4 ms·

> While I absolutely agree with the goal of reducing our species carbon production and associated impact on the environment, I have a more personal and selfish

by hannob 7y ago

> While I absolutely agree with the goal of reducing our species carbon production and associated impact on the environment, I have a more personal and selfish concern with these proposals. Congratulations for summarizing one of the main challenges of climate policy. Everyone's for it, except if it affects them personally.

close04 7y ago
This is a real dilemma because it's not always about choice in any reasonable interpretation. Some people may need a car for their livelihood but simply cannot afford anything better than a polluting clunker. Sometimes it is about choices made unwittingly. Imagine people who buy an EV because they think it's the best way to do their part even if 99.999% of their usage fits perfectly for bicycle and public transport (increased efficiency + added benefits not strictly related to global warming). In the end everyone will draw the line sooner or later. The point is to drop the bar and making it easier for most to take action. But people who expect everyone to be able to do it (usually based on the "I did it so if you don't you're just selfish" thinking) aren't very reasonable.
- lm28469 7y ago
  > Some people may need a car for their livelihood but simply cannot afford anything better than a polluting clunker. I think we can agree that no one _needs_ a sport car for their 'livelihood'. There are plenty of affordable new cars, they might be small and slow but at least they're safe and meet the current solution standard. And yeah people need trucks to tow or move things around, but that's something other than "entertainment".
  - close04 7y ago
    > I think we can agree that no one _needs_ a sport car for their 'livelihood' That's why I considered the "old clunker" case. But even the sports car part is debatable somehow. Look around you now. How many of the things in your line of sight are actually needs, and how many are wants? How many things have changed inside each layer of Maslow's hierarchy of needs over the past half a century or more? Do you need HN? Imagine if someone told you it's going down because you can save xxx KWh. :) I agree that a sports car may be a step too far even for this line of thinking but the point stands.
  - eertami 7y ago
    >There are plenty of affordable new cars, they might be small and slow Define affordable, because I'm never going to spend more than €2000 on a car so at the moment drive a small-ish but slow 1.6L petrol car from 2004. At least it was the smallest I could get away with while having to fit 190cm skis in the car everyday. I can't wait to go electric, but I think I'm 10 years away from being there myself. Also moving between rented accommodation in rural areas often with only street parking makes the whole "charging at home" thing quite a pain. I'm hoping by then things are better, but in the countryside I still think electric cars are going to be a tricky thing to migrate to.

by hannob 7y ago

close04 7y ago

This is a real dilemma because it's not always about choice in any reasonable interpretation. Some people may need a car for their livelihood but simply cannot afford anything better than a polluting clunker. Sometimes it is about choices made unwittingly. Imagine people who buy an EV because they think it's the best way to do their part even if 99.999% of their usage fits perfectly for bicycle and public transport (increased efficiency + added benefits not strictly related to global warming). In the end everyone will draw the line sooner or later. The point is to drop the bar and making it easier for most to take action. But people who expect everyone to be able to do it (usually based on the "I did it so if you don't you're just selfish" thinking) aren't very reasonable.

lm28469 7y ago
> Some people may need a car for their livelihood but simply cannot afford anything better than a polluting clunker. I think we can agree that no one _needs_ a sport car for their 'livelihood'. There are plenty of affordable new cars, they might be small and slow but at least they're safe and meet the current solution standard. And yeah people need trucks to tow or move things around, but that's something other than "entertainment".
- close04 7y ago
  > I think we can agree that no one _needs_ a sport car for their 'livelihood' That's why I considered the "old clunker" case. But even the sports car part is debatable somehow. Look around you now. How many of the things in your line of sight are actually needs, and how many are wants? How many things have changed inside each layer of Maslow's hierarchy of needs over the past half a century or more? Do you need HN? Imagine if someone told you it's going down because you can save xxx KWh. :) I agree that a sports car may be a step too far even for this line of thinking but the point stands.
- eertami 7y ago
  >There are plenty of affordable new cars, they might be small and slow Define affordable, because I'm never going to spend more than €2000 on a car so at the moment drive a small-ish but slow 1.6L petrol car from 2004. At least it was the smallest I could get away with while having to fit 190cm skis in the car everyday. I can't wait to go electric, but I think I'm 10 years away from being there myself. Also moving between rented accommodation in rural areas often with only street parking makes the whole "charging at home" thing quite a pain. I'm hoping by then things are better, but in the countryside I still think electric cars are going to be a tricky thing to migrate to.