527
submitted 1 year ago by Custoslibera@lemmy.world to c/memes@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] SkyNTP@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago

The things you mentioned should absolutely happen in the areas that have the population density to make these solutions practical. Let's also remember that this is not 100% of the planet.

[-] Sunfoil@lemmy.world -4 points 1 year ago

This is 100% of the planet. What about living rurally stops you from maintaining or retrofitting current vehicles, or going two wheels?

[-] ThunderWhiskers@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

What about living rurally stops you from

maintaining or retrofitting current vehicles

Cost, accessibility, and vehicles don't last forever.

or going two wheels?

If you're talking about motorcycles, they are basically death traps and many people aren't comfortable on them. If you're talking about bicycles, they are basically death traps and people don't always want to exercise to get where they're going and rural areas are by definition sparsely populated, bikes would take forever Neither of those offers options for families or bad weather.

Like it or not personal vehicles are a necessity in most of America.

[-] ultra@feddit.ro 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Bikes are ok outside streets, but pretty dangerous on streets.

Motorcycles are way faster bikes that are mainly for streets. Truly death traps

[-] Sunfoil@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

So if rural people aren't maintaining their vehicles, what are they doing? Obviously they are and you're being silly. There are cars that when correctly maintained, have kept running for the entire history that cars have existed.

Great to see you have such an informed take on two wheeled vehicles. The issue with two wheels isn't engineering, it's public perception, fuelled by dumb takes like yours. Obviously we have to change what people perceive as viable personal transport.

The solution of two wheels in the EV space is quickly obvious. Most car journeys are a single person. You don't need a 2 ton box to carry one person places.

When solving for the limiting factors of electric drive systems, you need to minimize resistances. Two wheels is less rolling resistance, less weight, and adding an enclosure, less air resistance. Put the rider in a recumbent riding position and place the batteries underneath, you have an incredibly stable, low friction, light, personal EV that maximizes your effective range while being simple, cheap, accessible. The enclosed nature makes the rider as safe as they would be in a car in case of an accident, and you're as weather resistant too. Obviously families, workmen etc still need 4 wheels but as I said most car journeys are for a single person. These could be made for two people also.

[-] ThunderWhiskers@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

So if rural people aren't maintaining their vehicles, what are they doing? Obviously they are and you're being silly.

So what the fuck are you talking about then? Either you're implying that existing vehicle lifespans should be extended beyond what normal care allows through "maintenance" or it's irrelevant to the conversation.

I won't bother quoting the rest of your comment but the same question applies. What are you even talking about? Nobody said anything about engineering hurdles or the difficulties of an electric two wheeled vehicle.

You got so caught up in being "right" you forgot what the discussion was even about. I'll break it down.

Two. Wheeled. Solutions. Are. Not. Universally. Practical. Quit trying to assume you know what's best for everyone.

[-] Sunfoil@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Jesus, I'm not saying they're universally practical, that's why I have given a range of options. You're missing the point that people buy new cars while their old car is perfectly good.

Most cars will run for hundreds of thousands of miles with standard maintenance, which people neglect to do. Retrofitting electric solutions to existing cars would further extend their life, as the low work-life components are all in the drivetrain.

I outlined what a two wheeled electric solution should be because you dismissed the entire sector as death traps, which is wrong and counter productive. A perception we need to overcome when the only economic option for a lot of people's personal transport will be motorcycles of some description.

If there was a 25% adoption of motorcycles to commute with, traffic congestion could effectively disappear.

I do know what's best for everyone. Its stopping climate change, removing our reliance of fossil fuels and switching to more economical forms of transport. Rural people do not need to ferry themselves around in a 2 tonne Ford F-150 doing 10 mpg with a v8 to run basic errands. Because you obviously missed it; OBVIOUSLY FAMILIES AND WORKMEN NEED MORE CARRYING CAPACITY. For those situations an electric van or low cc petrol engine could be used. However 60%+ car journeys are single occupancy errands and commuting. There is no excuse for not being on two wheels in that case.

[-] ThunderWhiskers@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You're missing the point that people buy new cars while their old car is perfectly good.

Edit: I see now that you are saying people buy new cars to replace a perfectly good old car. This is true, and also not your decision to make for other people. I also don't see what that has to do with anything beyond new vehicle production, which EVs don't fix.

Most cars will run for hundreds of thousands of miles with standard maintenance, which people neglect to do.

Irrelevant.

Retrofitting electric solutions to existing cars would further extend their life, as the low work-life components are all in the drivetrain.

Do you know where to get this work done in your town? I don't. I live in an enormous metropolitan area so the service is almost certainly available, but I wouldn't even know how to start looking. And what about people in rural areas? You think it's available there? Or if it is where it can be found? This would be the accessibility I was talking about earlier.

I outlined what a two wheeled electric solution should be because you dismissed the entire sector as death traps, which is wrong and counter productive.

A motorcyclist is 25-30 times more likely to die in a fatal accident. So you're just wrong about that. And unless you're an automotive designer your two wheeled electric solutions are just pipe-dreams until someone actually commercializes one.

I feel like I'm coming off as being against EV when I am very much not. In fact I wish that mass transit was actually a practical solution everywhere, but it isn't. I wish that we could just leave combustions in the past but we aren't quite there yet.

I know for certain that you're coming off as an asshole who thinks he has all the answers but clearly you don't because I don't see your two-wheeled ev wonder car being advertised.

When people like you show up and start saying things like "the solution to climate change is for everyone else to ride bikes and use technology that doesn't exist yet", the only thing you're really doing is making the rest of the movement look more radical than it has to.

[-] Sunfoil@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

I never said I had all the answers I'm saying these are the areas people should be putting in effort to future proofing transportation. Just because you're ignorant of things doesn't make them impossible Sci Fi pipe dreams. Electrom, Velomobiles, Transition One. 3 examples of MANY of commercial enterprises successfully making the technology I'm discussing. We've had electric recumbent two wheel transport since at least the 90s. The solution is there; awareness and understanding is what is lacking, as I've said it's an issue of perception and PR with the general public, as you're elegantly displaying.

People's buying habits aren't my decision but they are all of our problems. The reason why it's relevant is because a Tesla is an incredibly environmentally damaging product to produce, and Smaller, lighter EVs that make more use of less batteries are a more environmentally efficient prospect.

People not maintaining what they have is not irrelevant it's one facet of this massive issue of waste and environmental damage in transport. Maximizing the work-life of their vehicles is one of many things people can be doing to help environmentally.

A motorcyclist is more likely to die on a traditional motorcycle, which while better than cars environmentally, isn't what I'm talking about, as I've said, these solutions are enclosed the crash protection is vastly superior than a normal motorcycle; two wheel transport aren't just motorcycles. I would also say the chances of a car driver dying in a fatal accident are incredibly low, and even 25 times that is still incredibly unlikely. And also the cause of motorcycle accidents are in a massive majority the fault of car drivers. Less cars, less accidents, less pollution, less traffic.

Climate Change is a serious issue. We genuinely are fucked if we don't make massive changes. The fact you think what I'm suggesting is radical is wild. Sadly we have all of these solutions that people could be adopting, thereby limiting ICE usage massively, but no one cares. We're fucked.

[-] Techranger@infosec.pub 5 points 1 year ago

I went two wheels! My moto gets excellent fuel economy without the use of exotic metals like a hybrid or EV does. It was also way cheaper to buy than a car. Sometimes my parking is less of an impact, too because I can park in the landscaping islands in some parking lots if it's busy and I'm sneaky about it. One must be a very diligent and defensive rider and wear protective gear when riding. Having a different perspective about traffic flow helps with safety as well. Going slow for a bit after a stop while everyone else rushes ahead is a great way to keep traffic away from oneself. Also, having all the lights has helped everyone see me. No more cars pulling in front anymore. Don't be an arse, be extremely vigilant, and respect the machine. These rules have helped me so far. Many motorcyclists don't do that and have really skewed statistics and perception, I think.

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

2 things here.

First, motorcycles have a better fuel economy than cars, but they also produce more harmful emissions than a car because their smaller engines burn fuel less completely/efficiently, and there are fewer (if any) laws mandating tailpipe emissions standards for motorcycles.

Second, with all the entitled morons on the road who consider a few seconds of inconvenience more important than your life, who can't put down their fucking cell phone, check their mirrors or use their turn signals, I consider it only a matter of time until a car accident happens. Motorcyclists lose every time they tangle with cars, and car drivers are a lot less aware of motorcycles, and more likely to get in an accident with them than other cars. Good luck.

this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2023
527 points (70.7% liked)

Memes

45902 readers
1420 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