The electric car as a talisman of false hope

Post by Denzel » Sat, Aug 17, 2019, 3:12 AM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #87

Denzel wrote: post #13

His argument distills to: solve it all-at-once, or don’t solve it at all. This is an uninteresting and uninspiring line of thinking that ignores the nature of socially dynamic systems which don’t exist in a world of instantaneous cause-and-effect. His conclusion states that electric cars make a difference, but they don’t make a real difference: “I do think they can slightly reduce unsustainability” but “by switching…

That's a pretty uncharitable reading of TFA. My take-away is this: if we use the electric car as a way to persuade ourselves that our 'way of life' is safe if only we all switched to electric vehicles then we are ignoring the elephant in the room: it is our way of life that is the problem, not how we transport ourselves.

  if we use the electric car as a way to persuade ourselves
  that our 'way of life' is safe if only we all switched to
  electric vehicles then we are ignoring the elephant in
  the room

Post by agumonkey » Sat, Aug 17, 2019, 6:33 PM UTC

buboard wrote: post #216

agumonkey wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The worst part about it IMO is traffic light and stops. In a city, if you can drive around 20mph (25 maybe) uninterrupted, you get in most places very fast, very pleasantly and with fuel savings since you never slow down. Instead of a smooth flow, you get drivers that do: - high accelerations - nervous braking - idle engine running between 30 - 60 seconds (120 max?) Pure waste. Maybe I'm asking for a problem too comp…

Try roundabouts. In certain cities, they work really great.

Post by dTal » Sat, Aug 17, 2019, 6:44 PM UTC

yellowapple wrote: post #198

dTal wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Post by magduf » Mon, Aug 19, 2019, 2:11 PM UTC

yyyk wrote: post #317

magduf wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're cherry-picking counter-examples. No developed country, overall, has the infrastructural problems that America has. America just canceled its high-speed rail in California, yet Japan is already working on a maglev train scheduled for completion in 2027, and China already has one between Beijing and Shanghai. Japan's Shinkansen has been operating since the 1960s, has had zero accidents in all that time, and has…

I did mention UK's HS2, so not all airports. Speaking of cherry picking, I think that referring to high-speed passenger train alone is an example thereof, especially as it ignores the large and successful American fright train infrastructure. California made the mistake of being too ambitious, a more modest plan from the start would have worked.