I think it’s possible to accept that, while a city without cars obviously preferable, the electrification of vehicles is still a net positive given the enormous inertia of car culture.
the key thing that makes it an actual positive is bundling electrification with smaller sized vehicles.
If we could have all the new electric cars be smaller and lighter than existing combustion cars then it would actually be an unqualified improvement.
And ideally we could even get people to switch to things that barely even qualify as cars, stuff like the renault twizy
I drive a 2019 Fiat 500e as my daily getting-around-town car. A little more than “barely even a car” but it gets about 80 miles on an overnight charge from a normal 110V outlet.
I would love a small sedan that’s got 200+ miles of range, fast charging, and isn’t made by a company run by a fascist. Nobody seems to want to make them at any price.
Yeah one of the things that made me hate tesla early on is their refusal to make anything other than standard oversized cars, like for fuck’s sake they even keep the front bit and put a storage area in it, that’s absurd!
And really it’s a general problem with the vehicle market, including micromobility. We need more stuff that’s between moped and bicycle, and stuff that’s between car and motorbike.
America has a more decent selection of sub-moped options, and europe at least has a couple brands of moped cars but they… have a distinct hot-wheels vibe which doesn’t exactly inspire confidence…
And i think we’ve seen evidence of how much demand there is for these in-between vehicles, e-bike and e-scooters have exploded in popularity.
Net positives mean something, though. We want a 10/10 solution, but saying an achievable 6/10 is the same as no change at all is exactly what the people who oppose us want us to think. That if we can’t get rid of every car on the road, we might as well have done nothing. That’s terrible! Of course we can make things incrementally better!
We all want cars to generally go away from what should be walkable areas. Replace them with public transit and bikes and just walking. That kind of culture shift is going to take generations. Less smog and carbon dioxide being spewed into the air is a good thing. (Provided the trend towards solar and wind power continues.)
Assuming people get electric vehicles when their combustion cars reach end of life and not just trading in a four year old SUV for its electric variant, the I think it is.
Ignoring the ideal wherein privately owned vehicles decrease over time, of course. Continued development of EVs will be a benefit in terms of battery technology and motor efficiency, among other things.
The efficiency of an EV SUV will never be anywhere near the efficiency of an (electric) bicycle. Motor and battery efficiency also improves for bicycles. The bicycle will always need only a fraction of the resources, in materials, electricity and occupied space.
Yes I agree. I didn’t imply an SUV is somehow better than a few bikes. My comment wasn’t an argument for cars nor continuing car dependancy, only touching on a benefit from their manufacture - negatives often do have silver linings.
In a non car dependant future, I’d still expect the buses and ambulances and whatnot else to be electric.
It’s easier because I can make the decision myself and I can do it without much planning or coordination. I replace my car periodically anyway, so there may be no real difference (in my case my ice car was nine years old and I needed something for my teens to use, so an EV was the logical choice)
Modifying a city for walkability takes many years, decades, even assuming everyone else agrees, politicians are supportive, and there is some sort of budget. We can’t afford to just wait for the ideal solution
The only problem they will solve is air/noise pollution and maybe power efficiency. But for urban planning the space usage is the same, and traffic jams are the same. Also they move the same ammount of people.
They are a small upgrade in general (maybe more for cities with high air pollution).
My experience living 1 block away from an interstate in Denver was that 95% of the time you barely notice the highway. The 5% of the time is exhaust noise and subwoofers.
It embeds the existing dominant individual, resource-wasting mode of transport even deeper into the culture (and urban planning). That makes it a negative for urban environments. Bit different story in very sparsely populated areas.
I think it’s possible to accept that, while a city without cars obviously preferable, the electrification of vehicles is still a net positive given the enormous inertia of car culture.
the key thing that makes it an actual positive is bundling electrification with smaller sized vehicles.
If we could have all the new electric cars be smaller and lighter than existing combustion cars then it would actually be an unqualified improvement.
And ideally we could even get people to switch to things that barely even qualify as cars, stuff like the renault twizy
I drive a 2019 Fiat 500e as my daily getting-around-town car. A little more than “barely even a car” but it gets about 80 miles on an overnight charge from a normal 110V outlet.
I would love a small sedan that’s got 200+ miles of range, fast charging, and isn’t made by a company run by a fascist. Nobody seems to want to make them at any price.
Yeah one of the things that made me hate tesla early on is their refusal to make anything other than standard oversized cars, like for fuck’s sake they even keep the front bit and put a storage area in it, that’s absurd!
And really it’s a general problem with the vehicle market, including micromobility. We need more stuff that’s between moped and bicycle, and stuff that’s between car and motorbike.
America has a more decent selection of sub-moped options, and europe at least has a couple brands of moped cars but they… have a distinct hot-wheels vibe which doesn’t exactly inspire confidence…
And i think we’ve seen evidence of how much demand there is for these in-between vehicles, e-bike and e-scooters have exploded in popularity.
Is it? I think if you include opportunity cost and “well i switched to an electric car now i falsely believe the problem is solved”, not so much.
It’s just easier, in some ways, because it’s a smaller change.
Net positives mean something, though. We want a 10/10 solution, but saying an achievable 6/10 is the same as no change at all is exactly what the people who oppose us want us to think. That if we can’t get rid of every car on the road, we might as well have done nothing. That’s terrible! Of course we can make things incrementally better!
We all want cars to generally go away from what should be walkable areas. Replace them with public transit and bikes and just walking. That kind of culture shift is going to take generations. Less smog and carbon dioxide being spewed into the air is a good thing. (Provided the trend towards solar and wind power continues.)
Assuming people get electric vehicles when their combustion cars reach end of life and not just trading in a four year old SUV for its electric variant, the I think it is.
Ignoring the ideal wherein privately owned vehicles decrease over time, of course. Continued development of EVs will be a benefit in terms of battery technology and motor efficiency, among other things.
The efficiency of an EV SUV will never be anywhere near the efficiency of an (electric) bicycle. Motor and battery efficiency also improves for bicycles. The bicycle will always need only a fraction of the resources, in materials, electricity and occupied space.
Yes I agree. I didn’t imply an SUV is somehow better than a few bikes. My comment wasn’t an argument for cars nor continuing car dependancy, only touching on a benefit from their manufacture - negatives often do have silver linings.
In a non car dependant future, I’d still expect the buses and ambulances and whatnot else to be electric.
It’s easier because I can make the decision myself and I can do it without much planning or coordination. I replace my car periodically anyway, so there may be no real difference (in my case my ice car was nine years old and I needed something for my teens to use, so an EV was the logical choice)
Modifying a city for walkability takes many years, decades, even assuming everyone else agrees, politicians are supportive, and there is some sort of budget. We can’t afford to just wait for the ideal solution
The only problem they will solve is air/noise pollution and maybe power efficiency. But for urban planning the space usage is the same, and traffic jams are the same. Also they move the same ammount of people.
They are a small upgrade in general (maybe more for cities with high air pollution).
Not much noise reduction. After 50 kph, tires are louder than engines anyways.
Sure there are the occasional busted/“tuned” exhaust comes out very loud, but the majority of the din is just wheels on the road.
is it even that high? in my experience the tyre noise feels louder than most engines down at 40km/h
At 50 kph tires are louder. From 30-50 kph tires can be louder.
There’s a lot of factors (notably vehicle weight, tires type and tire age)
My experience living 1 block away from an interstate in Denver was that 95% of the time you barely notice the highway. The 5% of the time is exhaust noise and subwoofers.
While this is true, cars of any kind shouldn’t be going faster than 50k in a town/city anyway
Yeah even the air they push makes more noise. Electric buses are another story though.
It embeds the existing dominant individual, resource-wasting mode of transport even deeper into the culture (and urban planning). That makes it a negative for urban environments. Bit different story in very sparsely populated areas.