361–370 of 465 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"It pays off to avoid this: more mileage, marginally lower charging expense, lower cost on brake maintenance and fewer complaints from passengers." Regen braking wears the hell out of your battery. That few hundred you saved on brake changes just cost you a tens of thousands of dollars on a premature battery replacement.
Source for your ridiculous claim?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting historia I saw. A bus schedule for Geary st from 1924. Buses came every few minutes and took less time than it takes by car today. Just saying electric cars not a panacea for everything.
Yeah, but Geary St. is close to downtown in a fairly large city. At that point, you can argue about whether you'd still want to own a car for casual trips outside the city. But you could survive without one. But I can't walk anywhere from where I live (well, except down to the river in the woods) and there's no real transit system at all. If I couldn't drive, I'd have to relocate.
I wonder if this will spur mandatory regenerative braking in all cars, eventually, as a means of reducing pollutants?
You can gear down in a manual transmission ICE to achieve similar reduction effects, but I doubt they will bring back manuals.
On the latest model year, which is a hybrid, the paddles control regenerative braking instead.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
E-bikes are unusable at this time of year. It needs to stand stably on it's own to not kill me the instant some ice appears (so, four wheels) and have an enclosed cabin to stop frostbite.
Dress warm, studded tires. People are so averse to any non ideal weather for cycling. Texas, Arizona and Nevada people say it's too hot, West coasters say too much rain, other places say snow and ice. All excuses that can be solved by better personal preparation mixed with safer better maintained cycling infrastructure. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhx-26GfCBU
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe, but that still isn’t solving the root of the problem. There are a ton of ways in which cars harm us — exhaust, brake dust, tire dust, etc. The only actual solution is to reduce car usage.
Why can't we have both? Until we do convince uncle Jack and his friends to stop voting for things against humanity, at least those things could be made less harmful
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have a newer automatic ICE and they use cylinder deactivation for engine braking on low speed coasting.
Isn't cylinder deactivation for when you are at constant speed at low throttle?
Therefore, the engine keeps running, but there is no combustion.
You can see your live fuel consumption go to 0 when you lift the gas pedal on a modern ICE car.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"natural latex rubber" Worldwide switch-over will destroy forest ecosystems in Malaysia, Indonesia and Africa and more to replace it with Rubber tree plantations.
Did you read the links I posted? They can be made from dandelions. More info can be found in this previous thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37727040 Personally I would love to see a world of 100% transit, bicycles, walking, etc., but let’s be realistic. As long as we’ve got cars, we might as well try to do as much as we can to reduce the amount of pollution they generate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>astroturf Is the much greater weight of EVs not worse for tire and road wear?
Road wear? Not really. Tire wear? In the strictest sense, yes. But keep in mind, a lot of those studies measured "ev" tire wear by throwing a bunch of weight into the trunk of a gas car. Not exactly the same thing. Holistically, particle emissions from EVs are lower than gas powered cars due to reduced breaking (even above hybrids) and reduced exhaust. At the end of the day, the vast vast vast majority of road wear a…
EV vehicle weight definitely moves some needles in the wrong direction.
A Toyota Corolla weighs about 3,000, the Tesla model 3 weighs 3,500-4,000 depending on which model you buy. So a 16-33% increase in vehicle weight.
A Corolla will do 8.1 x 10^13 'damage points' A light model 3, 1.5 x10^14 'damage points' And a heavy model 3, 2.6x10^14
So moving to EV vehicles would move the damage done by the average commuter by an order of magnitude.
There are of course much heavier vehicles on the road as well, such as a standard empty garbage truck weights around 33k pounds and will do 1.2 x 10^18 damage points. So significantly more wear per mile traveled, but there are also far more vehicle miles traveled by those lighter class vehicles as well.
EV are probably still a net positive, but the real solution is to stop designing our cities and transportation systems exclusively around low occupancy vehicles. Walking, biking, and transit, also need to.be options for getting around.