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

581–590 of 661 posts

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

#581

Post by with »

m463 wrote: post #159
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…

Speaking of smells.... One good thing about driving an EV is that weird oil or hot coolant smells are from someone else's car (and not a problem with your car) (although yes technically many EVs have coolant loops)

I’ve driven an EV for 5 years now, and I still occasionally think it’s something wrong with my car, instinctively lol

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

#582

Post by coderenegade »

TheCapeGreek wrote: post #206
nine_k wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say that putting off sooth clouds is a way to sequester carbon (which obviously failed to burn). Such over-enriched fuel mixes must generate much more CO though, and I wonder if those who "tune" their cars like so take care about the catalytic converter :(

I know in some car tuning circles, or even just blue collar Joes in some places, will recommend removing the catalytic converter. Supposedly it makes the car use less fuel at the cost of worse emissions, and can make it sound better for those who care about that.

Depending on the type of catalytic converter, both of those things can be true.

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

#583

Post by cbeach »

vel0city wrote: post #476
cbeach wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 phon…

You’re free to live in some dense urban environment where amenities are a five min walk away, and everyone relies on underground trains, busses and taxis.

If you think “freedom” means not having a car, then there are options for you.

I moved out of a dense urban public-transport-and-cycling environment into a countryside town with heaps of space, and where everyone happily owns cars to give them the freedom to go wherever they like, whenever they like, taking family and cargo with them, without issue.

I would never go back to the urban environment, waiting around for public transport, being limited to the routes served by public transport, useless cycle lanes everywhere (what good is a bike when I need to transport my 3 year old, 6 year old, and all our shopping?). And the stifling density of housing and amenities was oppressive and unpleasant.

There is a better way. Move to countryside town, buy an EV that cost negligible amounts to run, cases negligible local pollution, and is a joy to own.

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

#584

Post by kfarr »

cyberax wrote: post #563
kfarr wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Walking and biking environments result in ghettoes" I must admit this viewpoint is one I have never seen before! Instead I've heard many arguments that bike lanes and pedestrianization are forms of gentrification, but resulting "ghettoes?" +1 for creativity!

Yes? Bikes are an incredibly segregating means of transport. They are inherently limited in range, and they are largely incompatible with any other transit mode. So you create an environment where all the housing within bike range from good jobs is unaffordable for most people. And the most democratic mode of transport? Cars. They provide far greater accessibility.

So you're saying that bicycles have caused our land use patterns to be inequitable? I would say I agree that transportation modes have made land use allocations in western society problematic, but again you are very novel in being the first person I've ever met who attributes those issues to people riding bicycles.

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

#585

Post by mittensc »

trimethylpurine wrote: post #578
mittensc wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm an expert in the field and I can say EVs are much less pollutant then ICE cars. Do give your best shot to debunk that.

Even where they are charged using coal? Please provide the research on that. Note that I'll be checking who funded and who performed the peer review, so please choose carefully before posting.

How would you put coal in EV?! They're electric, you plug them in!

You provide the research to prove ICE is cleaner.

Go in detail, I'll check everything:

- cost of extraction

- cost of byproducts

- cost of refining

- waste during refining

- cost of transporting oil to the pump (what do oil transport ships burn?)

- cost of burning that oil

- analysis on car age affecting emissions

- analysis of cheating like volkswagen

- full analysis of ICE car manufacturing

- Cost of wars to give us oil

- cost of weaponry needed to make oil producers behave and sell it at a decent price

- cost of aircraft carriers positioned around the world to enforce that.

- health cost of breathing in fumes.

- total cost of lead poisoning done by ICE cars until it was forbidden.

- health costs of noxes from diesel cars.

- costs of cars with dpf off or cat converter removed or just bad engines.

- Environmental impact of shale oil and water aquifers destruction and earthquakes.

- (reserve the right to add more after you provide the above)

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

#586

Post by stephenr »

sagarm wrote: post #574
stephenr wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's that got to do with reversing cameras?

Dual screens. One for infotainment, including the backup camera, the other for the dash. Have you never seen a newer model car?

I feel like you're deliberately missing the point.

You don't need them to have a reversing camera. Literally millions of cars over the past 2 decades have perfectly fine reversing cameras using the screen of a regular double-DIN deck (or fold out single-DIN deck).

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

#587

Post by Der_Einzige »

Aurornis wrote: post #462
Der_Einzige wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know a LOT of people personally who swap their exhaust in and out just for emissions inspections. That's the meta.

The internet classic “I know a lot of people” does not substitute for your original “A lot of Americans” claim You’re describing your small friend group, not Americans in general.

You got ratioed. I’m way up in upvotes from Americans who know that I’m right and you’re wrong! Na na na na na na!

Sometimes the plural of anecdote really is data.

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

#588

Post by apatheticonion »

renewiltord wrote: post #143
apatheticonion wrote: post #11

Having spent a significant amount of time in Bangkok - the city center (and many urban hubs) is an amazing walkable place with pedestrian walkways suspended above major roads, lots of frequent public transit (metro, skytrain) that honestly makes my home city of Sydney feel like a developing country. The only downside is that traffic creates a lot of pollution, and the engine noise (not honking, there's very little of…

Western countries will never match the new East Asian cities. All cities decay as the residents begin to oppose change. All residents begin to oppose change as they age and become wealthier. So whatever you become before the population gets rich is what you will remain. There will be no new fast subway in San Francisco and there will be no maglev in NYC. There will be no autonomous buses in Sydney and London will be…

Not advocating for autocracies, there's something to be said about the relationship between building essential infrastructure and the ability to ignore NIMBYs.

Bangkok just built a new metro line and are currently developing a high speed train from Malaysia to Vietnam, which would eventually lead to a train from Singapore to China.

Australia can't even build a functioning train to the outer city suburbs, let alone between major cities

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

#589

Post by rikima_ »

yanhangyhy wrote: post #78

i moved to beijing in 2015.. and i have to buy a air purifier, prepare masks for winter. pepople talks about air polutions so much, it feels like we are struggle, not living a life. i remember one day, it was so bad, i have to wear gas mask to go outisde, i know it's rare, and people are staring, but yes, its that hard. it's 2026 now, you barely see bad days in Beijing, most people wear mask only for the flu, not for…

And the air conditions in Chengdu and Chongqing are getting worse with the recent smog making the headlines, despite also one of the highest EV adoption rates in western China. Being able to mandate factory shutdown surely helps for Beijing, but is unfortunately not the case in other chinese cities

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

#590

Post by cyberax »

kfarr wrote: post #584
cyberax wrote: post #563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes? Bikes are an incredibly segregating means of transport. They are inherently limited in range, and they are largely incompatible with any other transit mode. So you create an environment where all the housing within bike range from good jobs is unaffordable for most people. And the most democratic mode of transport? Cars. They provide far greater accessibility.

So you're saying that bicycles have caused our land use patterns to be inequitable? I would say I agree that transportation modes have made land use allocations in western society problematic, but again you are very novel in being the first person I've ever met who attributes those issues to people riding bicycles.

No, bicycles are more of a symptom. They are not the sole cause, of course.

The actual root cause is over-centralization, where the only jobs worth having are concentrated in downtowns of a dwindling number of cities. These downtowns are always congested, and bike lanes are one way to make it more tolerable. But if you can afford an apartment, of course.

Bike lanes near Wall Street are an iconic example. If you're using them, then it's highly likely that you're a multi-millionaire. Or maybe you inherited a rent-controlled apartment.

Cars historically were a great equalizer. Sure, your CEO was likely driving a better car, and living in a better house. But they were stuck in the same traffic along with you. And this _was_ a factor when deciding on the next office location: "Hm. I really hate the commute, perhaps our next office should be in a bit less congested location?"

And this is reflected in actual research: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4938093/ - "For the USA, we observe an exponent βUSA ≈ 0 indicating that the density of jobs is independent from the skill level in the USA. For the UK and Denmark, we observe a non-zero exponent with βUK ≈ 1/2 for the UK and a larger value for Denmark βDK ≈ 0.8. These results indicate that the density of jobs decreases with the skill level, more in Denmark than in the UK."

Post reply on HN