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

591–600 of 661 posts

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

#591

Post by litbear2022 »

presentation wrote: post #14
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…

To me, Bangkok feels very much like a developing country. If you go to Chinese cities, the EV adoption has incredible positive effects to the vibe, though. Shanghai’s French concession is so quiet and peaceful now that most cars are EVs.

There is no place called the French Concession in Shanghai today.

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

#592

Post by kfarr »

cyberax wrote: post #590
kfarr wrote: post #584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 us…

Ok most of what you're saying makes sense, but having gone to bike lanes in lower manhattan it seems like it's a lot of food delivery people 24/7 with the normal new yorkers you'd see on the subway during commuting hours. From a humanistic perspective it seems like it's a good thing to ensure that delivery drivers aren't killed by motor vehicles and have the ability to not conflict with sidewalk pedestrians? As a driver I would prefer they're not in my lane.

> Cars historically were a great equalizer.

I suppose we'll agree to disagree on this one, there's like a bajillion books that assert the opposite so I will let those and the intertubes do the talking.

As it relates to the study, I'm a little confused how it relates to the above discussion. Is this a good or bad thing to have density of jobs relate to skill level? Wouldn't the historic development of these cities with thousands of years of human civilization in Europe vs. relatively recently developed US cities be a confounding factor in exploring land use patterns?

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

#593

Post by vel0city »

cbeach wrote: post #583
vel0city wrote: post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 whe…

> 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.

Not really. People are often tied to lots of areas for a number of reasons, and we don't build this much of this kind of urban environment in the US. We've made it largely illegal to build this in most of the country. I'm not free to really live that kind of life.

For most Americans, it's not an option.

> what good is a bike when I need to transport my 3 year old, 6 year old, and all our shopping?

If it was designed well enough your six year old should be able to ride on their own bike with you. You can take a lot of stuff with you with an even mildly powerful electric bicycle. And I'm not saying you shouldn't be able to have the option for a car, but we've designed our urban spaces to be actively hostile to everything but a car when we really didn't have to. Freedom is being able to choose, not be forced into only one option.

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

#594

Post by dotcoma »

nielsbot wrote: post #140
dotcoma wrote: post #128

But don’t they cause higher pm2.5 and pm10 pollution from braking due to the fact that EVs are heavier than vehicles powered by internal combustion ?

Maybe if they used their brakes all the time, but they don't. (Regen braking uses no brakes). That's why EVs, while heaver, require fewer brake pad replacements than ICE cars.

Interesting.

But what about the use and abuse and shredding of tyres?

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

#595

Post by cyberax »

kfarr wrote: post #592
cyberax wrote: post #590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 us…

Ok most of what you're saying makes sense, but having gone to bike lanes in lower manhattan it seems like it's a lot of food delivery people 24/7 with the normal new yorkers you'd see on the subway during commuting hours. From a humanistic perspective it seems like it's a good thing to ensure that delivery drivers aren't killed by motor vehicles and have the ability to not conflict with sidewalk pedestrians? As a dri…

> Ok most of what you're saying make sense, but having gone to bike lanes in lower manhattan it seems like it's a lot of food delivery people

Yes, I should have mentioned that I specifically meant people using bike lanes for commutes. Bike lanes for work or for recreation are a totally different story, and I have nothing against them.

However, in this case it still reinforces my point: delivery by bike is a luxury good. It still is something that makes living in an utterly unaffordable area more bearable for people who have money.

> I suppose we'll agree to disagree on this one, there's like a bajillion books that assert the opposite so I will let those and the intertubes do the talking.

I'm actually not saying anything that is not an accepted fact in urbanism.

> As it relates to the study, I'm a little confused how it relates to the above discussion. Is this a good or bad thing to have density of jobs relate to skill level?

No, it's not good. This means that good jobs force people to move closer to the centers of their concentration. This automatically reduces opportunities for other people.

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

#596

Post by mattlondon »

eldaisfish wrote: post #525
mattlondon wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

It uses a automated voice call and a SMS message I think. It's not internet based, it just dials 112 like a human would

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

#597

Post by thelastgallon »

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.

You are spot on about segregation. Yes, walking and biking are for undesirables. The suburbs are built for cars and cars only. Poor people (African, etc) can't afford the large lots, the minimum size of residence, the HOA and lawn maintenance, car required to go anywhere. This is how you can do segregation without violating any laws. Usually, most people don't admit that these are the real goals. I'm surprised that you are openly admitting that segregation is what we want. I guess times are changing!

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

#598

Post by ehaliewicz2 »

Braxton1980 wrote: post #161
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…

Many car enthusiasts remove the catalytic converter for a combination of additional power and/or better sound. It has a massive impact on emissions and what you might be smelling is hydrogen sulfide which is normally converted to sulfur dioxide which is orderless. I should note the power increase may not have a major impact on newer cars where the cat has been optimized to reduce it's negative power impact. Infact a…

As someone into performance cars and motorcycles, removing a cat is pretty uncommon, and you're generally seen as a dick if you do it.

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

#599

Post by vel0city »

groundzeros2015 wrote: post #555
dymk wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Six months break even and then it’s more carbon friendly than an ICE for the rest of its working lifetime

Tesla has used more than 40 billion of capital

They've made almost 9 million cars overall, with a lot of those made in the last several years. Spreading it over the cars they've made so far, 40,000 / 9 = 4,444.44.

Doesn't seem that crazy. I'm not seeing your point.

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

#600

Post by vel0city »

yvely wrote: post #300
girvo wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now do the same for internal combustion cars. What a silly argument.

Yes do the same for ICE - very constructive suggestion. Completely unnecessary to call the argument silly though.. There are marked differences in what's needed in an EV vs an ICE, most obvious of which is the giant battery with a very different supply chain.

You're then acting as if the energy supply chain and it's impacts are about the same. They're radically different.
Post reply on HN