this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2023
351 points (84.6% liked)

Memes

45649 readers
2352 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] silvercove@lemdro.id 107 points 1 year ago (10 children)

Electric cars are to save automobile industry profits. Not the planet.

If you want to save the planet, then ride a bicycle.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Sounds great if you don't have to commute many miles 2 times per day in an area with no public transit.

All just to keep the roof over your head

[–] what_is_a_name@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Two failures do not make a right.

The point above stands. EVs do little for the environment. Compared to sensible options like transit and biking and walking they are marginally better, but hm hardly at all.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

They reduce emissions in a neighborhood, in driveways and such, and they reduce sound pollution, which is great for local creatures.

They shift power generation to more efficient platforms, rather than messy, poorly maintained gas engines.

Battery production and recycling is a major issue.

For those who cannot walk or bike, an affordable ev is a great choice

[–] what_is_a_name@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You’re just reiterating my points. Yes they are better. And for people without a choice living in car dependent he’ll holes - an improvement.

But the fact that you live in a car dependent he’ll hole is another failure of our society - and prevents you from using much better options.

We should be addressing the root cause. Not the symptom.

In functional societies, EVs are a small improvement. The noise and carcinogen pollution, land use impact and simple danger to soft street users are key damages ALL cars make to spaces occupied by people.

Finally - I am tired of “we need cars for those with impairments / to reliever things / other bullshit.” We do not. It’s just the completely broken car-dependent American perspective.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Lol, we agree more than you think, but your despising incremental progress gets you nowhere. "But it isn't progress! It's not going the way I want it to go!" Sorry but you're looking down the barrel of decades worth of small changes to get to any American future you're seeking.

America is a big place, with many differing environments, governments, and needs. They aren't all going to "get there" in unison, or in a hurry.

In the mean time, quit shaming people trying to benefit their local system, and trying to conduct their lives in the way they see best, while keeping their gone and feeding their family.

When I see a Prius driving around I know that could have been a misused ferd f-teen thousand truck, which lives it's life commuting and getting groceries. I'll take the Prius.

[–] 7bicycles@hexbear.net 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yeah the long commute is of course an immuteable fact of life and cannot be changed

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yes, for many it cannot. For many job shopping is a luxury.

[–] AOCapitulator@hexbear.net 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

What they were implying with their statement was that your life was made to be this way by the decisions of dead capitalists who caused infrastructure and the way we live our lives to be this way so that they could make money

Housing laws caused suburban sprawl which has been worsened, at least in the US, by utterly foolish parking minimum laws. Thats why you have a commute like this, because cars were forced on us instead of trains, biking, and walking.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] 7bicycles@hexbear.net 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm thinking societal changes not individualist ones. Think bigger, who the fuck enjoys a long commute?

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Original comment I replied to said "save the planet, ride a bicycle" and my reply related to that.

I'd love a combination teleporter/blowjob machine but for now a shorter commute would be a treat

[–] 7bicycles@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

but for now a shorter commute would be a treat

This is achievable though is my point

load more comments (3 replies)

True, but given the right government policy the provision of high quality, high speed, highly affordable public transport very much can be changed.

[–] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

Seems to me like having to drive many miles to maintain a job that can pay enough to maintain your fairly far afield home (assuming the home costs less because it's not in the same geography as the office) is a failure of the system as a whole and the company for not making their office work better for their workers.

I mean, unless you have a storefront or regularly have to go to specific places as part of your job, like lawyers going to the court house, then why tf does the company pay for very expensive offices in the middle of a metro area? Put the offices where the workers can actually live near it.

I work in IT, I go to the office to stare at a PC for 8 hours. Something I can literally do anywhere, but instead of IDK, working from home or having distributed offices spaces so people don't have to drive as far, my companies only office is in the middle of a major Metro's downtown in a high rise office for a massive amount of money. So now I have to pay, out of my pocket and time, to drive through downtown traffic, to a parking spot that costs me far too much monthly, so I can simply be physically there to do a job that only requires a PC and an internet connection.

It's all fucking stupid.... And every company seems to do this. Nobody ever comes to our offices and there's literally no reason for them to be where they are, or for me to be there.

[–] steinbring@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

... or walk?

Fewer CO2 emissions is a good goal if you are going to buy a car. Keeping it as long as possible is a better goal.

[–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 year ago

... or walk?

Both have their role. Walking is appropriate for local short trips, while bicycles allow you to cover more distance, and is in turn superseded by transit in potential distance covered, while still being a low emissions mode of transportation.

Fewer CO2 emissions is a good goal if you are going to buy a car. Keeping it as long as possible is a better goal.

If the infrastructure allows for it where you live, going car-free is an even better goal for reducing CO2-emissions, and is only one of a long list of benefits of not traveling by car.

Barring that, voting and influencing politicians that can build infrastructure enabling more car-free lives is a good step in the right direction.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] WheeGeetheCat@sh.itjust.works 61 points 1 year ago (4 children)

not sure if it hits like it did in my head

[–] baseless_discourse@mander.xyz 36 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Electric cars are here to save the car industry, not the environment.

The most environmentally friendly car is the car you already have, and the most environmentally friendly (also safest, healthiest, quietest, just in general the most considerate) way to get from point A to point B is by walking, biking, bus, or train.

The only time EV saves the environment is when all of the following are met:

  • your old car is completely gone,
  • there is zero way to get to where you need to be without a car,
  • and you have been fighting for good transport and safe bike lane all along.
[–] AspieEgg@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 year ago

I bought an electric car because it was a better car for my needs. I got a good deal on it. Electric cars have fewer, simpler moving parts. They require fewer oil changes and don’t have to deal with heat dissipation. I can also have it plugged into my house each night, which means I always have a “full tank” every morning. I can set the heat or air conditioning to come on on a schedule because it doesn’t produce carbon monoxide. The car is much quieter and drives a lot smoother.

They have a lot of benefits, but they don’t exactly save the environment. Lithium mining is very destructive to the local environment and it’s done in countries with questionable ethics around worker health and safety. Most experts agree that over the lifespan of a car, electric cars are better for the world environment than gas vehicles, but if you really want to make an impact on the environment, taking public transit or biking or walking or other forms of micro-mobility would actually make a way bigger impact. And if those kinds of things are difficult where you live, you should really be supporting public policy to make that better.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] cooopsspace@infosec.pub 37 points 1 year ago (4 children)

The people who broke the testla are the ones who murdered the tree by putting asphalt right up to its trunk.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] FederatedSaint@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago

I bought an electric car to insulate me from gas prices, because the instant torque makes them fun to drive, and because the cost of ownership is way lower than an equivalent gas car.

It had nothing to do with the environment, but if it helps, great.

[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 25 points 1 year ago

Weird disconnect here though that stopping climate change was about saving trees, and not our own sorry arses.

[–] nothing@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Great joke!

And for the rest: yes, electric cars aren't saving the environment. We just don't have historical data on the effects like we do with fossil fuels. Add in trashed batteries, lithium mining, slave mining, and the shipping costs (in pollution mostly) and it's possibly worse (just counting consumers). We really need to deal with shipping globally and major corporations effects. But I bet you already knew that.

Doesn't matter, companies love greenwashing these days

[–] AOCapitulator@hexbear.net 5 points 1 year ago

I did but I'm glad to see you say it nonetheless :)

[–] thisfro@slrpnk.net 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The planet is subscribed to !fuck_cars@lemmy.ml

[–] Tischkante@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 1 year ago

Technically the city, that didn't take of the tree, killed the car and the tree.

[–] ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net 4 points 1 year ago

The tree, a lifelong pyromaniac, heard stories of these legendary "lithium fires" and wanted to see for itself.

[–] neptune@dmv.social 4 points 1 year ago

Alright Alanis, here's a fork

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Irony would be the car still kills the planet. I think this is technically coincidence. But I'm in no way an expert and could be entirely wrong. Just commenting to see if anyone definitively has the answer.

Edit: to be clear, I'm discussing the difference between irony and coincidence. My bad.

[–] Uprise42@artemis.camp 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They’re significantly less damaging to the environment but the lithium mining is awful and the resources to generate electric currently are pretty damning. But all things considered, even with those they are significantly more eco friendly so if we could focus on green electric generation EV’s would be extremely more friendly.

But a real solution to green transportation involves cutting out vehicles for personal use. Using public transportation like buses and stuff (which can be electric too) would cut down on transportation emissions significantly. Intercity travel is tough because of the distance. Trains are an option, but honestly they aren’t fast enough for most people when you’re traveling hundreds of miles. I think electric cars are still the better option there. Them moving trucks to electric is a big help too. Tractor trailers aren’t as inefficient as many people think. They use exhaust fluid to curb tons of emissions. But they do an extreme amount of driving so it still has a significant impact.

More solar, wind, or hydro electric would make us a very green planet that costs a lot of money and not much interest from people with the money to do it. It’s a solved problem, but no one wants to implement the solution

[–] buckykat@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Trains can go a lot faster than electric cars what are you talking about

[–] Uprise42@artemis.camp 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Trains can go faster, but have a stricter schedule. Cars are extremely convenient. You can leave when you want. Want to be in a city at 8 am? It’s a hour away by car so leave by 7. However the only train getting there before 8 leaves at 6. But it takes 20 minutes to get to the station. Or, if we go super green, it take 45 since your walking. You need to leave at 5

It’s similar with a bus, but more manageable when most stops have buses stopping every 15-30 minutes. So for a bus you may need to leave at 6:30 or whatever to make it on time.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] LDaxin@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

It looks still driveable to be honest.

load more comments
view more: next ›