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

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

keck.usc.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 661 posts

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

#431

Post by cucumber3732842 »

alephnerd wrote: post #10
ares623 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just hope "dumb" EV's become a thing soon. I cannot and will not own a smart car any more I want to own a smart TV or smart fridge or smart toaster.

> I just hope "dumb" EV's become a thing soon What business case is there for a "dumb" EV? By using touchscreens and software for most functionality, you dramatically reduce your supply chain overhead and better enhance margins (instead of managing the supply chain for dozens of extruded buttons, now you manage the supply chain of a single LCD touchscreen). This was a major optimization that Chinese automotive manufa…

>Edit: Any answer that does not take COGS or Magins into account is moot.

Auto quality touch screes are not cheap. A high quality switch/button assembly is still cheaper for a give lifetime (100k, 200k, whatever), which is why it's what the 3rd world compact cars all use. The switches start losing when you start having a ton of different sets of features the car needs to support.

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

#432

Post by kristofferR »

flakeoil wrote: post #408
bruce511 wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both ICE and EV cars require a support infrastructure. As sales trends change, so the emphasis on support infrastructure changes, and that accelerates the trend. For example EVs depend on charging, so we're seeing more public charge points, as well as more home chargers, work chargers and so on. ICE depends on gas stations (which is the tip of the gasoline distribution industry.) It also depends on ICE mechanics. As…

> But 50 years from now most of that ICE infrastructure will have disappeared. I'm guessing it will be already in 20-30 years from now. In 5-10 years from now, no-one will buy an ICE vehicle. Add to those 10 years a lifetime of 10-20 years for the last sold ICE vehicle and you get 20-30 years. So 20-30 years from today there will not be many ICE cars rolling on the streets and most gas stations and other needed infra…

Half the US takes pride in pollution though, and despise efforts to reduce it, so that's not gonna be the case everywhere.

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

#433

Post by kristofferR »

didip wrote: post #73

Anyone can argue ICE vs EV all night long but there's only 1 metric I care about, in favor of EV: When I am going to take my son to school, he doesn't have to smell the gas and the fumes from the exhaust in the garage.

I live in Oslo, Norway, and it's insane how much more pleasant parking garages have become to use in the last 10 years.

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

#434

Post by buckle8017 »

mpyne wrote: post #178
crystal_revenge wrote: post #167

It's great to see a reduction in local pollution but it is worth remembering the electric vehicles ultimately have zero impact on climate change and petroleum consumption (which as continue to rise year-over-year). Oil not used in ICE cars is just used someplace else. Electric cars are great for the city/suburbs but don't really make a dent in the larger resource usage issues facing us.

> Oil not used in ICE cars is just used someplace else. That's simply not true. Oil used someplace else would have been used someplace else either way. There is a supply/demand effect where reduced oil demand would lower its price and therefore arrest the loss of oil demand from cars by other consumers of oil, but the net effect would still be that less oil is burned and used.

You're simply wrong.

Most of the world is priced out of purchasing oil.

When the price declines those people can (and do) buy the oil westerners aren't using.

But don't trust me, here's the data.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/fossil-fuel-primary-energ...

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

#435

Post by margalabargala »

loosescrews wrote: post #204
margalabargala wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> EVs can coast too EVs could coast if a manufacturer chose to make one that allowed that without shifting into neutral. In practice, when letting off the accelerator, existing EVs will instead regen brake.

The default setting just moves the coast point to a slightly depressed accelerator. This is because EVs typically have lower drag, so this behavior mimics a higher drag vehicle. If you use the accelerator to achieve the desired speed, you will coast when possible. You can also monitor the display to see the coast point. My 2013 plug in hybrid only supports this style of operation. Modern EVs have easy adjustment for…

The Hyundai/Kia EVs do not have a mode that only regens when pressing the brake. The best you can do is limit the car to 2kW of regen braking when not touching the accelerator. You can't disable it entirely.

It's true though that using this mode will extend the life of your tires.

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

#436

Post by stahtops »

margalabargala wrote: post #157
fafac wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The tires and their dust don't care whether you're braking by regen or friction. The reason there's more dust is from the increased weight of the EV not because of regen braking. You can coast in EV as well, that is not exclusive to ICE.

> The tires and their dust don't care whether you're braking by regen or friction. I'm aware. The point I'm making is that EVs apply more braking than ICE vehicles do, due to the specifics of the implementation of regen braking that all manufacturers have chosen. > You can coast in EV as well Not without literally putting it in neutral. If you just take your foot off the accelerator, any modern EV will apply some amo…

Plenty of ICE cars let you control the transmission, and not just MT. Engine braking is effectively the same as regen braking to tires.

Regen is lossy, so there’s no incentive in slowing down to capture 1W just to speed up and spend 1.1W

Porsche has modes for coast and regen. Applying brakes in coast mode will use regen up to a threshold and then use conventional pad/rotor.

So I am sorry to inform you that you’re just wrong.

There are EVs that can coast.

EVs are not braking more.

Whether you use conventional brakes, engine braking, or regen braking, it’s all the same to the tires.

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

#437

Post by grosswait »

_bent wrote: post #427
maxerickson wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The exhaust from a well functioning modern ICE is likely enough to have less pollutants than the air. Of course it still has carbon dioxide, but less other pollutants.

you still have tyre rubber, which is a major source of microplastics

And not a distinguishing factor of ICE vehicles

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

#438

Post by dijit »

maximus-decimus wrote: post #429
dijit wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

believe it when I see it. no car you can buy with this longevity tech, no phone either- same issue.

The Tesla Model S has been out for almost 13 years, so you can already see it. Your phone doesn't have liquid cooling temp management and is probably recharged daily. With a car that has 300 miles range, a lot of people probably only do a full cycle every week.

It was recently in the media that old Tesla’s are now worthless once the batteries are dead and that this is happening now.

Heres one such source but theres hundreds if you care to look: https://min.news/en/auto/2a2636e0ac962b5d94ee68babcd09a3d.ht...

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

#439

Post by margalabargala »

magicalhippo wrote: post #224
margalabargala wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The amount of engine braking applied by an automatic transmission ICE vehicle when you take your foot off the gas is an order of magnitude less than the regen braking applied when you take your foot off the accelerator on your Model 3. Here's a reference for you: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2023/07/elect...

First off, my Renault Megane e-Tech has paddles that allow me to change the regen strength on the fly. I use it actively when driving. But anyway, I find I drive differently with an EV. I don't let off the throttle unless I want to slow down. If I want to coast, I just reduce my throttle input to where its coasting.

Sure, lots of vehicles allow you to change the strength. Some allow you to set the regen very very low.

Generally they do not allow you to turn it off.

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

#440

Post by londons_explore »

idiotsecant wrote: post #404
londons_explore wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the fleet of EV's age, I'm sure we'll see equivalents... "The high voltage wires were just dragging on the street sparking, presumably with all the safety features disabled" "They were driving with a 10 gallon coolant tank on the roof, presumably because the coolant loop had a big leak and needed continuous topping up".

Unlikely. Many of these sensors are mostly CAN-based, rather than hardwired. It would be a time consuming enterprise to custom bake a solution for each vehicle model to fake out protection systems. For better or worse EVs are substantially more difficult to modify than typical ICE.

Only takes 1 person to make a "safety system faker: Makes car run even with faults" which is a $20 thing you can buy from aliexpress and can be clipped anywhere onto the canbus - just two wires to hook into.

It then runs code which auto detects the car model (fairly easy from the messages on the bus), and has a database of the messages to send/inhibit to change the behaviour in the desired way.

Because so many cars use electronics that are common across a whole manufacturer of cars - ie. all GM cars, or all cars with a Bosche ECU - there won't be awful lot of work making it compatible with hundreds of models of car.

Such devices already exist for faking data for engine tuning, and for faking 'zero faults, all monitors pass' to pass government tests.

Post reply on HN