Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The electric car as a talisman of false hope

jussipasanen.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 338 posts

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#191

Post by localhost »

magduf wrote: post #173
localhost wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real problem, as the author tangentially points out, is our over-reliance on cars to move us around. That’s due to the intentional choices that we have all made. If you look at the structure of suburban areas of cities in the US, you’ll immediately see that they are entirely designed the assumption of the existence of a personal car for YOU. You simply cannot get around without one. A choice that I’m grappling wi…

>A choice that I’m grappling with personally (as someone who lives in the suburbs in the US and owns two Teslas) is that I should really move somewhere more sustainable, i.e., more density so that I can get rid of my cars. That’s more difficult given family needs etc. If I didn’t have to factor others’ needs, I would have done this already. This is exactly what I'm planning to do. However, for most Americans, it isn'…

I haven’t ruled out emigrating from America either. I follow modacitylife[1] on Twitter, and love the cycling centric culture in that small city just outside of The Hague.

I like the design of that city more than, say Manhattan, which is another candidate.

[1] https://twitter.com/modacitylife

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#192

Post by magduf »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #186
magduf wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, there is: if you get in a collision with a large vehicle in a really tiny one, you're going to die. So you need a larger vehicle that can make a crash survivable. Basically, it's an arms race.

Clearly fewer folks are buying into that. The day of the 1970's 25-foot land cruiser are waning. The Ford Focus is now king.

The Ford Focus is still a 3000-pound car these days. Even "economy" cars these days are rather heavy, and you'd be surprised how little those 70s cars weighed. Old Mustangs are positively lightweight. While the land boats are mostly gone, cars in general have gotten larger and especially heavier, even with lightweight technologies and materials used to offset the increase.

The way I read it, the OP was talking about people needing to drive micro-cars (e.g., ones that can only hold 2 people, like the micro-cars that are only sold in Japan). Those cars would fare very poorly in a crash against just about any typical car (let alone SUV) on an American road.

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#193

Post by magduf »

yellowapple wrote: post #184
magduf wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Planning for any rail line, then constructing, takes over a decade. Even in the environmentalist San Francisco Bay Area. Try a google of “Van Ness BRT” to get a sense for how slow infrastructure projects work. That's a uniquely American problem. Maybe America should fix itself so it doesn't take so long to build infrastructure.

Well unfortunately, fixing America will take far more time and effort than even outright abolishing ICEs and transitioning every automobile-driving American to electric vehicles (let alone let the market do its thing, given that the advantages of ICE relative to electric are rapidly evaporating). So, you know, why not push for the latter in the meantime while we work toward the former?

I'm not even talking about abolishing ICEs or anything like that. I'm just talking about fixing whatever political problems cause America to take literally decades to build a single bridge or other infrastructure, when other industrialized nations get it done in a small fraction of the time and cost.

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#194

Post by theworld572 »

addicted wrote: post #142
theworld572 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So whats the alternative? Do nothing at all? If you have $100k left to pay on your mortgage, and somebody offers you $5k towards the mortgage are you going to tell them they're offering you a "false hope because you'd still have $95k left to pay"? EDIT: This is also known as the "nirvana fallacy": because the solution is not perfect - that means it is worthless. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy

That’s not what the original author of the article is claiming from how I read it. He’s claiming that sure, take the 5k, but don’t let that fool you into believing you’re done. You still have to plan on finding the other 95k.

Sure but who is denying that you don't need to pay the other 95k? The article is arguing against a straw man. Nobody is saying that electric cars will be the end-all solution to climate change. Literally no one.

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#195

Post by yellowapple »

localhost wrote: post #155
Barrin92 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't make a real difference, and the author is correct about it. If you drive towards a wall and you're accelerating and all you're doing is slowing the rate of acceleration you're still going to run into the wall at terminal velocity. The author correctly points out that the total increase in car usage, mostly conventional engines is going to offset the small dent that electric cars make, and that cars themsel…

The real problem, as the author tangentially points out, is our over-reliance on cars to move us around. That’s due to the intentional choices that we have all made. If you look at the structure of suburban areas of cities in the US, you’ll immediately see that they are entirely designed the assumption of the existence of a personal car for YOU. You simply cannot get around without one. A choice that I’m grappling wi…

> The real problem, as the author tangentially points out, is our over-reliance on cars to move us around.

And the author fails to explain why (in the context of climate change) that's actually a problem. Suburban areas have a disproportionate carbon footprint specifically because of ICE-powered cars being required to go anywhere; if those ICE cars become electric cars, and that electricity comes from solar/wind/nuclear/hydro/geothermal/etc., then... where, exactly, is the carbon footprint?

Hell, at that point the suburban areas could actually be net carbon sinks, given there's more room for big carbon-devouring trees in between single-family/duplex/quadruplex homes than there typically is between skyscrapers packed as tightly as possible (as is the norm in even small cities, let alone large ones).

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#196

Post by JoeAltmaier »

magduf wrote: post #192
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly fewer folks are buying into that. The day of the 1970's 25-foot land cruiser are waning. The Ford Focus is now king.

The Ford Focus is still a 3000-pound car these days. Even "economy" cars these days are rather heavy, and you'd be surprised how little those 70s cars weighed. Old Mustangs are positively lightweight. While the land boats are mostly gone, cars in general have gotten larger and especially heavier, even with lightweight technologies and materials used to offset the increase. The way I read it, the OP was talking about…

Just like a bicycle. Which are also booming. And which are also dangerous to ride on the road with any car.

The argument I was addressing was, if its really an arms race, then no way we would go from the 4800lb Ford Thunderbird to the 2600lb Ford Focus in a generation.

Folks have by and large opted out of the arms race. For better and for worse.

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#197

Post by whenanother »

rpmisms wrote: post #183
dragontamer wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Senators use the DC Metro and Stock Market traders in NYC use their subway. Big Subway systems in big cities are pretty famous for seeing executives in suits and celebrities sit in the same bus as beggars. > ill gotten gains That's... quite an assumption you're making there. Sure, some execs are assholes. But most true wealth is driven through cooperation.

I think he's making the morally dubious jump to say that corporate profits are immoral.

nothing wrong with corporate profits. the problem lies when a corporation is being used as a money laundering and tax evasion scheme. and a boogie man that wealthy people hide behind.

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#198

Post by yellowapple »

dTal wrote: post #98
acidburnNSA wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. Consider using the term "low-carbon energy" in place of "renewable energy". We want to promote the right stuff. Biofuel is considered renewable but is high carbon. Nuclear fusion would be low carbon but not considered renewable. The difference matters hugely for future energy policy.

Biofuel is carbon-neutral because the carbon comes from the atmosphere. It's fine to burn it because its emissions have already been bought and paid for in its creaion. The problem with carbon is digging it up, in an open cycle. Renewable is a more strict term than carbon-neutral, it's true, but all "renewables" are by definition closed-loop and hence carbon-neutral.

Okay, but the problem we're trying to solve is the carbon being in the atmosphere, so even biofuel is objectively far worse than, say, solar.

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#199

Post by usrusr »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #186
magduf wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, there is: if you get in a collision with a large vehicle in a really tiny one, you're going to die. So you need a larger vehicle that can make a crash survivable. Basically, it's an arms race.

Clearly fewer folks are buying into that. The day of the 1970's 25-foot land cruiser are waning. The Ford Focus is now king.

> The Ford Focus is now king.

The Ford F150 wishes to disagree.

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#200

Post by yellowapple »

new2628 wrote: post #74
Al-Khwarizmi wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a textbook example of false dilemma fallacy. Replacing ICE cars with electric cars doesn't preclude other environmental measures, and in fact, people who worry about their car's emissions tend to be people who worry about other environmental issues as well.

..it surely precludes the environmental measure of not having a car.

And what exactly is that impact? The author never specified; just asserted "cars are bad because reasons" and left it at that.
Post reply on HN