They certainly improve noise and air pollution gigantically, Christ knows how fecked I am having to grow up around cars.
Obviously nothings perfect, but Iâll take a world of EVs over a world of combustion vehicles.
yeah, OPâs shit-take is moronic. EVâs propulsion can be entirely carbon offset, not something you can do with a car that has an engine spewing co2.
NOW, if you want to talk about tires/plastic particles, thatâs a whole other story where EVâs do not have an edge - yet.
Battery powered EVs also have a greater environmental impact to manufacture than equivalent ICE vehicles, but the greater efficiency in energy conversion and the lack of emissions offsets this in less than five years of use on average. Ideally, it will continue to improve as battery technology advances as well.
They barely improve noise pollution, the loudest factor on a moving car are the tires. If you use electricity out of a coal powered power plant you just outsource the air pollution. And I canât imagine that it is healthy to live around a the mines that are needed to get all the ressources to build the battery and the car itself.
This is worse then ânothing is perfectâ, this is lying to yourself to continue to fuck up the planet and fuck up people who are not you. Congratulations on your âcleaner cityâ.
Edit: maybe tell me where I am wrong instead of just downvoting. I think I have a valid point to diskuss.
Your comment raises some valid points about the environmental impact of electric vehicles (EVs), but there are a few misconceptions that need to be addressed.
Firstly, regarding noise pollution, while itâs true that tire noise can be a significant source of noise from a moving car, especially at higher speeds, itâs not accurate to say that EVs barely improve noise pollution. EVs are generally quieter than conventional vehicles, especially at lower speeds. This can significantly reduce noise pollution in urban areas, where speeds are often low.
Secondly, the point about electricity from coal-powered plants is a common argument, but it oversimplifies the issue. Yes, if an EV is charged using electricity from a coal-powered plant, itâs effectively outsourcing some of its emissions. However, the overall emissions are still typically lower than those from conventional vehicles. Furthermore, the electricity grid is getting cleaner over time as we shift towards renewable sources, which will further reduce the emissions from EVs.
As for the environmental impact of mining for resources to build batteries and cars, this is indeed a concern. However, itâs important to note that conventional vehicles also require resource extraction for their production, and the extraction and refining of oil for fuel is a major source of environmental damage. Moreover, the battery production process is becoming more efficient, and there are ongoing efforts to improve the recycling of batteries.
Lastly, the assertion that advocating for EVs is âlying to yourself to continue to fuck up the planet and fuck up people who are not youâ is a rather harsh judgement. While itâs true that EVs are not a perfect solution and have their own environmental impact, they are generally considered a step in the right direction towards reducing our reliance on fossil fuels and mitigating climate change.
Citations: [1] When we switch to electric vehicles everything is going ⊠https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/comments/oqpalp/when_we_switch_to_electric_vehicles_everything_is/ [2] Noise is all around us https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36024887 [3] Electric cars noise pollution https://www.fastcompany.com/90774779/heres-what-science-says-about-electric-cars-and-their-impact-on-noise-pollution [4] Answers https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/international-schools/pdfs/ilower-secondary/exploring-science-international/ExploringScienceInternationalAnswers/int_esws_at_y7_ap_sb_answers_ttpp.pdf [5] How far do I need to be from a highway/parkway to no ⊠https://ask.metafilter.com/271697/How-far-do-I-need-to-be-from-a-highway-parkway-to-no-longer-hear-it [6] Answers SP1a Vectors and scalars https://resources.finalsite.net/images/v1584024880/sydenhamlewishamschuk/agtqfqee1mgv0nnk165x/SP1andSP2answers.pdf
Thank you for your answer! My points are a result of my thoughts without looking anything up. You are much more thorough.
So EVs are loud, but ICEs are louder. The production of EVs is dirty, but producing and running ICEs is dirtier. Running ICEs now could damage the nature, because a lot of power is still produced with coal, but the future will fix it.
EVs are better than ICEs. But saying that EVs are a step in the right direction feels very wrong. We have one big problem - âcar infrastructureâ. And giving the avarage Joe/Jane the idea, that they can better the world by using EVs is a waste of time and energy that could be used to go in a much better direction: public transport, bikes, well planned cities. I donât think Joe wants to sell his new EV, even if he had alternatives, and he will continue to vote for more roads and parking spaces.
But compromises are important: I would recommend everyone, who HAS to use a car with no alternatives and whose car is not up to good environment standards anymore, to buy an EV instead of an ICE.
This is a fantastically ignorant response in damn near every aspect. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, and wrong, fuck you, I suspect youâre a shell or exxon employee.
Good that you took the time to respond âfuck youâ to me, I hope it makes you feel better.
Sadly your response didnât make me think all that much, âwrong wrong wrongâ and insults arenât great arguments after all.
Oh boy, you clearly never had a semi truck engine breaking down a hill 30 yards from your house at 3am in the morning.
I live near a road with a 100 km/h speed limit, all I hear is the tires on the road, no engine. I guess an electric car could be even louder, as they are heavier. The loudest vehicles here are the trucks, but again, canât hear the engine, just the sound of the tires. Especially when it rains and the road is wet.
I donât know what âbreaking down the hillâ means, but of course there are scenarios where combustion engines are louder. When they wait on a red light e.g. My point is: EVs suck as much as combution engine cars, they are both loud.
Why not opt for the option of more public transport, bikes and cars only where they are absolutly neccessary - for all I care EVs.
Clearly you donât live near a road where V8s and muffler less cars fly by. And Coal Powered plants are going extinct everywhere except China. Even in my Oil and Gas State, the local power company is building out a solar farm.
So your point is the world will be fine as soon as every person on earth drives an EV? We have a systematic problem and people get hung on the point of EVs vs. combustion engine cars. This should not be the question, they both suck in their own way.
Your footprint is massive if you get rid of your combustion engine car and buy an EV just for the sake of driving an EV. Better would be: get rid of your car entirely (if poasible) and buy a good bike.
And I belive it is already possible for many people and pure convenience is holding them back, while the world burns. And they buy EVs and pat themselfes on the shoulder, as âI am not the problem, the dirty combustion engines destroy the worldâ. Wrong direction of thinking, if you want to better the environment and life quality.
Donât let perfect be the enemy of good.
The carbon footprint of building an EV is larger than an ICE, no one is disputing this. But once in operation the EV catches up and through its life is a better alternative over all. So why not take that win? Why be so vehemently against a solution that reduces carbon footprint and air pollution? Because fuck cars right?
Because the real problem is our car centric society and we wonât fix that by switching every ICE with a EV and tell the people they have to drive a lot so the advantage of an EV comes to light.
EVs have their place, but we could do so so so much better with all the energy we put in them.
So yeah, âfuck carsâ, if that is the level you prefer and understand.
Your statement then should be: EVs are better than combustion engine cars. Period. Your first statement is clearly wrong, as EVs are not good for the environment. Just better then combustion engines. Far from good, further away from perfect.
Donât think you do something good when you buy an EV instead of a bike - if you have the choice.
Making this choice possible should be our main concern, not EVs vs. combustion cars. They make us as lazy as your statement is.
Edit: to the Downvoters: where is my statement wrong?
From what Iâve seen: EVs normally produce about half the carbon of regular cars, mostly from making the batteries. Switching fully to EVs would therefore reduce worldwide emissions by about 8%, compared to 16% by just getting rid of cars completely. EVs also donât fix the societal problems of cars including sprawl and all of its related problems.
An ideal future would have no internal combustion engines and only EVs. But there would be a lot fewer of them, and preferably in a much smaller form factor.
As an unrelated side note, when I read âICEâ, the first thing that came to mind was the train. Iâve never even been to GermanyâŠ
They are the better alternative compared to combustion considering the carbon dioxide footprint.
Yet, of course, to really address climate change and the destruction of our planet we need to get away from cars.
Letâs think then of electric VEHICLES. you know buses, trucks included.
Being against electric cars, at this moment, is being for combustion cars.
