this post was submitted on 30 Dec 2023
572 points (78.6% liked)

Fuck Cars

9821 readers
40 users here now

This community exists as a sister community/copycat community to the r/fuckcars subreddit.

This community exists for the following reasons:

You can find the Matrix chat room for this community here.

Rules

  1. Be nice to each other. Being aggressive or inflammatory towards other users will get you banned. Name calling or obvious trolling falls under that. Hate cars, hate the system, but not people. While some drivers definitely deserve some hate, most of them didn't choose car-centric life out of free will.

  2. No bigotry or hate. Racism, transphobia, misogyny, ableism, homophobia, chauvinism, fat-shaming, body-shaming, stigmatization of people experiencing homeless or substance users, etc. are not tolerated. Don't use slurs. You can laugh at someone's fragile masculinity without associating it with their body. The correlation between car-culture and body weight is not an excuse for fat-shaming.

  3. Stay on-topic. Submissions should be on-topic to the externalities of car culture in urban development and communities globally. Posting about alternatives to cars and car culture is fine. Don't post literal car fucking.

  4. No traffic violence. Do not post depictions of traffic violence. NSFW or NSFL posts are not allowed. Gawking at crashes is not allowed. Be respectful to people who are a victim of traffic violence or otherwise traumatized by it. News articles about crashes and statistics about traffic violence are allowed. Glorifying traffic violence will get you banned.

  5. No reposts. Before sharing, check if your post isn't a repost. Reposts that add something new are fine. Reposts that are sharing content from somewhere else are fine too.

  6. No misinformation. Masks and vaccines save lives during a pandemic, climate change is real and anthropogenic - and denial of these and other established facts will get you banned. False or highly speculative titles will get your post deleted.

  7. No harassment. Posts that (may) cause harassment, dogpiling or brigading, intentionally or not, will be removed. Please do not post screenshots containing uncensored usernames. Actual harassment, dogpiling or brigading is a bannable offence.

Please report posts and comments that violate our rules.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Naz@sh.itjust.works 52 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (5 children)

Disagree on inefficient.

Internal combustion engines in standard small size convert 19.65-22.1% of their energy from thermal to kinetic.

The ratio of electron throughput from battery to electric motor can be as LOW as 88% but hovers between 92-98% efficiency.

Even if you had a fuel cell in the back, running electric motors quintuples (5×) the standard energy efficiency owing to the principle of energy quality type preservation in conversion (High to High vs Low to High):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_transformation

So 1 electric car = 4 less carbon liquid fuelled cars worth of pollution.

What you're actually looking for is:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

Jevon's Paradox states that improved efficiency of something will only increase its use, and in this case, electric cars will in fact, correlate to car use, and increased mineral demands.

This is a problem you cannot solve endemic to humanity.

[–] Faresh@lemmy.ml 14 points 11 months ago

I think the point is that compared to public transport when transporting a large number of people, they are inefficient.

[–] Redonkulation@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago

A reasonable comment in this community? Get out!

[–] Nobilmantis@feddit.it 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I think you missed the meaning of inefficency on this matter...

While it is undeniable that electric cars have a better supply-to-engine energy efficency than combustion cars, you can understand that they are equiparated in the meme as "equally bad" if you think outside of the box labelled "rubber wheels on high friction asphalt transporting usually a single individual".

Compare that with a tram or a train, transporting multiple passengers with the same electric engine but also steel-on-steel friction on the wheels and the difference between an ICE and EV vehicle becomes a mere approximation error; god I can do the math for you if you want, but I bet even a disel bus with a lot of passengers has a better efficency/passenger ratio than an EV.

So 1 electric car = 4 less carbon liquid fuelled cars worth of pollution.

Also I think this is a bit misleading: if I buy an EV this won't magically destroy 4 (where is this number from?) already existing carbon liquid cars, it merely means you avoided adding 1 other ICE car to the total.

[–] eluvinar@szmer.info 1 points 10 months ago

box labelled “rubber wheels on high friction asphalt transporting usually a single individual”.

so, a box I keep my bike in? :D

[–] hex_m_hell@slrpnk.net 4 points 10 months ago

When is it efficient to carry several tons of steel with you to pick up eggs and milk?

[–] Ummdustry@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I mean, Jevon's Paradox works because the increased efficiency leads to decreased costs. It's unclear if that's going to be the case for electric cars because the hardware needed to get to that high efficiency is so expensive, and mostly made cost-effective by government assistance (I.e. eletric cars here in the UK do not pay road tax).

I'm also not sure if lowered costs would massively change the number of drivers (at least in the developed world) in the EU there's one car for every two people. We're not going to see that become 5 cars for every two people just because the efficiency increases, demand is too inelastic.