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

The electric car as a talisman of false hope

jussipasanen.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 338 posts

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#91

Post by VBprogrammer »

PeterStuer wrote: post #9
alexgmcm wrote: post #2

Honestly, I hope electric cars become commonplace just because of the reduction in noise pollution let alone PM and CO2 emissions. Furthermore, I'm not really sure what the author thinks we should do? How can we maintain modern civilisation without factories etc.? Reverting to some primitive state seems neither realistic nor desirable.

You are in for a cold shower. Above 35 km/h (~22 mph) tire noise becomes the dominant factor. Besides, a large part of a modern vehicle's engine noise is designed. Some cars even go as far as play engine noises through added speakers.

This might be the case in the US since most cars are 'gas' (petrol) powered. However, in much of Europe diesel powered cars are extremely common. Also, at least in London, the average speed for a car is <20mph.

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#92

Post by bjourne »

The numbers are somewhat contested. See potholer54's well-sourced video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwMPFDqyfrA He cites ghg savings of about 20-30% for a common mix of electricity production sources.

Of course, Jussi Pasanen is still completely right. The only solution is to stop driving cars.

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#93

Post by sak5sk »

mrhappyunhappy wrote: post #38
Denzel wrote: post #13

His argument distills to: solve it all-at-once, or don’t solve it at all. This is an uninteresting and uninspiring line of thinking that ignores the nature of socially dynamic systems which don’t exist in a world of instantaneous cause-and-effect. His conclusion states that electric cars make a difference, but they don’t make a real difference: “I do think they can slightly reduce unsustainability” but “by switching…

The problem is time. Or lack of it. We cannot afford for the markets to work things out for us. Sure, you can shift culture and behavior but that takes time that we do not have. It’s time for drastic policy change and swift global action.

Don't know why you're being downvoted. We currently have only 1 nuclear plant under construction. Any new construction wouldn't be complete and operational until at least 2033. IPCC clearly stated we need to make significant progress if not reverse emissions by 2030. The idea that nuclear is somehow going to save the day is insane. Sure, if we had plants that were nearly complete (in the US) and we prioritized operational approval and somehow got the population on board.. but that simply can't happen.

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#94

Post by jaimex2 »

abhi152 wrote: post #15

Ok, so the author suggests nothing.. He fails to describe the solution(if any). May be the solution is population control.

Pretty much. He doesn't seem to grasp the reality that solving the problem is political and like gun laws in the US there are those that will oppose every change no matter how small every step of the way for money regardless of the human or planetary cost.

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#95

Post by navigatesol »

pas wrote: post #49
eptcyka wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument isn't that doing _something_ is bad, it's that the amount of effort people put into obtaining their shiny non-paleolithic-compost-fueled-but-rather-battery-powered 2 tonne sledgehammers would be better spent changing policies that operate on organizational rather than individual units. How about we just stop buying as much shit from halfway across the world? Global trade requires us to spend stupid amoun…

A lot of people already don't buy shit. At all. I mean after about a decade I finally gave in and bought a used TV (instead of using a PC monitor). I already don't fly to useless tech conferences, and work remotely (so no mindless daily commute). And eventually when the e-charger network will become widespread enough around here, I guess, I'll buy a used EV instead of the current car, because cities can't ban these s…

>And the way to make the GHG-friendly stuff cheap is to tax the shit out of the GHG-positive things.

Making everything more expensive is a political dead-end, and would exacerbate income inequality.

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#96

Post by PeterStuer »

ecpottinger wrote: post #61
PeterStuer wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have not seen automotive industry projections that predict fewer vehicles.

Of-course not - what do you expect them to say to their shareholders? But in all the other NON-automotive industry sources the idea of a car that drives itself and acts as a taxi suggests 4-10 times less cars needed.

Why is that? Taxis have always existed, and rationally are cheaper than owning a car for some. Yet most people own private cars, and when yours in the future comes with a free private driver, the possibilities for having a decent office or entertainment center in there when freed from the driving task will only make them more attractive to own.

Taxis mostly seem to displace other forms of public transport.

https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2019/01/uber-lyft-rid...

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#97

Post by growlist »

r00fus wrote: post #83
growlist wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exhaust emissions are only part of the air pollution problem - brake discs and tyres contribute around 50%, as I recall. Depressing! But we need lighter vehicles all round, and less travelling in general.

Cite needed. Also types of pollution matter. Do brakes & tires contribute to climate change or to the PM2.5? Yes we need to move towards more sustainable transport (mass transit) and reduce the overall load but EVs don’t hamper this movement.

Agreed, it's a complex topic. Just pointing out that EVs alone won't solve air pollution from transport.

https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/assets/documents/reports/cat09/1...

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#98

Post by dTal »

acidburnNSA wrote: post #75
endymi0n wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment hits the nail on the head. Plus, what the OP conveniently ignores, is that electric cars aren‘t a talisman, but a bridgehead. If electric cars succeed on a large scale, it means we solved making electricity storage fast, dense and cheap enough to put them on the road. Putting that technology into the electric grid and combining it with renewables will enable dirt cheap, limitless energy, which will contr…

Agreed. Consider using the term "low-carbon energy" in place of "renewable energy". We want to promote the right stuff. Biofuel is considered renewable but is high carbon. Nuclear fusion would be low carbon but not considered renewable. The difference matters hugely for future energy policy.

Biofuel is carbon-neutral because the carbon comes from the atmosphere. It's fine to burn it because its emissions have already been bought and paid for in its creaion. The problem with carbon is digging it up, in an open cycle.

Renewable is a more strict term than carbon-neutral, it's true, but all "renewables" are by definition closed-loop and hence carbon-neutral.

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#99

Post by navigatesol »

adamlett wrote: post #58
Denzel wrote: post #13

His argument distills to: solve it all-at-once, or don’t solve it at all. This is an uninteresting and uninspiring line of thinking that ignores the nature of socially dynamic systems which don’t exist in a world of instantaneous cause-and-effect. His conclusion states that electric cars make a difference, but they don’t make a real difference: “I do think they can slightly reduce unsustainability” but “by switching…

The way I read TFA, the argument is this: If you think electric cars is the solution or a meaningful part of the solution, you're wrong. It does not say electric cars are bad, and it certainly does not argue that we should not solve [the climate crisis] if we can't solve it all-at-once. There are unfortunately still many, many people, who—even if they accept that human caused climate change is real—do not appreciate…

>There are unfortunately still many, many people, who—even if they accept that human caused climate change is real—do not appreciate how urgent the crisis is.

I am one of these people. How urgent is it? Between the denials and exaggerations, I really can't tell.

Re: The electric car as a talisman of false hope

#100

Post by growlist »

NullPrefix wrote: post #80
growlist wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exhaust emissions are only part of the air pollution problem - brake discs and tyres contribute around 50%, as I recall. Depressing! But we need lighter vehicles all round, and less travelling in general.

>brake discs Regenerative braking does not have this problem. Although the tyre problem remain.

Though the extra weight of the regenerative system has to be taken into account.
Post reply on HN