this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2024
138 points (82.5% liked)

Asklemmy

43826 readers
861 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've seen a lot of posts here on Lemmy, specifically in the "fuck cars" communities as to how Electric Vehicles do pretty much nothing for the Climate, but I continue to see Climate activists everywhere try pushing so, so hard for Electric Vehicles.

Are they actually beneficial to the planet other than limiting exhaust, or is that it? or maybe exhaust is a way bigger problem?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

So the implication here is that we can't get rid of cars everywhere, so we shouldn't reduce the use of cars anywhere?

[โ€“] gibmiser@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Nope, not at all what I said. The OP made it sound like there was no practical reason for EVs and I gave one.

By all means humans should cut back on... well, everything.

The OP said nothing at about reducing the use of cars, and what's more, people make the same objection about rural people needing a car to get to town even in discussions explicitly about creating walkable cities. Even if we read into the question an implication that we should ditch cars, where does the idea come from that it must happen everywhere, all at once? The argument feels disingenuous.