This is a ridiculous article. I acknowledge that we could always do better for the environment, but the headline almost sounds as if we should stop producing EV’s and go back to our sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide emitting machines, which also tear through and shed tire waste because they do it 20% more efficiently. How about we focus on tire reconstruction to harder tires that have better longevity on heavier cars.
this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2023
18 points (100.0% liked)
Environment
3925 readers
2 users here now
Environmental and ecological discussion, particularly of things like weather and other natural phenomena (especially if they're not breaking news).
See also our Nature and Gardening community for discussion centered around things like hiking, animals in their natural habitat, and gardening (urban or rural).
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Fucking seriously
Gaslight me harder, daddy. Was this written by an oil exec?
Or, you know, also sell cars that fit standard daily use cases like commuting. People have never driven personal vehicles exclusively for 400-mile trips. We're just repeating the bullshit transition to SUVs for going around the corner for a gallon of milk.
Nissan Leaf and Chevy Bolt are those vehicles and they don't appear to be any heavier than their ICE counterparts. This article is just fear-mongering about EVs. Tire degradation may be a serious concern, but it's not actually unique to EVs and this article isn't really setting itself up to be taken seriously.
I wouldn't say it is unique to EVs. Not a huge fan of the framing of "they must be heavier," but it's important to know what sort of propaganda we're seeing on the EV transition.
Why aren't we taxing vehicles by weight? Regardless of what powers it. Wouldn't that incentivize smaller, lighter, and more efficient vehicles? Instead of the "I'm the biggest on the road" arms race we have now.
OH wow.. whoah. idk where to start with this. Ok, that would require people to adjust their lifestyles and actually do something. But WORSE, it would ask the auto industry to change. Sorry, this is a non-starter.
Slash S
It would make the roads safer as well. You're more likely to be badly injured or die in a crash with a giant SUV or truck than with a compact car.
The US should be using Japanese style kei cars for commuting, not Explorers and F250s.
They do in Australia. My 1.7 tonne station wagon costs a good deal more to insure than my wife's Kia Rio.
On the other hand, the fact we have to register each vehicle when we can only physically drive one at a time strongly discourages people owning two cars, so they end up with the bigger one in many cases even though most of the time a smaller car would be fine.
That's cars for you. Anything that large and convenient can't be good for the environment, no matter the power source or configuration.
Then stop making big vehicles for the U.S. auto market and stop only selling big vehicles in the U.S. auto market!
https://youtu.be/jN7mSXMruEo [NotJustBikes video about stupidly big vehicles]
Not just bikes my beloved