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

471–480 of 661 posts

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

#471

Post by paulryanrogers »

IngvarLynn wrote: post #465
princevegeta89 wrote: post #3

No surprises. No matter how we look at it, EVs are much friendlier and safer to the environment. Some people argue the source of electricty can be contested against because that involves fossil fuel burning again, but in today's world we are rapidly moving away from it and towards nuclear/hydel/wind methods for generating power. I hope ICE cars completely become a thing of the past in the next couple of decades to co…

I'm all for EVs, but half of PM10 pollution is independent of engine type as it comes from brake and tire wear: http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JR... So direct environment impact is still huge for EVs and calling them ZEV is literally a scam.

Don't EVs use resistive breaking to recharge their batteries? I would hope that reduces particle emissions.

Though I suppose that EVs and hybrids are heavier than similar gas powered counterparts, so tire wear is worse. At least until EVs can be made lighter.

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

#472

Post by paulryanrogers »

ErroneousBosh wrote: post #378
princevegeta89 wrote: post #3

No surprises. No matter how we look at it, EVs are much friendlier and safer to the environment. Some people argue the source of electricty can be contested against because that involves fossil fuel burning again, but in today's world we are rapidly moving away from it and towards nuclear/hydel/wind methods for generating power. I hope ICE cars completely become a thing of the past in the next couple of decades to co…

We're still burning massive amounts of fossil fuels as waste products from refining oil to make plastics and chemical feedstocks. A huge amount of that is propane that just gets flared off. We could have been running cars on that for decades, but getting people to make their dirty polluting inefficient old petrol cars run on fuel that emits carbon dioxide and water with no HC, CO, SOx, NOx, or particulates was nowher…

Compressed propane is explosive, more so than liquid gasoline or batteries. Though batteries do burn hot and are hard to extinguish.

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

#473

Post by SideburnsOfDoom »

ako wrote: post #274
dijit wrote: post #256

The real scandal isn’t just battery degradation… it’s that manufacturers have zero incentive to solve it. Your car becoming worthless after a decade suits them down to the ground. Battery swapping changes the game entirely. Imagine a national network of exchange stations (co-located with existing petrol infrastructure, you can use the overhead canopy for solar). Standard pack sizes scaled by vehicle class: compact ca…

So you don't think the free market will force manufactures to compete on better batteries? I always thought the benefit of the free market was that it forced companies to compete on product quality... /s

The USA's ICE auto industry has been bailed out twice (in 2008 and 1979) and is currently protected from imports.

What free market?

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

#474

Post by flakeoil »

bluGill wrote: post #447
flakeoil wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

The average car is 12 years old (us, but other countries are similar). so gas stations are likely still common in 20 years. in 10 years new gas stations will be built a lot less often, but nobody will close an existing one that they wouldn't close anyway.

I mentionedf a lifetime of 10-20 years for a car. So 20 lifetime and 10 years from now is when the last ICE car is sold that makes 30 years from now there will be basically no ICE cars circulating.

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

#475

Post by flakeoil »

kristofferR wrote: post #432
flakeoil wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

In the US, money talks. I believe EV cars will be much cheaper to produce than ICE cars in 10 years from now. They will also have lower maintenance costs, better performance and lower energy costs. So there will be no reason to buy an ICE car over an EV in 10 years from now.

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

#476

Post by vel0city »

cbeach wrote: post #279
DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hope ICE cars completely become a thing of the past in the next couple of decades to come. for this to happen the EVs depreciation needs to drastically improve compared to ICE. I don't see this. On top of this EVs tend to push ideas from Software/Tech companies, such as recurring revenues (because the underlying technology lends itself to it better). Personally I'm unsure that this will be accepted by all consume…

Public transport will never recreate the freedom of car ownership. It’s a collectivist dream not rooted in reality.

You know what would make me more free? Being able to just walk and bike to all the places I want to go, and not have to pay car insurance and the energy cost and the high upfront cost or a loan to buy a giant chunk of metal every time I need a loaf of bread.

You know what would make my kids more free? If they could just play outside without the giant death machines flying by with their operators looking at their phones well over the speed limit.

I'm trapped in a world where I need to spend a good chunk of my life in a cage just to work and eat, and you call that "freedom".

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

#478

Post by vel0city »

itsprobablyok wrote: post #336
jodrellblank wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rarely in everyday life situations do I feel as claustrophobic as being in a car in traffic in a typical road. Can’t change direction (one lane no junctions), can’t change speed (vehicles in front and behind), can’t stop (flow of traffic), can’t break concentration (driving), can’t change body position (car cabin is tiny, seats and hand/feet controls are fixed, no space to stand), can’t look away for more than a mome…

[flagged]

> Buddy, the world is a bigger place than the 4 square miles around your downtown studio

I live in a suburb. There's a bus stop outside my door. It connects me to 1,100 square miles of service area. The busses and trains also have bike racks so it expands the area even more. It connects me to multiple international airports with one offering non-stop flights all around the world.

I could be on the other side of the planet in a day without having to get in my car.

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

#480

Post by HPsquared »

cucumber3732842 wrote: post #413
dietr1ch wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I think is missing today is a way to challenge someone else's car. A few independent reports should force an early checkup, and if passed soon after the accusation, the accusers should get their own just to have something at stake.

It's missing because letting the minority of Karens harass everyone like that would cause the political will for the inspection programs to evaporate instantly. Second, places with high touch governments already lose out on business due to registration arbitrage. Your proposal would dump gas on that fire.

A functioning bureaucracy can handle false reports. If someone has a habit of making false reports, they'd be ignored or even punished themselves.
Post reply on HN