Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

They’ve just moved the pollution out of the gentrified areas that can afford to purchase EVs at scale. Which was part of the initial goal when pushing for this insanity, as the plebs were polluting with the air of the much better off by using their 20-years old clunkers (or at least that was the discourse here in Europe). Mission about to be accomplished, those plebs now can take the bus if they still want mobility.

And wouldn't you say that when a comment is made in bad faith, or misrepresents (deliberately or not) a major component of its argument, that it adds little to the discussion?

It's all well and good to have high-minded ideals of pure intellectual discussion, but in the real world, there are many people who are coming into the comments with a strong political agenda in mind, and are both willing and able to make disingenuous and bad-faith comments to support that agenda.

Presenting the increased tire dust of heavier vehicles as being an exclusive property of EVs—a bright-line differentiator between them and ICE cars—is disingenuous and misrepresents the facts. I think it's reasonable to say that makes it "add little to the discussion".

Even if we still make a mess I think centralization of the mess is better than distributing it - what I mean is that polluting cities where millions sleep, eat, drink and breathe will probably be worse, net effect, than containing energy pollution to select places.

Running EVs in densely populated regions is probably a lot better for the population on the whole even if the net pollution would stay the same, IMO.

Still no EV is even better, but we’ve created a world where transport is often required so, one step at a time I guess.

It is a horrible setup that the manufacturers would much rather sell you a new car than a new battery.

We saw this play out with phones. We used to have easily swappable batteries. And since battery chemistry was (and hopefully still is and will continue) improving, by the time you actually swapped the battery there were ones around with a higher capacity than the battery the phone shipped with. And typically for little money.

Now everything is glued and messy to swap so the manufacturer can sell you a battery swap for much much more money than it used to cost.

I believe cars should have swappable somewhat standardized batteries. Even if not swappable by the user, it should not be a more than 1h job at the mechanic (ANY mechanic, not just the manufacturer).

Imagine picking a car and not caring about battery at all. You want a Tesla but BYD batteries are better - so get a Tesla without a Battery and put a BYD one it it. Or maybe Tesla has the best batteries right now, so you get that. And once you have to swap the battery, you again just pick the best manufacturer at the time - who might not even be a car manufacturer at all but rather someone specialized in batteries exclusively.

And since hopefully 10 years have passed since you bought the last battery, chemistry has improved so you pick from options that are all (hopefully a lot) better than the battery you had initially.

We could have some proper competition where manufacturers would have to compete on pricing and performance.

But car manufacturers don't care. They want as much of your money as they can get. And opening their cars to third party batteries and not keeping up as many walls as they can is the opposite of that.

So until forced by regulation every manufacturer will continue to put batteries in their cars that only they themselves will sell and put a slightly different one in every car. So guess what, even if you swap your battery in 10 years, they will sell you the same battery you can buy right now. Because the newer stuff is for new cars only and compatible with your car.

[flagged]