this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2023
448 points (83.8% liked)

Memes

45595 readers
1068 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] WheeGeetheCat@sh.itjust.works 114 points 1 year ago (4 children)

not sure if it hits like it did in my head

[–] baseless_discourse@mander.xyz 58 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Electric cars are here to save the car industry, not the environment.

The most environmentally friendly car is the car you already have, and the most environmentally friendly (also safest, healthiest, quietest, just in general the most considerate) way to get from point A to point B is by walking, biking, bus, or train.

The only time EV saves the environment is when all of the following are met:

  • your old car is completely gone,
  • there is zero way to get to where you need to be without a car,
  • and you have been fighting for good transport and safe bike lane all along.
[–] AspieEgg@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 year ago

I bought an electric car because it was a better car for my needs. I got a good deal on it. Electric cars have fewer, simpler moving parts. They require fewer oil changes and don’t have to deal with heat dissipation. I can also have it plugged into my house each night, which means I always have a “full tank” every morning. I can set the heat or air conditioning to come on on a schedule because it doesn’t produce carbon monoxide. The car is much quieter and drives a lot smoother.

They have a lot of benefits, but they don’t exactly save the environment. Lithium mining is very destructive to the local environment and it’s done in countries with questionable ethics around worker health and safety. Most experts agree that over the lifespan of a car, electric cars are better for the world environment than gas vehicles, but if you really want to make an impact on the environment, taking public transit or biking or walking or other forms of micro-mobility would actually make a way bigger impact. And if those kinds of things are difficult where you live, you should really be supporting public policy to make that better.

[–] schnokobaer@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago

Very good. Bottom panel could also read "to save the automotive industry ☝️"

[–] silvercove@lemdro.id 104 points 1 year ago (10 children)

Electric cars are to save automobile industry profits. Not the planet.

If you want to save the planet, then ride a bicycle.

[–] steinbring@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

... or walk?

Fewer CO2 emissions is a good goal if you are going to buy a car. Keeping it as long as possible is a better goal.

[–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 year ago

... or walk?

Both have their role. Walking is appropriate for local short trips, while bicycles allow you to cover more distance, and is in turn superseded by transit in potential distance covered, while still being a low emissions mode of transportation.

Fewer CO2 emissions is a good goal if you are going to buy a car. Keeping it as long as possible is a better goal.

If the infrastructure allows for it where you live, going car-free is an even better goal for reducing CO2-emissions, and is only one of a long list of benefits of not traveling by car.

Barring that, voting and influencing politicians that can build infrastructure enabling more car-free lives is a good step in the right direction.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] expatriado@lemmy.world 38 points 1 year ago (1 children)

nature: "you should take the train instead"

[–] Surface_Detail@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

The train doesn't stop at the recycling centre. Nor does it stop at my childrens' schools. Ditto my office, the supermarket, IKEA, the house of the person I just bought weed from.

The layout of our towns expanded with the ubiquity of cars. Services agglomerated and became situated where land was cheap rather than central.

Bikes and light mass transit have their use cases but removing cars is not feasible for the majority of households

[–] cooopsspace@infosec.pub 37 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The people who broke the testla are the ones who murdered the tree by putting asphalt right up to its trunk.

[–] Surface_Detail@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Or the tree trunk grew to the asphalt.

[–] cooopsspace@infosec.pub 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Either the asphalt shohldnt be there or a smaller tree should have been used.

Nonetheless it's clear someone has asphalted right up to the trunk and that should have never occurred.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What a weak tree, in my city the trees pretend the asphalt isn't there and the roots grow right through it

[–] Surface_Detail@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

For real, the pavements here are like bunched-up carpet from all the roots, lol

[–] thisfro@slrpnk.net 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The planet is subscribed to !fuck_cars@lemmy.ml

[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 29 points 1 year ago

Weird disconnect here though that stopping climate change was about saving trees, and not our own sorry arses.

[–] FederatedSaint@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago

I bought an electric car to insulate me from gas prices, because the instant torque makes them fun to drive, and because the cost of ownership is way lower than an equivalent gas car.

It had nothing to do with the environment, but if it helps, great.

[–] nothing@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Great joke!

And for the rest: yes, electric cars aren't saving the environment. We just don't have historical data on the effects like we do with fossil fuels. Add in trashed batteries, lithium mining, slave mining, and the shipping costs (in pollution mostly) and it's possibly worse (just counting consumers). We really need to deal with shipping globally and major corporations effects. But I bet you already knew that.

Doesn't matter, companies love greenwashing these days

[–] moonsnotreal@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

(Just forget about the lithium mines)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Irony would be the car still kills the planet. I think this is technically coincidence. But I'm in no way an expert and could be entirely wrong. Just commenting to see if anyone definitively has the answer.

Edit: to be clear, I'm discussing the difference between irony and coincidence. My bad.

[–] Uprise42@artemis.camp 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

They’re significantly less damaging to the environment but the lithium mining is awful and the resources to generate electric currently are pretty damning. But all things considered, even with those they are significantly more eco friendly so if we could focus on green electric generation EV’s would be extremely more friendly.

But a real solution to green transportation involves cutting out vehicles for personal use. Using public transportation like buses and stuff (which can be electric too) would cut down on transportation emissions significantly. Intercity travel is tough because of the distance. Trains are an option, but honestly they aren’t fast enough for most people when you’re traveling hundreds of miles. I think electric cars are still the better option there. Them moving trucks to electric is a big help too. Tractor trailers aren’t as inefficient as many people think. They use exhaust fluid to curb tons of emissions. But they do an extreme amount of driving so it still has a significant impact.

More solar, wind, or hydro electric would make us a very green planet that costs a lot of money and not much interest from people with the money to do it. It’s a solved problem, but no one wants to implement the solution

[–] buckykat@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Trains can go a lot faster than electric cars what are you talking about

[–] Uprise42@artemis.camp 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Trains can go faster, but have a stricter schedule. Cars are extremely convenient. You can leave when you want. Want to be in a city at 8 am? It’s a hour away by car so leave by 7. However the only train getting there before 8 leaves at 6. But it takes 20 minutes to get to the station. Or, if we go super green, it take 45 since your walking. You need to leave at 5

It’s similar with a bus, but more manageable when most stops have buses stopping every 15-30 minutes. So for a bus you may need to leave at 6:30 or whatever to make it on time.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Tischkante@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 1 year ago

Technically the city, that didn't take of the tree, killed the car and the tree.

[–] neptune@dmv.social 4 points 1 year ago

Alright Alanis, here's a fork

[–] Gork@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

"If I'm going down I'm taking one of you with me!"

[–] LDaxin@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

It looks still driveable to be honest.

load more comments
view more: next ›