109 points

They also reduce noise pollution

And reduce the propping of petrostates

And can be fueled, in theory, almost anywhere there are buildings (including your own home/work)

And that fuel can also, in theory, come from fully sustainable sources

They also help normalise the usage of renewable energy (this is a factor that shouldn’t be overlooked, imo)

permalink
report
reply
28 points
*

They also do all those things much worse than transitioning away from car dependence.

And they give people an excuse to not move away from cars.

And they are so much heavier and deadlier than ICE cars at the same speed that they may actually actively discourage other modes, like walking or cycling.

edit: Look, I think every car should be an EV. And I also think there shouldn’t be many cars because cars still suck. Both can be true.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

And they are so much heavier and deadlier than ICE cars at the same speed that they may actually actively discourage other modes, like walking or cycling.

whether a car has an ICE or a battery is the last thing on my mind when avoiding them

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

It doesn’t matter what your thinking about when a vehicle hits you…

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

This should go without saying but what’s on your mind about a car doesn’t change how deadly it is when it hits you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Since much of the noise pollution from cars comes from tire noise, I doubt EVs will reduce noise pollution that signifcantly.

permalink
report
parent
reply
39 points

It’s not tire noise I’m hearing in bed at 1am while some yahoo is treating residential roads like a racetrack.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

That is because many cities/politicians refuse to enforce reasonable noise limits on automobiles. It should have never been legal/normalized to have exhausts loud enough to need hearing protection while outside of the vehicle.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

those ppl will create noise at whatever cost lmao, I bet they’ll start attaching external speakers at some point to compensate for the lack of engine noise

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points
*

Near motorways where they go high speed the reduction will be negligible, but is material around lower speed streets.

Something not mentioned is the significantly reduced brake dust as most EV braking is regenerative.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Is this really substantial? With a skilled manual driver or a clever automatic gearbox, the majority of braking should be engine braking. It seems to me that regenerative braking is typically replacing what would be engine braking, the unplanned stops still use friction brakes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Noise pollution is a function of speed.

At low speeds, it’s mostly engine noise. At highway speeds, it’s mostly tire noise.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

Many city streets have near highway speed limits or designs that easily allow cars to reach near highway speeds.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

Also Pedestrian crash avoidance mitigation (PCAM) systems are great, and will be required on all new vehicles soon.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

They also reduce noise pollution

Only at low speeds. At high speeds for a modern car the tyre noise is louder that the engine noise, and since electric cars are heavier they would be noisier.

And reduce the propping of petrostates

Replace mining oil with mining rare metals. Not a big improvement.

They also help normalise the usage of renewable energy (this is a factor that shouldn’t be overlooked, imo)

Why? Electric cars are causing a huge load on the grid and will continue to do so. In countries that haven’t managed the load and invested heavily in renewable capacity, those EVs are powered by fossil fuels.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

You could also potentially use them as a solution for more efficiently allocating energy, less by pumping energy back into the grid, and more by running home power from the car battery during peak hours, rather than having to produce too much energy during off hours, having to shut down the power during peak hours or provide limited access, or having to provide power for less people. You can make the power go further, and especially for renewables which have potentially less consistent energy production (the nice part being that peak demand roughly lines up with peak production for solar power, at least, in the summer). But none of that’s really an attractive proposition to the american car buyer who wants to travel as far as possible at the drop of a hat, and you have to make car batteries larger and the cars themselves less efficient to compensate for this power draw and power storage that may or may not be happening at any given moment, so it’s sort of self-defeating with the american car market.

Obviously, it isn’t really a more equitable or more efficient solution broadly than doing something like pumping water uphill. Or trying to limit demand in the first place by decreasing surface area of homes, by moving towards multiple units in one building, increasing r-values by using better building materials you could shell out for with a larger amount of occupants, yadda yadda urban design garbage. Stuff that generally is antithetical to car-centric infrastructure and thus electric cars. You also potentially run into problems where the as the grid as a whole becomes less relied upon, they make less money, and then the grid starts to fail further in a positive feedback loop. Poor people can’t afford rooftop solar and electric cars, because most of them can barely afford rent and aren’t really the ones making those decisions anyways.

permalink
report
parent
reply
67 points

Ugh guys come on, don’t let perfect be the enemy of good (or better). We cannot snap our fingers and fix everything. Incremental steps are necessary.

permalink
report
reply
25 points

Local commuter rail, walkable cities, and nationwide high speed rail are all necessary to completely eliminate 90% of individual car ownership. We should be advocating for these systems of convenience which will make car ownership obsolete while incentivizing EVs while the infrastructure is built up, not demonizing EVs and making them appear as useless and a waste of time for helping fight climate change. Plus we need EV utility vehicles and trucks for professionals who need them to do their job.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points
*

Incremental steps are not personal EVs. They are diesel and electric buses. EVs eliminate 1 problem (tailpipe emissions) while creating 2 more (battery manufacturing, increased vehicle weight making road and tire wear worse, and making them more deadly - there’s others, take your pick) and not addressing the other hundred problems with car dependence.

Buses use the same infrastructure as cars. Bus stops are stupid cheap in comparison to anything else. And then, bus lanes can be implemented to prioritise buses and keep them from getting stuck in traffic.

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points
*

The number one (by a long way) selling vehicle in the US is a massively over sized truck. Designed to be so heavy to avoid falling under emissions laws.

There is no electric vehicle that comes even close to that. You want those people interested in electric cars. They don’t give a single fuck about what your think about buses and nothing you will ever do in your lifetime will change that. Ever.

Getting people into EVs is an across the board incremental improvement in the exact definition of the word.

You’re right about the massive benefits of transit and trains in particular would be so amazing… but none of the people we want getting out of F150s give a single shit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

@xenoclast @ProgrammingSocks once you add a weight tax and special license qualifications they might start changing their tune

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

I don’t care about getting people into things. That’s a highly individualistic way to look at the problem. Car dependency is a societal problem, and marketing won’t solve societal problems. There needs to be a fundamental change in the way we (specifically the government) view transportation as a whole. (And as an extension to that, there also needs to be a change in regulation to close that loophole for light trucks.)

What’s important to me is getting lawmakers and those advocating to the lawmakers on board with funding public transit and making the streets safer for all people using them. Yes we need people on board too but really only enough to get these ideas in lawmakers heads as a major issue. A minority. The majority of people don’t understand or care and that’s fine, because their minds will start to change once they see it actually working. In the words of NJB, there are not that many car people, bike people, or train people. Most people just want to get to their destinations as quickly and efficiently as possible.

We don’t live in a direct democracy. 51% don’t have to explicitly agree to laws. The government passes laws that are bad for people and the majority disagree with all the time. Not saying the majority of people disagree, I honestly think they couldn’t care less. I’m just saying we don’t actually have to recruit hundreds of millions of people.

Unfortunately, a major part of this plan is going to have to restrict what oil companies are allowed to do and nowadays that’s seemingly impossible. Only seemingly though. Nothing is truly set in stone.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Ok you try riding the bus everywhere with your whole family dude. That’s not happening. It’s incredibly inconvenient. Especially given the infrastructure we have.

I’m loving my electric car and hope you all get one.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

Having been to the UK and Germany, it’s incredibly convenient and much quicker than driving in many cases. I’ve used the metro where I live and it’s also much quicker, the only issue is the closest bus stop is 20 minutes away by foot. That’s easy to fix though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I have an electric vehicle. I ride it everywhere in my city and it costs basically nothing. It’s an ebike. I’ve done nothing to it, it’s a normal 350w motor capped at 32 km/h. And damn does it feel so much better than driving in traffic.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

It’s not that perfect (public transport) is more difficult than good (electric cars). More often good is the enemy of perfect since the industry is lobbying for it and against the other

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Hence mocking Musk instead of guillotining him.

permalink
report
parent
reply
59 points
*

This is pure oil company propaganda. I hate cars with a passion and want a car free society. We will get there but it will take time. But We need to get rid of gas NOW.

Anyone who spews this kind of filth is literally the enemy.

permalink
report
reply
17 points
*

I really do not think so. Oil propaganda would support cars rather than be against it. I’m quite sure this is directed at the people who think EVs are a full solution.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

This comic ISN’T anti-car, it’s anti-electric car.

Absolutely oil propaganda.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

I already discussed this exact thing once before on Lemmy, I’ll link to my old comment chain https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/3441189

And some other of the artist’s comics https://twitter.com/GregVann/status/1085788036573540354

But in short, no, in context this artist is anti-car.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

Why, then, does the picture with all the problems depict a gas car, and why is “tailpipe emissions” listed as one of the problems?

Also, usually corporate propaganda is done by less well-established cartoonists that don’t have reputations to ruin.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

It’s criticising cars in general, one if it’s arguments is that EV’s don’t solve some lf the main problems of cars (which gas cars also have)

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

Is your reading comprehension in the shitter?

Mate, the whole comic shits on cars as a whole, each and every part that electrics and gas both share. The only thing making electric better being tailpipe emissions and nothing else.

The messaging here is clear, eliminate the car as a concept for transport and stop accepting lukewarm solutions as anything but unacceptable.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

EVs are the only solution to getting ourselves out of this mess. We can’t ban all cars in the next few years like we can with all gasoline cars. Building proper public transport takes time, especially when it’s been sabotaged to such a point. We need to transit to a carless society through ev or it’s literally over.

Propaganda is a slimy business and their current strat is bash EVs and bring up nihilism. Regardless of your intentions, you are being their mouthpiece by posting this.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

I think we live in very different parts of the world. Where I’m from, it is quite self-evident that we have to transition to EVs, and most people in fact already do. However a lot of people seem to forget that EVs only solve part of the problem and that we have to think further, so from my perspective this comic can basically only be used for good.

But I do get that this could be used by reactionaries to push back against clean energy in places where such sentiments are common. However, I don’t think that’s a particularly big problem on the Fediverse.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points

The only solution EVs provide is a pathway for automotive companies to continue to exist. They solve nothing and their existence continues to enable suburban sprawl, lack of public transportation, and the alienation of a car-centric society. You are trash for supporting EVs and you aren’t interested in a better world, one without cars.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Why would Big Oil support cars that don’t use its product?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

the people who think EVs are a full solution.

Those people don’t exist. These kinds of arguments are only made to cause disagreement. It’s like car-racism.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Did you really just say car racism lmao.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

My brother in Christ, you literally have no idea how much stuff is made out of petrochemicals, do you? Try asphalt, industrial solvents, cosmetics, any real lubricant, fertilizers, pesticides, textiles, circuitry, detergents, insulation, PVC, paint, adhesives, roofing material, synthetic rubbers, as well as a ton of pharmaceutical products and food additives. And that’s not even an exhaustive list. Gasoline is a big part of the petrochemical industry, but it’s not the totality of it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I do know how much we use petrochemicals. Gasoline is not a direct synonym for petrochemicals, it’s definition is fuel for combustion engines. None of the products you mentioned are made out of gasoline.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I’m curious why you think ocean microplastics can stick around for a few more decades or centuries

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I was gonna argue that rolling resistance doesn’t have a large impact on efficiency, but apparently I was wrong

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_resistance

An example of a very light high-speed passenger train is the N700 Series Shinkansen, which weighs 715 tonnes and carries 1323 passengers, resulting in a per-passenger weight of about half a tonne. This lighter weight per passenger, combined with the lower rolling resistance of steel wheels on steel rail means that an N700 Shinkansen is much more energy efficient than a typical automobile.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

The funny thing is, electric cars help with the tire/brake dust and mined materials issue. Regenerative braking reduces the wear on brakes, and electric motors provide smoother power delivery, which reduces tire wear. As for the mined materials, electric cars generally take more material to make, but they are also easier to recycle, and the batteries themselves are able to be recycled in to even better batteries that they were when brand new.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I don’t feel like grabbing the source right now but EVs give off higher amounts of tire dust due to their heavier weight.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

But We need to get rid of gas NOW.

That’s fine, but electric cars are only moving the gas right now.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

Anyone who thinks cars are a solution to anything is my enemy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
47 points

Climate change is a big enough problem that it is worth prioritizing.

permalink
report
reply
32 points

I see them as “diet” cars. Similar to if someone is trying to cut back on sodas, switching to diet sodas is a net benefit. That’s not to say diet sodas are good for you or remotely healthy, they’re just less bad than the alternative.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-18 points
*

Yeah, except the sweeteners they use to make diet sodas “diet” make those sodas just as bad, if not worse, than the originals. Which also works for the car analogy given the source of the energy most EVs use :/

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

Source? Because from what I’ve learned, they’ve studied aspartame so much now it’s almost silly, and it has never been proven to be “worse than sugar”. Though the sugar industry is really happy you believe otherwise.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Source please. (There isn’t one)

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

given the source of the energy most EVs use :/

What? This is hilariously wrong.

A profoundly filthy coal power plant has multimillion dollar filtration the size of your damn apartment. That gross coal is scrubbed more than the gasoline from any vehicle possibly could be.

In a first world country it’s not possible to have an electric car as dirty per joule as a gas vehicle.

Further, the powertrain is direct and therefore dramatically more efficient, so on a distance basis you get an additional multiplier. That’s where the EPA MPGe comes from - total energy content of 1 gallon of gasoline, converted to range on the electric vehicle.

That’s about 33 kWh in one gallon, which is about half the total storage capacity of my Bolt EUV 2023 (65 kWh) which has about 240mi of range on a full charge, which is why the MPGe is ~120mi/gal, which for an equally polluting power source as a personal gas vehicle, is 5-6x cleaner. Public DC fast chargers are frequently exclusively renewably powered.

It’s impressive because literally every possible angle of your statement is hilariously incorrect.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I wouldn’t say prioritizing rather than worth practicing. Corporations do much more damage than all the automobile drivers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions

Transportation (28% of 2021 greenhouse gas emissions) – The transportation sector generates the largest share of greenhouse gas emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions from transportation primarily come from burning fossil fuel for our cars, trucks, ships, trains, and planes. Over 94% of the fuel used for transportation is petroleum based, which includes primarily gasoline and diesel.2

To further break it down:

The largest sources of transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions include passenger cars, medium- and heavy-duty trucks, and light-duty trucks, including sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks, and minivans. These sources account for over half of the emissions from the transportation sector.

So the idea that transportation emissions from regular people is totally negligible compared to corporate excesses isn’t actually realistic. It’s a major chunk of it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Exactly. We’re a minority but it’s still like 15%-20% of the overall problem that’s addressable.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Exactly. Corporations ABSOLUTELY are a problem we NEED to fight. But its also not an excuse to pretend we’re all completely blameless. People get furious when you tell them we cant sit around and wait for climate change to magically fix itself or billionaires to magically become good and stop. But that WE are going to have to actually make changes and put our money where our mouths are

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Corporations. Ok, so that’s out of my responsibility then, since I don’t buy anything from corporations. Good to know.

permalink
report
parent
reply
46 points

Can I just have good public transit, or safe bike lanes, I don’t even want a car.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

I’m lucky enough to live somewhere with 24/7 public transit and generally walkable spaces. Some of my coworkers have moved out of the city to cheaper places and I’m just like yeah sure you pay less for rent or your mortgage, but now you’re in a car-first wasteland.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

To keep in line with the meme, you must acknowledge that bikes also have pollution from tire wear and replacement, require road salt many places, causes accidents which lead to wounds or death of humans and animals and causes pollution from brake wear and manifacturing.

As the post clearly implies, if you can’t fix every issue with something simultaneously, then you should’t attempt to fix anything at all. /s

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I don’t even think you have to fix every issue. Human existence by nature requires us to use and change our environment and our job is to minimize that so we can continue living on this planet.

Both of those examples solve our issues to a point where they’re non-existent. Yes, they’re still produced but they’re well within our manageable amounts and would reverse much of the damage we did if we did them on mass.

I’m not even necessarily against electric cars. I just don’t want one personally, I don’t think they’re great or even the solution, but they’re certainly better than combustion. They just still aren’t great, especially when we already have the actual solutions.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Fuck Cars

!fuck_cars@lemmy.ml

Create post

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

This community exists for the following reasons:

  • to raise awareness around the dangers, inefficiencies and injustice that can come from car dependence.
  • to allow a place to discuss and promote more healthy transport methods and ways of living.

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.

Community stats

  • 3.1K

    Monthly active users

  • 719

    Posts

  • 14K

    Comments