10
submitted 1 month ago by veganpizza69@lemmy.vg to c/fuck_cars@lemmy.ml

Maybe EVs are not a comprehensive climate solution??

top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] manucode@infosec.pub 34 points 1 month ago

Their bigger carbon footprint isn't caused by the EV though.

[-] skvlp@lemm.ee 21 points 1 month ago

No, it is not. But, while electric vehicles have lower carbon footprint than gasoline powered cars, they have far higher carbon footprint than public transport.

[-] PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 month ago

A lot of North America has zero public transit and is very spread out.

[-] skvlp@lemm.ee 4 points 1 month ago

Absolutely. Improvements has been made, but there is a very long way to go.

[-] polskilumalo@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 month ago

China is comparably big and they don't seem to have this "problem". There is little excuse to not develop public transit. But unfortunately from what I've seen from Not Just Bikes, Amtrak looks like hell to use. So destroying capitalism might be the first thing to do, before any significant and useful developments happen.

[-] veganpizza69@lemmy.vg 2 points 1 month ago

Correct, it's caused by being relatively rich.

Cars are luxuries. Electric cars are more expensive luxuries.

[-] entumetnary@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago
[-] veganpizza69@lemmy.vg 2 points 1 month ago

Yes! Now convince the car fanboys clamoring for electric cars to switch.

[-] SuperSaiyanSwag@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 month ago

By this logic, if a rich dude makes a public railway system then it’s doesn’t matter that the trains are more environmentally efficient, that person is rich so it invalidates everything else

[-] veganpizza69@lemmy.vg 2 points 1 month ago

Is the railway system for his personal use? Rail is good if it's public transport (and cargo). There was a tradition, some time ago, of rich people getting their own railways and trains. But now they have jets and yachts.

[-] aBundleOfFerrets@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Correlation ≠ Causation. This study is ridiculous in premise. I hate cars as much as the next guy but please don’t post garbage

[-] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 6 points 1 month ago

Yeah this reads like an article built to make people who don't choose evs to feel justified. What are the real motives of this "study".

I personally own an EV, and also got rid of my gas furnace, and gas water heater, and everything gas. So, wonder who they studied and how

[-] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I personally own an EV, and also got rid of my gas furnace, and gas water heater, and everything gas. So, wonder who they studied and how

They probably studied every other person who owns an EV.

[-] PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

Sounds like some lazy thinking.

[-] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 month ago

EVs are here to save the car/oil cartels not the planet. The planet can not sustain the level of privilege exhibited by these EV owners. Even if the EV makes a slight improvement, it's not nearly enough and it's a symptom of much greater waste and privilege. We need to stop pretending that EVs are some kind of sustainable solution for the planetary crisis.

[-] entumetnary@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Wtf OP. this is so misleading Why are you peddling this ?

[-] veganpizza69@lemmy.vg 1 points 1 month ago

What is misleading?

this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2024
10 points (58.3% liked)

Fuck Cars

9817 readers
56 users here now

This community exists as a sister community/copycat community to the r/fuckcars subreddit.

This community exists for the following reasons:

You can find the Matrix chat room for this community here.

Rules

  1. Be nice to each other. Being aggressive or inflammatory towards other users will get you banned. Name calling or obvious trolling falls under that. Hate cars, hate the system, but not people. While some drivers definitely deserve some hate, most of them didn't choose car-centric life out of free will.

  2. No bigotry or hate. Racism, transphobia, misogyny, ableism, homophobia, chauvinism, fat-shaming, body-shaming, stigmatization of people experiencing homeless or substance users, etc. are not tolerated. Don't use slurs. You can laugh at someone's fragile masculinity without associating it with their body. The correlation between car-culture and body weight is not an excuse for fat-shaming.

  3. Stay on-topic. Submissions should be on-topic to the externalities of car culture in urban development and communities globally. Posting about alternatives to cars and car culture is fine. Don't post literal car fucking.

  4. No traffic violence. Do not post depictions of traffic violence. NSFW or NSFL posts are not allowed. Gawking at crashes is not allowed. Be respectful to people who are a victim of traffic violence or otherwise traumatized by it. News articles about crashes and statistics about traffic violence are allowed. Glorifying traffic violence will get you banned.

  5. No reposts. Before sharing, check if your post isn't a repost. Reposts that add something new are fine. Reposts that are sharing content from somewhere else are fine too.

  6. No misinformation. Masks and vaccines save lives during a pandemic, climate change is real and anthropogenic - and denial of these and other established facts will get you banned. False or highly speculative titles will get your post deleted.

  7. No harassment. Posts that (may) cause harassment, dogpiling or brigading, intentionally or not, will be removed. Please do not post screenshots containing uncensored usernames. Actual harassment, dogpiling or brigading is a bannable offence.

Please report posts and comments that violate our rules.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS