• HipHoboHarold@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Keeping an old car is better, but having one that works is even better than that. Cause, you know, eventually cars stop working. That’s a thing.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The main issue in the push for electric cars, is that we’re pretending that we can fix things with no lifestyle changes.

    And for the richer people, that’s probably true. But there’s a big chunk of people for whom the electric car revolution means no more personal transport.

    I accept that, but we need to invest in public transport exponentially more than we are doing. It needs subsidising up the wazoo so people outside the inner-city bubble can still get around. By just pretending that electric cars will reach affordable levels for the poorest, we’re inviting trouble further down the line when they can’t use their petrol cars any more.

  • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    This post is fucking idiotic. Without electric cars climate change CANNOT be addressed.

    Nothing is ever as simple as a single solution. Mouth breathing OPs need to get that through their thick stupid skulls

    • Sunfoil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Without electric VEHICLES* climate change cannot be addressed. Expensive new electric cars are not the solution. Electric public transport, retrofitting old vehicles, making current vehicles last, and people adopting two wheeled electric solutions will be the solution. Cars like Teslas are awful and buying one shouldn’t be considered making a difference.

    • ThunderWhiskers@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Afraid you’re wasting your breath. OP appears to be a member of fuckcars, which feels like it’s coming from a good place but is mostly just short-sighted and infantile. I live in DFW and not having a vehicle is not an option, but these folk would classify me alongside the devil because I dare to use a combustion engine. If I could realistically use an electric vehicle I would.

      I’m sure that in OPs mind everyone should just abandon their cars tomorrow and that will immediately solve all of the climate change as if private vehicle owners are the ones actually causing the problem in the first place.

      • rexxit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Fuckcars is made up of people with little life experience who think they have all the answers, and people who fetishize city living and think it’s normal or healthy for humans to live at a density like NYC (and fuck you if you disagree). They’re oversimplifying to the point of meaninglessness, and handwaving away the problems.

        • Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’ve lived in places far less dense than NYC with robust public transit far better than NYC. Owning a car would’ve just been a burden 99% of the time. And it was certainly healthier than living in car-centric suburbs, both physically and mentally. Not everywhere is America where we can’t fathom anything but cars and McMansions

          • rexxit@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            What’s far less dense with better public transit than NYC? The most popular example of no-car city design I see is Amsterdam, which is 1/2 the density of NYC, but still 15x the density of where I’m from (not even close to a rural area). I think robust public transit at 1/15th the density of Amsterdam and 1/30th the density of NYC is a pipe dream.

            In these lower density places, maybe you luck out and you’re walking or biking distance to work. If you change jobs do you have to move instead of hopping in the car and commuting a bit further? In circumstances like these, transit can’t possibly serve every origin and destination efficiently, and personal vehicles can offer efficient point to point.

  • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    We will never consumer our way of of a problem capitalism created. And public transit is nearly always a better solution to spending on car infrastructure.

    … but… If you’re gonna buy a new car anyway, they have the potential to cause less climate impact (although they’re still environmentally devastating in other ways). As power generation becomes cleaner, so too do the cars. ICE cars are already about as environmentally friendly as they’re gonna get, but EVs still have a lot of potential improvement (both in emissions and in things like material mining).

    Although the tire microplastics is gonna get worse.

  • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Remember kids, if you’re not solving climate change entirely in one single step, there’s no point in trying.

    Seriously, what a brain dead argument lol

    • winterayars@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Every car on the road being converted to electric with magic wouldn’t fix climate change. If you didn’t also get trucks and SUVs it may not even move the needle Personal car use is not a major cause of climate change. It just doesn’t matter compared to industrial and commercial emissions.

      • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Of course it won’t fix climate change in one go, but doing so would remove a major fossil fuel dependency for your average Joe and make them much more likely to vote against fossil fuels.

        Put another way, how many people driving gas cars would vote in favor of heavy taxes on fossil fuel use?

        Now, how many would vote that way if they personally didn’t have any dependencies on fossil fuels?

        Also, highway vehicles account for 1.5 billion tons of GHGs being emitted each year, that’s 11% of the global yearly GHG emissions, so yeah, it definetely would “move the needle”. In the US specifically it’s as much as 20% of our nations emissions.

        And yeah I already know the next argument “bUt YoUr JuSt UsInG fOsSiL fUeLs To ChArGe It” - except you’re not necessarily, in my area (part of CA), you can choose to have 100% of your electricity provided by renewable sources for a small monthly premium ($18/month). Additionally in CA, all new homes are being built with solar power, which further increases your ability to charge without fossil fuels.

        And in the areas that isn’t true, it’s at least getting groundwork laid down to make it true. An electric car can be powered by renewable energy, a fossil fuel car must be powered by fossil fuels.

        There are a lot of steps to solving climate change beyond “buy an electric car”, and you’re right that industrial and commercial pollution accounts for the majority, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be pushing on all fronts.

        We’ve already waited way too long to act, we can’t afford as a species to say “well, I’m not going to change my car until the industrial polluters get their shit together”, we have to push in Every possible direction, all at the same time to make progress, and electric cars overtaking fossil fuel cars is a big part of that.

        There’s a lot of work to be done globally until electric cars are 100% green, both in terms of power infrastructure and the processes to create them, but there’s no way forward with gas cars, so we need to start moving over as a society now, phasing out the production of gas cars with electric

      • Tak@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        There’s a lot wrong with this video as most videos on EVs from 2016. The data is sources for electricity production is actually over a decade old now (Sep 2013) and it rationalizes that the electric cars will break down before the grid ever moves towards greener sources. This is a very silly notion considering solar is straining the grid with too much power at times, times where EVs could charge. They can also charge over night encouraging nuclear power to be more financially feasible as nuclear relies on a base load as they don’t like to turn off.

        They’re not a silver bullet and in some cases like the Hummer EV they are worse than an old car but if you have to drive a lot it is completely less carbon intensive than an ICE for most EVs.

        Here’s a still pretty old but more nuanced video: https://piped.video/watch?v=6RhtiPefVzM

        The greenest car is a train car.

  • mommykink@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Electric cars don’t solve every problem with private vehicle ownership but they’re certainly a step in the right direction. Most EVs average an equivalent of more than 100mpg versus most ICEs, which are around 30-40. You can also power an EV with renewable resources. This isn’t possible with ICEs (yes, I know you can power certain diesels with biofuel, but it’s horribly inefficient).

    “Buying a new car is worse than keeping an old one” is an incredibly situational phrase that has a million exceptions for so many people.

    • Custoslibera@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      My frustration comes from the fact that hybrids exist and are not used nearly as enough as they should (all cars should have been mandated as hybrids a decade ago) and this would reduce the downsides of electric car production.

      I’m not defending ICEs here, I just think the overall environmental credentials of electric cars at this point in time isn’t as good as hybrids.

      I fully expect this to change in the future but I’ve got entire fleets of vehicles which are less than 5 years old being replaced by electric and that makes no sense.

      Also cars generally are just a terrible solution to mass transport. We already have the most environmentally friendly option known to man. Bicycles and trains.

      Edit: for further information on hybrid vs electric see this analysis:

      https://www.carboncounter.com/#!/explore

      • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, which is why I’m downvoting you.

        I’m huge into going green, going mass transit, and everything else, however, most people cannot fit into one worldview, which is why this is more nuanced than your meme suggests.

        As an example The Midwest in the states does not have mass transit, so they have to drive. So trains and bikes are out. Hybrid still uses gas, and for the vast majority of them they will be on the freeway, so a hybrid is basically the same as an ICE car anyway, so yeah, I’ll push them into getting EVs if what they’re doing is commuting. However than it gets more nuanced to “is this for roadtrips”, because then maybe hybrid is better.

        Which is why again I say it’s a person-to-person basis. For you maybe a hybrid is the only option, but saying EVs are wrong for everyone is a very naive approach.

        • Custoslibera@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah. America isn’t the world.

          Plenty of countries have functioning public transport.

          America is not the exception, you can survive without cars.

    • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Buying a new car is worse than keeping an old one” is an incredibly situational phrase that has a million exceptions for so many people.

      Yeah, but this still holds a lot of water. More often than not people buy a new car to have a new car or even worse they buy one specificcally because they are misguidedly trying to lessen their carbon footprint.

          • Beemo Dinosaurierfuß@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Just because I wanted to be sure I am not being mistaken for some reason I just googled a couple different search terms for motivations to buy a new car.

            None of the results is even close to confirming your ludicrous quote from above.
            So again I am baffled by how confidently wrong you keep on posting here.

      • Lightor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        People aren’t just buying new cars for fun in a recession. The point is people will need to buy a new car at some point. Either because they now need their own car or their old one isn’t viable. At that point, choosing an electric car is a step in the right direction. That’s why this post is stupid, it’s acting like buying an electric car is just a frivolous purchase and not acknowledgeding that when someone needs to buy a car there is a choice to be made.

    • ch00f@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Buying a new car is worse than keeping an old one

      Also, what do you think happens to your car when you replace it with an electric car? Do most people just drive their old cars into the ocean when they upgrade?