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

521–530 of 661 posts

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

#521

Post by alephnerd »

MBCook wrote: post #68
pinnochio wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure what your point is when we're talking about cars, where fixed physical controls are demonstrably more usable and safer for drivers that need to keep their eyes on the road. Multiple manufacturers have pulled back from excessive touch controls (not just touchscreens, but capacitive buttons and sliders) and reinstated more traditional buttons and dials.

Physical controls and smart cars are not mutually exclusive. That’s why they’ve been fixing that. I agree that was an idiotic trend. But if someone wants a car without connectivity, it’s too late. The market is not strong enough to get rid of that. Most people either like it or don’t care enough to avoid it. Just like most people liked or didn’t care enough to avoid smart TVs. So that’s all you can buy.

^ This

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

#522

Post by Analemma_ »

HPsquared wrote: post #388
MBCook wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The number of ICE cars I get stuck behind from time to time that just REEK is amazing. I’m in a decently well off area too. Some putting off soot clouds, white smoke, nothing visible but clearly not doing complete combustion. Sometimes I wonder if half the cylinders are even working. I’ve heard one car like that is the equivalent of a surprisingly large number of modern ICE cars is in good shape. I love EVs. I’ve had…

I could see a single "bad" ICE car being the equivalent of 100 "good" ICE cars. Even the VW emissions scandal (where the cars were still functioning as designed, just not as well as they should) had instances where pollutants were 35x higher than they should be. So I could see an emissions deleted diesel (of which there are many, i.e. catalytic converter and DPF removed) could easily have more than 100x the usual emi…

I don’t have hard numbers on this, but I once read a claims that the lawnmowers and weed-whackers in California with their two-stroke engines are responsible for more nitrate and particulate emissions than all the cars and trucks in the state put together, even though by fuel burned the latter outnumbers the former by orders of magnitude. I could totally see a malfunctioning four-stroke ICE with dirty burns being worse than 100 maintained ones.

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

#523

Post by seanmcdirmid »

Analemma_ wrote: post #522
HPsquared wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could see a single "bad" ICE car being the equivalent of 100 "good" ICE cars. Even the VW emissions scandal (where the cars were still functioning as designed, just not as well as they should) had instances where pollutants were 35x higher than they should be. So I could see an emissions deleted diesel (of which there are many, i.e. catalytic converter and DPF removed) could easily have more than 100x the usual emi…

I don’t have hard numbers on this, but I once read a claims that the lawnmowers and weed-whackers in California with their two-stroke engines are responsible for more nitrate and particulate emissions than all the cars and trucks in the state put together, even though by fuel burned the latter outnumbers the former by orders of magnitude. I could totally see a malfunctioning four-stroke ICE with dirty burns being wor…

That probably explains why California banned the sale of gas powered leaf blowers, law mowers, and weed whackers in 2024. You can still use them if you have an old one or by one out of state.

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

#524

Post by melling »

flakeoil wrote: post #475
kristofferR wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

EVs are already cheaper to produce. That’s why the US has a 100% tariff on Chinese EVs.

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

#525

Post by eldaisfish »

mattlondon wrote: post #205
eldaisfish wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why do you want your car to contact emergency services? the people around you can do that just fine and very reliably. How on earth did we survive as a species before our cars could make automated phone calls?

There's often been a few cases of "disappeared" people who went missing and it turns out they actually crashed off the road somewhere and weren't found for a week or two. That's extreme of course but there are probably a lot of accidents that happen in low-density rural country areas or late at night when there aren't many people around. The automatic e-call from the car gives exact GPS coordinates and severity of th…

right, but airbags, seatbelts, etc. are not internet connected. That's the critical distinction. I do not want the risks that come with my car connecting to the internet.

A much more reasonable ask would be for your car's systems to use your phone to place a call to emergency services. I absolutely do not want yet another internet connected device in my life, especially one like a car, where examples exist of hackers being able to disable the electronics remotely.

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

#526

Post by raydev »

imo The final hurdle for mass adoption is solving the refueling planning problem.

I was in the market for a new car in 2024. Thought seriously about a few electric options but opted for another ICE vehicle because 2025/2026 are years of many road trips, and the issue that kept coming up for me was "can I just pull off any random highway and refill my car in a few minutes?"

Unfortunately for the environment I guess, I prefer not being forced to strictly plan my trips around distance and availability and speed of chargers. I can go pretty much anywhere in North America and be reasonably certain there's a gas station just off any highway, let alone an interstate.

"Oh, do the kids need to use the bathroom ASAP? Might as well fill up a quarter tank while we're there" opportunities would also vanish.

And even if charging stations were magically placed across the country to match gas stations, there'd still be the "time to charge" problem.

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

#527

Post by CraigJPerry »

pirate787 wrote: post #442
grosswait wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And not a distinguishing factor of ICE vehicles

EV have far more tire wear because they are heavier and also probably from regenerative braking

>> EV have far more tire wear because they are heavier

Is this true?

If an EV were 30% heavier than an ICE, would it produce 30% more tyre wear emissions? Or would it produce more or less than 30%? Is the primary factor in tyre wear weight and is the relationship linear?

The types of tyres appear to be quite different, the EVs seem to have smaller contact patches (narrower wheels) and they're made of different "less grippy" compounds that drag less. Does this change the equation at all?

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

#528

Post by Rygian »

margalabargala wrote: post #441
Rygian wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People driving an EV learn, in a matter of minutes, to coast by just applying the right amount of pressure on the "gas" pedal.

They learn to sort of coast. The car feels like it's coasting. Sure. Next time you do this keep an eye on the actual power readout. See if it's actually zero or if it's reporting ~3kW of braking or accelerating.

It hovers depending on how my foot modulates the speed. I don't want or need "exactly zero power readout", I only need to reach my target speed at my target spot on the highway, without having to action the physical brakes at any time.

Whether that is more or less efficient than a zero-power coast followed by some kind of braking exactly at the end... I assume the difference is so tiny that it makes no difference.

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

#529

Post by iambateman »

raydev wrote: post #526

imo The final hurdle for mass adoption is solving the refueling planning problem. I was in the market for a new car in 2024. Thought seriously about a few electric options but opted for another ICE vehicle because 2025/2026 are years of many road trips, and the issue that kept coming up for me was "can I just pull off any random highway and refill my car in a few minutes?" Unfortunately for the environment I guess, I…

This is becoming less of an issue, but there’s no question it’s a barrier.

To be honest, the bigger barrier I see is around political will to charge the true social cost of gasoline.

Some nonprofits think the true cost of burning gas is $10-15/gallon. If filling up with gas cost $250 and charging an EV was 85% cheaper, I’d be willing to wait 30 minutes for an occasional charge.

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

#530

Post by hvb2 »

raydev wrote: post #526

imo The final hurdle for mass adoption is solving the refueling planning problem. I was in the market for a new car in 2024. Thought seriously about a few electric options but opted for another ICE vehicle because 2025/2026 are years of many road trips, and the issue that kept coming up for me was "can I just pull off any random highway and refill my car in a few minutes?" Unfortunately for the environment I guess, I…

Not sure what age your kids are, but if they're below 10 I can guarantee you that your kids will be slowing you down, bit the car. Kids need to use the bathroom would be filling up the battery well over 25% if it wasn't almost full.

The one thing people that have never owned an EV seem to miss is the benefits that you get to experience every day.

No gearbox, so seamless acceleration. No maintenance on, spark plugs, timing belts, gearbox. No oil changes. A quieter ride, especially nice on a road trip.

Post reply on HN