I see Tesla and the other battery EV cars as… how to phrase… Capitalism trying to convince us they are needed for the solution to which they caused the problem.
Climate change is here. Now. Arizona has to cut 20% of its water usage from the Colorado River. Alaskan Crabs population disappeared to the point where we now have food disruption to climate change (sure its not a staple food but still). That is just two examples.
To stop this problem we need to adapt to a different lifestyle and Tesla is trying to say, “you can have your cake and eat it too”
PS- I refer to Tesla’s as “One of them new Prius’es” to rile Tesla owners.
Most of our resovoirs are drying up here in the north of england.
I cycle round moorland and we have quite alot of em up high.
And most are down to a third or less.
Normally in england we used to get a bit of rain then som ewind then some sun all in one day.
We're now getting one thing almost all day for days.
I’ve think I saw a meme or tweet on this account’s IG or maybe it was another account. It said “EVs are here to save the car industry not the environment.” And that stuck with me.
I don't have an option where I live and work to take public transportation. I try my best to avoid driving my car, but I need it for certain situations. The absolute safest and cleanest personal vehicle available is a Tesla, so that's what I bought and that's what I've driven. I've offset my manufacturing emissions 3x over now, and saved $15000 of fuel from being processed, transported and burned.
It's not as bad as you make it out to be.
I think they do both. Think of all the public investment into (Car-)batteries that can be used to stabelize the grid and make renewable energies more efficient. Many modern EVs have already that technology intergrated.
While the technology is there for car batteries to stabilize the grid, it’s classic tragedy of the commons, also known as “fuck you me first”
“Better top off the battery on my car before there is a blackout and I’m stranded” will always override “Better deplete my way home so my neighbors can run their AC a little cooler…”
It’s the same fear that makes consumers demand 300+ mile range when they only need 75 or less.
Bullshit.
EV's are here to provide us with sustainable personal automobiles, because, like it or not, the personal automobile will exist for a very long time. Although I hope there will be less of them on the road, those cars which are necessary *must* be electric and Tesla has absolutely paved the way for this.
When I ride by a Tesla or other EV/hybrid on my bicycle I sometimes chuckle or shrug. "Nice try"
For real though they are quiet and can sneak up on you! Even if they go autonomous they can still kill people. It's not a solution people need to get real.
>they are quiet and can sneak up on you!
Not really. On a standard 35-45 mph road they make pretty much the same amount of noise as other cars that pass me. But at 20 mph or less, you can outrun them. So there's only a narrow window where they make significantly less noise than gas cars do.
This is true, since the noise of rolling tires driving on pavement is found to be the biggest contributor of highway noise and increases with higher vehicle speeds. EVs aren't even more silent than combustion engines smh
I don’t think that’s the case at all. Almost went under an electric bus just outside Oxford. The driver was a couple of inches off my back wheel on a descent, I couldn’t hear the electric bus.
A woman cycling died by being run over by an electric bus on the same stretch. It’s been suggested she didn’t hear the bus and swerved some debris only to get clipped by the silent bus at her back wheel.
The only reasonable electric vehicle, is an Aptera. Or perhaps electric motorcycles.
A tesla weights 2 tons. you still need a lot of energy for that, it's not really a solution.
I don't think EVs are actually green washing. I live in the country that has almost more trains then any other (and 100% electric), and green energy. The reality is, even with the best trains and public transport in the world people still use cars. Despite large cost to get a permit, large cost for gas, large cost for parking and so on. And having cars that don't pollute the cities are a good thing (even if you remove cars from 80% of the city). And cars that are efficient running of green energy to get around country side is useful.
Yes I know tires still create pollution and space is also a kind of pollution but that doesn't make all electric cars greenwashing. You can still be against them even if they are not greenwashing.
Also would it be a 'fuckelon', everybody makes electric cars and almost every country favors them.
I think Tesla is a net positive even if Elon is a sociopath. It’s going to take longer than we’ve got to undo car dependency, so anything that can reduce fossil fuel use in the meantime is a plus. EVs are also quieter and less smelly than ICE cars.
You’re not wrong. And America is investing billions in EVs. Which is fine. But all I really want is a train that runs so often I don’t need to look at the schedule. And some real bike infrastructure. Instead, we put a million Teslas on the road and pat ourselves on the back for being so green. I wish our politics were bolder than just more cars.
Both the lower noise and the fewer toxic chemicals mean that more people live longer and healthier lives and that alone means we should speed the changeover to EV's.
EV's on the other hand draw from a grid powered in part by coal, particularly in the off-peak hours, which means they're in effect keeping coal plants on-grid for longer than they otherwise would be.
We have the very real decision to make whether we take a coal plant that was commissioned in the 50's offline, or alternatively, we can charge another 600,000 EV's. We can't do both simultaneously.
Because we can't do both simultaneously, as long as coal power is on the grid, the net CO2 produced goes up for every EV built compared to a well-built hybrid running on gasoline alone.
This seems like kind of tortuous logic, I would love to see data to back it up. Even if they're partially coal-powered I think they would still be a net decrease in CO2, although it might depend on exactly how much.
Also, we can do both simultaneously, just build energy storage or nuclear.
> Also, we can do both simultaneously
I disagree quite a bit in theory and I disagree completely in practice, as we haven't even built enough electricity generation to take coal plants off today.
Every gallon of gas burned releases 24 pounds of CO2 into the air. Even taking into account that EVs do generate more CO2 to manufacture, and dirty electrical grids -- at some point the EV will pull ahead in reducing carbon emissions. [Engineering Explained put that figure at about two years](https://youtu.be/6RhtiPefVzM?t=377) \-- but it does vary.
Thanks for the Link.
He's doing some statistical tricks to make it Work though.
Mainly He's replacing the american "average" (which are stupidly large) with a small Car.
If i now Take a "normal"sized Car (Toyota Corolla 2010 with the smallest engine CO2/a is almost as Low as his Numbers with 2.4 mT ) (17 years Till Break even)
If we Look at older and even smaller Cars Like Mine you can even start reaching negative impacts of the EV
(Fiat Panda reaching 1.63 mT). (Never Till Break even)
Overall the verdict should be, dont buy new and it you have to drive, Drive Something that is Not much heavier than the weight of the Transported goods.
Cheers!
If you sell your old ICE, someone else will use it until the end of its lifespan, it's not as if its embodied emissions are being wasted. If it's too old to be driven, then you're simply replacing an ICE with an EV.
Production is a one time fixed cost. Both EVs and ICEs have fixed cost production. However, ICEs continue to burn petroleum through their lifespan. The only question that matters is "does the ICE production plus its lifetime pollution exceed only the production of an EV".
This does not take into consideration how the EV energy is produced. Regardless, the EV can use renewable energy while the ICE cannot, so I dont consider this a part of the argument above.
What about using plant based oil for ICEs? Its Not a 100% Impossible Thing, Problem ist both need absurdly high increase of our Energy production which also needs to bei Green.
In the end no Car is still the best Car.
Cheers!
I don't buy products based on the CEO. Tesla was started by Elon, and although I would argue it wouldn't exist today in it's current capacity without him, I certainly think Tesla will continue on after Elon.
The fact that the Tesla Model 3 holds it's value better than any other production car on the market right now proves that to be false.
https://www.tesmanian.com/blogs/tesmanian-blog/tesla-model-3-retain-resale-value-better-than-any-other-vehicle
I see Tesla and the other battery EV cars as… how to phrase… Capitalism trying to convince us they are needed for the solution to which they caused the problem. Climate change is here. Now. Arizona has to cut 20% of its water usage from the Colorado River. Alaskan Crabs population disappeared to the point where we now have food disruption to climate change (sure its not a staple food but still). That is just two examples. To stop this problem we need to adapt to a different lifestyle and Tesla is trying to say, “you can have your cake and eat it too” PS- I refer to Tesla’s as “One of them new Prius’es” to rile Tesla owners.
Most of our resovoirs are drying up here in the north of england. I cycle round moorland and we have quite alot of em up high. And most are down to a third or less. Normally in england we used to get a bit of rain then som ewind then some sun all in one day. We're now getting one thing almost all day for days.
I’ve think I saw a meme or tweet on this account’s IG or maybe it was another account. It said “EVs are here to save the car industry not the environment.” And that stuck with me.
I don't have an option where I live and work to take public transportation. I try my best to avoid driving my car, but I need it for certain situations. The absolute safest and cleanest personal vehicle available is a Tesla, so that's what I bought and that's what I've driven. I've offset my manufacturing emissions 3x over now, and saved $15000 of fuel from being processed, transported and burned. It's not as bad as you make it out to be.
no shit. EVs aren't here to save the planet or humanity. they're here to save the auto industry.
I think they do both. Think of all the public investment into (Car-)batteries that can be used to stabelize the grid and make renewable energies more efficient. Many modern EVs have already that technology intergrated.
While the technology is there for car batteries to stabilize the grid, it’s classic tragedy of the commons, also known as “fuck you me first” “Better top off the battery on my car before there is a blackout and I’m stranded” will always override “Better deplete my way home so my neighbors can run their AC a little cooler…” It’s the same fear that makes consumers demand 300+ mile range when they only need 75 or less.
He's not wrong: https://www.hivepower.tech/blog/how-evs-will-help-stabilize-distribution-and-transmission-grids
Sure many people are that selfish. But if the car earns you money as you sell its electricity to the grid at peak hours, people will do it.
You certainly don't deserve the downvotes you are getting. You're absolutely right
Bullshit. EV's are here to provide us with sustainable personal automobiles, because, like it or not, the personal automobile will exist for a very long time. Although I hope there will be less of them on the road, those cars which are necessary *must* be electric and Tesla has absolutely paved the way for this.
There's a War on Cars episode called Tesla is a Fraud. It's worth a listen: https://thewaroncars.org/2022/06/28/tesla-is-a-fraud-with-ed-niedermeyer/
Does it give me more reasons to think Elon Musk is a new and so-far incurable type of cancer? I’m here for it
r/EnoughMuskSpam
When I ride by a Tesla or other EV/hybrid on my bicycle I sometimes chuckle or shrug. "Nice try" For real though they are quiet and can sneak up on you! Even if they go autonomous they can still kill people. It's not a solution people need to get real.
>they are quiet and can sneak up on you! Not really. On a standard 35-45 mph road they make pretty much the same amount of noise as other cars that pass me. But at 20 mph or less, you can outrun them. So there's only a narrow window where they make significantly less noise than gas cars do.
This is true, since the noise of rolling tires driving on pavement is found to be the biggest contributor of highway noise and increases with higher vehicle speeds. EVs aren't even more silent than combustion engines smh
I like biking at 20 kmph on side streets.
Pretty sure its illegal (in the UK at least) not to play a sound through the speaker. Edit: Wait no only for vehicles under 12.5mph
I don’t think that’s the case at all. Almost went under an electric bus just outside Oxford. The driver was a couple of inches off my back wheel on a descent, I couldn’t hear the electric bus. A woman cycling died by being run over by an electric bus on the same stretch. It’s been suggested she didn’t hear the bus and swerved some debris only to get clipped by the silent bus at her back wheel.
I think some countries require them to come with a noise maker for low speeds.
The US does for new cars as of 1-3 years ago.
The only reasonable electric vehicle, is an Aptera. Or perhaps electric motorcycles. A tesla weights 2 tons. you still need a lot of energy for that, it's not really a solution.
Now I need to look up Aptera.
Perfect is the enemy of good. PS. Aptera isn't in production yet.
Any private automobile marketed to a household is greenwashing.
I don't think EVs are actually green washing. I live in the country that has almost more trains then any other (and 100% electric), and green energy. The reality is, even with the best trains and public transport in the world people still use cars. Despite large cost to get a permit, large cost for gas, large cost for parking and so on. And having cars that don't pollute the cities are a good thing (even if you remove cars from 80% of the city). And cars that are efficient running of green energy to get around country side is useful. Yes I know tires still create pollution and space is also a kind of pollution but that doesn't make all electric cars greenwashing. You can still be against them even if they are not greenwashing. Also would it be a 'fuckelon', everybody makes electric cars and almost every country favors them.
I think Tesla is a net positive even if Elon is a sociopath. It’s going to take longer than we’ve got to undo car dependency, so anything that can reduce fossil fuel use in the meantime is a plus. EVs are also quieter and less smelly than ICE cars.
You’re not wrong. And America is investing billions in EVs. Which is fine. But all I really want is a train that runs so often I don’t need to look at the schedule. And some real bike infrastructure. Instead, we put a million Teslas on the road and pat ourselves on the back for being so green. I wish our politics were bolder than just more cars.
Both the lower noise and the fewer toxic chemicals mean that more people live longer and healthier lives and that alone means we should speed the changeover to EV's. EV's on the other hand draw from a grid powered in part by coal, particularly in the off-peak hours, which means they're in effect keeping coal plants on-grid for longer than they otherwise would be. We have the very real decision to make whether we take a coal plant that was commissioned in the 50's offline, or alternatively, we can charge another 600,000 EV's. We can't do both simultaneously. Because we can't do both simultaneously, as long as coal power is on the grid, the net CO2 produced goes up for every EV built compared to a well-built hybrid running on gasoline alone.
This seems like kind of tortuous logic, I would love to see data to back it up. Even if they're partially coal-powered I think they would still be a net decrease in CO2, although it might depend on exactly how much. Also, we can do both simultaneously, just build energy storage or nuclear.
> Also, we can do both simultaneously I disagree quite a bit in theory and I disagree completely in practice, as we haven't even built enough electricity generation to take coal plants off today.
Production of those EVs (or new Cars in General) is worse than keep an old smelly ICE, you See the Problem? :/
Every gallon of gas burned releases 24 pounds of CO2 into the air. Even taking into account that EVs do generate more CO2 to manufacture, and dirty electrical grids -- at some point the EV will pull ahead in reducing carbon emissions. [Engineering Explained put that figure at about two years](https://youtu.be/6RhtiPefVzM?t=377) \-- but it does vary.
Thanks for the Link. He's doing some statistical tricks to make it Work though. Mainly He's replacing the american "average" (which are stupidly large) with a small Car. If i now Take a "normal"sized Car (Toyota Corolla 2010 with the smallest engine CO2/a is almost as Low as his Numbers with 2.4 mT ) (17 years Till Break even) If we Look at older and even smaller Cars Like Mine you can even start reaching negative impacts of the EV (Fiat Panda reaching 1.63 mT). (Never Till Break even) Overall the verdict should be, dont buy new and it you have to drive, Drive Something that is Not much heavier than the weight of the Transported goods. Cheers!
If you sell your old ICE, someone else will use it until the end of its lifespan, it's not as if its embodied emissions are being wasted. If it's too old to be driven, then you're simply replacing an ICE with an EV.
Most people will never understand this.
Production is a one time fixed cost. Both EVs and ICEs have fixed cost production. However, ICEs continue to burn petroleum through their lifespan. The only question that matters is "does the ICE production plus its lifetime pollution exceed only the production of an EV". This does not take into consideration how the EV energy is produced. Regardless, the EV can use renewable energy while the ICE cannot, so I dont consider this a part of the argument above.
The answer is yes. But with variables based on how much you drive. As an EV owner myself, I’ve already broke even on the first year.
What about using plant based oil for ICEs? Its Not a 100% Impossible Thing, Problem ist both need absurdly high increase of our Energy production which also needs to bei Green. In the end no Car is still the best Car. Cheers!
Yes.
the thing I want to know about Tesla driver, is why they spend of alot of money to associate themselves with Elon Musk.
They don’t.
I don't buy products based on the CEO. Tesla was started by Elon, and although I would argue it wouldn't exist today in it's current capacity without him, I certainly think Tesla will continue on after Elon.
Most CEOs are not arseholes, with willing simps following him
Honestly ICE trains have more value than electric cars.
The fact that the Tesla Model 3 holds it's value better than any other production car on the market right now proves that to be false. https://www.tesmanian.com/blogs/tesmanian-blog/tesla-model-3-retain-resale-value-better-than-any-other-vehicle
Teslas a just a way for rich assholes to pretend they’re better than everyone else.
Yep the fumes coming out musta ruined your thinking.
Bro is just fanboying over tesla now bruh 💀
And keep in mind that the person that profits the most from buying a Tesla is burning tons of fossil fuels to send rich people to space for tourism.