points 1 year ago (5 children)

We will never consumer our way of of a problem capitalism created. And public transit is nearly always a better solution to spending on car infrastructure.

... but... If you're gonna buy a new car anyway, they have the potential to cause less climate impact (although they're still environmentally devastating in other ways). As power generation becomes cleaner, so too do the cars. ICE cars are already about as environmentally friendly as they're gonna get, but EVs still have a lot of potential improvement (both in emissions and in things like material mining).

Although the tire microplastics is gonna get worse.

[–] GenesisJones@lemmy.world 51 points 1 year ago (14 children)

They already do cause less of an impact than ICE powered cars. Anyone can Google the information that shows that even though battery production is unclean, fossil fuel production over the life of a car is worse.

If the EV last for more than about 5 years, it was worth it.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 103 points 1 year ago (17 children)

This post is fucking idiotic. Without electric cars climate change CANNOT be addressed.

Nothing is ever as simple as a single solution. Mouth breathing OPs need to get that through their thick stupid skulls

[–] Sunfoil@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Without electric VEHICLES* climate change cannot be addressed. Expensive new electric cars are not the solution. Electric public transport, retrofitting old vehicles, making current vehicles last, and people adopting two wheeled electric solutions will be the solution. Cars like Teslas are awful and buying one shouldn't be considered making a difference.

[–] SkyNTP@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago (10 children)

The things you mentioned should absolutely happen in the areas that have the population density to make these solutions practical. Let's also remember that this is not 100% of the planet.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] ThunderWhiskers@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Afraid you're wasting your breath. OP appears to be a member of fuckcars, which feels like it's coming from a good place but is mostly just short-sighted and infantile. I live in DFW and not having a vehicle is not an option, but these folk would classify me alongside the devil because I dare to use a combustion engine. If I could realistically use an electric vehicle I would.

I'm sure that in OPs mind everyone should just abandon their cars tomorrow and that will immediately solve all of the climate change as if private vehicle owners are the ones actually causing the problem in the first place.

[–] rexxit@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Fuckcars is made up of people with little life experience who think they have all the answers, and people who fetishize city living and think it's normal or healthy for humans to live at a density like NYC (and fuck you if you disagree). They're oversimplifying to the point of meaninglessness, and handwaving away the problems.

[–] Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I've lived in places far less dense than NYC with robust public transit far better than NYC. Owning a car would've just been a burden 99% of the time. And it was certainly healthier than living in car-centric suburbs, both physically and mentally. Not everywhere is America where we can't fathom anything but cars and McMansions

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago (6 children)

This post is fucking idiotic. Without electric cars climate change CANNOT be addressed

I mean, that's not true at all..... America would just have to build actual public transportation. We just attach a feeling of personal freedom to cars that's so prevalent that Americans cannot fathom the idea of expanding public transportation.

And yes, of course public transportation isn't going to reach everyone in rural America. However, if a significant portion of the urban/suburban population switched to electric rail, it would curb climate change faster than everyone slowly replacing their personal vehicles.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
[–] Borkingheck@lemmy.world 68 points 1 year ago (4 children)

This is a terrible arguement. It has the premise that all ice are going to be scrapped at once and we will just make a bazillion electric cars. It's a phase out thing.

Also quieter cars and no tailpipe emissions are fantastic.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] DingoBilly@lemmy.world 55 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Huh? This is just flat out wrong.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 8 points 1 year ago (5 children)

It's not entirely wrong, public transit is better

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] FARTYSHARTBLAST@kbin.social 44 points 1 year ago (7 children)
[–] Custoslibera@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

The bicycle is one of humans greatest achievements.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] UFODivebomb@programming.dev 42 points 1 year ago

Double overly reductionist takes with no positive contribution. Congrats! This is crap.

[–] spauldo@lemmy.ml 41 points 1 year ago (25 children)

Guess I'll keep pouring lead additive into my '65 Galaxie, then. Woo! 10 miles per gallon!

load more comments (25 replies)
[–] Colour_me_triggered@lemm.ee 26 points 1 year ago (6 children)

In countries that generate almost all of their electricity from renewables, they are better tbh. Although more environmentally damaging to produce.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] hoshikarakitaridia@sh.itjust.works 24 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Well it's a two start program.

  • All of the citizens buy an electric vehicle
  • The government produces clean energy

So it shifts the responsibility onto the government.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 18 points 1 year ago

It isn't.

But staying on fossil fuels is even worse. And by a lot.

[–] Poxlox@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Remember, 100 companies are responsible for 71% of global emissions.

[–] rexxit@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I feel like this point is missing the big picture: people create the demand, and companies supply what the market demands. Like or hate "the free market", this is essentially what it is. If there were magically 1/10th the number of humans on the planet, we would expect those companies to have 90% less emissions. It's not that some of these companies aren't bad actors, and have actions that are at times immoral, it's that they are amoral actors in a market economy that is only responsive to consumer demand.

The example I like to give is that companies' race to the bottom on quality. They're responding to human behavior, where if an item on Amazon is $6, and another very similar item is 10 cents cheaper, the cheaper item will sell 100x more. This is a brutal, cutthroat example of human behavior and market forces. It leads to shitty products because consumers are more responsive to price and find it hard to distinguish quality, so the market supplies superficially-passable junk at the lowest possible price and (with robust competition) the lowest possible profit margin.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] OppositeOfOxymoron@infosec.pub 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

My electric car was manufactured ONCE. It's powered by 99% green power (hydroelectric). It burns no gas/diesel, requires no oil changes. I intend on keeping it for 15+ years (my last vehicle got to 16 years before the electrical system fried).

It is better by literally every measure short of walking everywhere.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] superfes@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well, the carbon footprint calculator I used may not be accurate, but for the same mileage on my car vs an electric car is about 1/2 the carbon... and I assume the electric car's footprint decreases even more over time...

Certainly, electric cars aren't solving all the problems, but reducing my carbon footprint by 1/2 over a 10 year period sounds like a pretty good start.

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

No one ever addresses the national security aspect either. OPEC can’t fuck with the economy as easily with electronic cars and trucks.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Bwaz@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If they're made instead of making fossil fuel vehicles, they do (addressing the cartoon, not the barely related added title) . Cars will still be made as many become no longer repairable. Which kind to build? Yes, better to make more electric buses and trains, but cars wont simply vanish in any scenario.

[–] thepiguy@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

Recently my parents got a car for emergency situations (like dropping my sister to school when busses are cancelled and she can't bike because of rain). And when I did the research for a car with them, I realised just how good cars with sub 1L engines are (3-4l per 100km in the city). Sure, they are not gonna be fast, but they are still faster than the speed limit of 120km/h on our highways here. I am personally hoping to buy a rx8 or a na miata soon for enthusiast reasons. Modern transport should be 100% public.

Edit: grammar and spelling

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Ranger@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Economical retrofit kits for legacy vehicles would help reduce manufacturing pollution & reduce vehicle emissions, if carbine free electricity production is increased.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] mvirts@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Yeah but they're way more fun to drive

load more comments
view more: next ›