9 ms·

This is a polarizing opinion, but as someone who exclusively drives electric I firmly support phasing out, and eventually banning consumer gas vehicles. A more

This is a polarizing opinion, but as someone who exclusively drives electric I firmly support phasing out, and eventually banning consumer gas vehicles. A more realistic approach to do so would be to increase incentives - in the form of rebates for both new and used vehicles, as well as rebates for charging infrastructure.

marliechiller 6y ago
Whilst I agree that phasing out combustion engines should be a priority, I have read recently that new studies have found that a lot of the hazardous materials that are inhaled are actually particles ejected from brake pads and tires. Both of these obviously are still present on electric cars too. It will be interesting to see how this research develops and what innovations come as a result but as someone who lives near a main road, I really am getting more and more concious of the long term effects that are yet to be realised
- pg-gadfly 6y ago
  Actually, electric cars can break using entirely their motors while gaining the energy back. They wear their breakpads reaaally slow.
  - xenonite 6y ago
    Same with combustion engines, called "engine breaking effect". More so, if one drives anticipatively instead of driving ternary (100% acceleration, 100% deceleration, or keeping the velocity). By the way: changing the velocity gently reduces tire wear.
    - koonsolo 6y ago
      You can do this with manual shifting, but none of the automatics that I drove had this feature of engine breaking. Although I sometimes hack it with my current automat by flooring the pedal and releasing it right after it shiftet to lower gear.
      - heftig 6y ago
        I want to know more about why automatics can't do this, but Wikipedia only has an unsourced claim that "gliding vehicles equipped with torque converter-based automatic transmissions [causes] damage due lack of lubrication." If you release the accelerator, does it decouple the engine from the wheels?
        rascul 6y ago
        Gliding refers to shutting off the engine with the car moving, which isn't the same thing as engine braking (using the retarding forces of a running engine to slow the car down). Without the engine running there are various pumps that aren't running and fluid movement that isn't taking place anymore, so certain things won't be getting the proper lubrication while the parts are moving. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gliding_(vehicle) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gliding_(vehicle) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_braking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_braking
        koonsolo 6y ago
        I would guess it's technically possible, but probably not worth the effort.
        kube-system 6y ago
        Automatics can engine brake -- but in response to the person above who couldn't do it -- they typically do not exhibit that behavior in the default drive gear for fuel economy. (although some torque-converter automatics with inclination sensors will automatically engine brake on downhill grades) Most torque-converter automatic transmission also have selectors for holding particular gears to allow the operator to command engine braking behavior. As the other person mentioned, the quote you are citing means that you shouldn't spin the wheels of an automatic while the engine is not spinning. The input shaft of an automatic transmission typically drives the transmission's lubrication pump. If you spin the output shaft of a transmission of this design without spinning the input shaft, you are rotating the mechanism without lubrication.
        mullingitover 6y ago
        I have a Civic with a CVT, and it engine brakes if I'm going downhill and I tap the brakes.
- xiphias2 6y ago
  As a person who's suffering from air pollution every day because of my extreme sensitivity, I have to see a case when I feel sick from those harzardous materials. It hasn't been the case so far, which means that it's probably far not as bad as diesel exhaust. On the topic of living near a main road: I suggest you to move away from it as fast as possible. If I could change one thing in my past, it would be that I was living near a main road as well. It was far the worst decision of my life :(
strstr 6y ago
With long enough time horizon and some limited exceptions, I’m not certain this is controversial. The moment you add a specific date, I suspect this does become polarizing. Many would like gas cars to be gone in 10 years, others 50 years, and others whenever it becomes cost effective.
- polishdude20 6y ago
  I'd switch to electric once it is cost effective for me. And that means I need to be able to find a used electric car on Craigslist for $2000 that still runs well just like my 2002 corolla. Other than that, id be forced to now spend $15000 or more on a car.
labster 6y ago
Electric vehicles do not reduce PM emissions, and produce more microplastics as heavier vehicles erode tires faster. As helpful as EVs are they're not a cure-all for air pollution.
- xenonite 6y ago
  ..all in addition to power plant pollution.
  - TomMarius 6y ago
    Nuclear energy does not pollute much.
    - xenonite 6y ago
      1.) nuclear isn't the only source of energy 2.) nuclear power emits greenhouse gases indirectly: (a) construction/decommission of the power plant, (b) mining and extraction of Uranium, (c) contamination of nuclear waste.
      - Mayzie 6y ago
        per megawatt, it's much less than any other source (even if you include construction and extraction costs, it'd be disingenuous not to)
        andromeduck 6y ago
        Yup, I think the only renewable that competes is geothermal.
      - sjwright 6y ago
        The construction and decommissioning of nuclear has an exceedingly negligible carbon footprint relative to its lifetime energy generation. The same criticisms apply to wind and solar as well, they’re also energy intensive to manufacture, transport and install. Besides, in a world with a surplus of nuclear energy, much of the plant construction and mining could be performed using nuclear generated electricity rather than burning diesel.
lazyjones 6y ago
Why limit this to consumer gas vehicles? Public transport and delivery trucks in cities are just as bad..
- nicbou 6y ago
  Things still need to be delivered.
- sjwright 6y ago
  Public transport emits far less per passenger. Public transport and last mile delivery are actually ripe for hybridisation and electrification because they spend a lot of their time stopped. As for long haul delivery—take the Tesla Semi and add a small diesel electric generator. Now it can go all day and still emit far less than regular trucks. This, not pure electric, is where disruption will happen.
  - lazyjones 6y ago
    > Public transport emits far less per passenger. Untrue. You're thinking of CO2, where this is debatable (for my city I ran the numbers, our diesel buses fare much worse than my EV per passenger). A modern EV will always beat a diesel bus at total emissions per passenger, simply because it doesn't emit most of the harmful stuff. > As for long haul delivery—take the Tesla Semi and add a small diesel electric generator. Now it can go all day and still emit far less than regular trucks. Most trucks in cities cover only small distances.
    - sjwright 6y ago
      When I said "Public transport emits far less per passenger" I was not making an assertion about specific methods of locomotion. If you can claim to have an electric car, I can claim (with greater warrant, mind you) to have electric public transport. As it stands right now, public transport is SUBSTANTIALLY more electrified than passenger vehicles. Thus your insistence that we your electric passenger vehicle up against diesel powered public transport isn't just disingenuous, it's factually inverted. When I said "last mile delivery" I am referring to trucks in cities which cover small distances. Thus I don't understand what your point is when you reply to me with "Most trucks in cities cover only small distances." When I said "As for long haul delivery..." I am speaking about trucks outside of cities by definition. I referenced trucks which travel short distances in the prior paragraph. I'm sorry but I think you might have just entirely failed to read my post as it was written. Hopefully you were not having a stroke at the time of replying as I wish you to be well and uninjured.
morsch 6y ago
We need to phase out cars. There is no solution in sight to make driving around >1000kg for an hour a day sustainable for everybody. At least 9/10 cars need to go. That still leaves plenty to serve special needs.
- artificialidiot 6y ago
  Half the world economy is dedicated to run the automotive industry. Not happening anytime soon sadly..
  - tonyedgecombe 6y ago
    It's interesting that the countries that are further along with this transition tend not to have much of an automotive industry.
  - spodek 6y ago
    All the more reason to start now -- not taking the next unnecessary trip, biking, carpooling, making a "necessary" trip unecessary, etc.
  - fulafel 6y ago
    This hyperbole got me thinking, what is the industry size really as share of the world economy? Germany is often cited as the most heavily automotive leaning economy. WP says the industry employs around 800k people. Germany's total workforce is cited at 44 million.
    - kube-system 6y ago
      There's a lot of companies that rely on automotive manufacturing that aren't in the automotive industry. Some of that workforce would be categorized as being in the industries of manufacturing, engineering services, chemical products, electronics, etc. In Michigan, for example, there are many hundreds of non-automotive companies who rely on nearby automakers for virtually 100% of their contracts.
pietrovismara 6y ago
Electric is not a solution yet. With the technology we currently have, the only solution is to stop using cars for private transportation altogether.
- koonsolo 6y ago
  How is that a solution for people living in rural areas?
  - echelon 6y ago
    It isn't. In reality, the world will continue chugging along on gas for some time until the entire economic equation flips. We're still not ready for that, and I don't think it's going to happen in the next decade. Oil is still what the market chooses.
    - sjwright 6y ago
      But for the cost of batteries, electric has already won. As soon as we can 10x the manufacturing volume of lithium ion cells, price per cell will plummet and private transport will shift to electric rapidly. (Obviously that isn’t trivial.)
      - pietrovismara 6y ago
        You're missing the fundamental factor here: There isn't enough lithium on earth to sustain a full switch to eletric. This article from 2015 sums it up pretty well: https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Is-There-Enough-Lithium-to-Maintain-the-Growth-of-the-Lithium-Ion-Battery-M https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Is-There-Enough... Edit: and to add, I don't want to attack you personally but the kind of "market will take care of it" thinking you shown here is exactly the problem. The market will just exhaust our lithium reserves in a few decades if let on its own. I'd even argue that the market should be excluded outright from limited resources at this point.
        6y ago
stormdennis 6y ago
Saw something recently that suggested that an awful lot of the particulates in the air are from tyres being worn through driving
kilroy123 6y ago
The thing I'm most excited about is electric _buses_ I think that will have a huge effect on cleaning up pollution in cities. Especially in other countries. I lived in Mexico City for a few years and the pollution there is over the top bad. I'm talking almost as bad as Chinese cities. They have all these ancient horribly polluting busses that spew out huge amounts of pollution. If you replace all of those with electric buses things would dramatically improve.
- cknight 6y ago
  I'm most excited about these too, but for another reason: noise. Looking for a place to live, and there are many nice suburban streets which I pretty much have to avoid because I am such a light sleeper. A late night or early morning bus route would drive me insane.
- tonyedgecombe 6y ago
  I don't know why we don't bring back trolley buses, no worries about batteries then.
- fiftyfifty 6y ago
  Where I'm at they've replaced nearly all of our diesel buses with natural gas. They certainly look a lot cleaner driving down the road and I'm guessing they are cheaper to operate as well. Something like that might be a good intermittent step for a lot of these places while the cost on electric buses comes down.
arijun 6y ago
This is a more polarizing opinion, but as someone who doesn't own a car I firmly support removing private cars from many cities altogether. Make anyone who wants to come in or out park outside the city and take public transport/bikes within the city. There are so many benefits including: - Greatly reduced air and noise polution - Much more pedestrian friendly, walkable streets - Put the enormous amount of land reserved for parking in these expensive areas to better use - Fewer pedestrian deaths If you look at experiments like Barcelona, these types of changes usually result in resounding success.
- rimliu 6y ago
  Do you have kids? Have fun moving them around without a car.
  - adrianN 6y ago
    Me and my sister were raised without much trouble despite not having a car. The trick is living a city that is not built for cars with humans as an afterthought.
  - DoingIsLearning 6y ago
    I think this is absolutely dependent on the transport network you have available in your residence area. I have lived in cities where I _needed_ a car to do anything or wait for hourly buses + walking several miles. I've been living in a city where I just use public transport (with a baby + wife) and I have only rented a car twice in 3 years, once to do a house move and another time to visit friends in a remote countryside location. Demand more from local governments or move to a location that provides adequate transport as a service.
  - dasil003 6y ago
    I lived in London when my daughter was aged 2-6 without a car and without a stroller and never thought twice.
    - stx 6y ago
ramraj07 6y ago
Many have already pointed out numerous ways in which you might not actually be more environmentally friendly, so I'll refrain from that. Even if you assume your "exclusively" electric car doesn't pollute more, it still pollutes one way or another. Furthermore, perhaps you buck the trend, but every Tesla owning "person" I know also does an insane amount of travel both in the name of business and pleasure, releasing a ton or more of CO2 for each transatlantic trip. Rich smug people who drive Teslas probably pollute far more than some dude in the countryside with a gas guzzling pickup, at least he only drives it around in his small town and doesn't fly anywhere almost ever. Its probably best we all try to get off our holier than thou horses and acknowledge that we all are slaves to our wants and want a comfortable lives. Perhaps then we might be able to have a productive conversation on how to truly save this planet (as if the planet needs saving rather than ourselves).
- lallysingh 6y ago
  Do they drive more because they have Teslas, or would they drive the same amount in a fady guzzler?
  - bluGill 6y ago
    They drive a lot. What they drive is always a new whatever the latest fad is. Sometimes it is a large suv, sometimes a prius, sometimesaa BMW now it is a Tesla. I decline to speculate what will be next, but there will be a next
    - polishdude20 6y ago
      So the question still stands. If people have to drive a lot, is it better they drive a Tesla? Or a 1991 ford pickup?
      - antasvara 6y ago
        Seems as though over the lifespan of the car, a Tesla is better for the environment. However, the point of the comment was that people who drive Teslas are offsetting their environmentally friendly car with a larger house, more air travel, and other things that wealthy people who can afford Teslas tend to do.

marliechiller 6y ago

Whilst I agree that phasing out combustion engines should be a priority, I have read recently that new studies have found that a lot of the hazardous materials that are inhaled are actually particles ejected from brake pads and tires. Both of these obviously are still present on electric cars too. It will be interesting to see how this research develops and what innovations come as a result but as someone who lives near a main road, I really am getting more and more concious of the long term effects that are yet to be realised

pg-gadfly 6y ago
Actually, electric cars can break using entirely their motors while gaining the energy back. They wear their breakpads reaaally slow.
- xenonite 6y ago
  Same with combustion engines, called "engine breaking effect". More so, if one drives anticipatively instead of driving ternary (100% acceleration, 100% deceleration, or keeping the velocity). By the way: changing the velocity gently reduces tire wear.
  - koonsolo 6y ago
    You can do this with manual shifting, but none of the automatics that I drove had this feature of engine breaking. Although I sometimes hack it with my current automat by flooring the pedal and releasing it right after it shiftet to lower gear.
    - heftig 6y ago
      I want to know more about why automatics can't do this, but Wikipedia only has an unsourced claim that "gliding vehicles equipped with torque converter-based automatic transmissions [causes] damage due lack of lubrication." If you release the accelerator, does it decouple the engine from the wheels?
      - rascul 6y ago
        Gliding refers to shutting off the engine with the car moving, which isn't the same thing as engine braking (using the retarding forces of a running engine to slow the car down). Without the engine running there are various pumps that aren't running and fluid movement that isn't taking place anymore, so certain things won't be getting the proper lubrication while the parts are moving. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gliding_(vehicle) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gliding_(vehicle) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_braking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_braking
      - koonsolo 6y ago
        I would guess it's technically possible, but probably not worth the effort.
      - kube-system 6y ago
        Automatics can engine brake -- but in response to the person above who couldn't do it -- they typically do not exhibit that behavior in the default drive gear for fuel economy. (although some torque-converter automatics with inclination sensors will automatically engine brake on downhill grades) Most torque-converter automatic transmission also have selectors for holding particular gears to allow the operator to command engine braking behavior. As the other person mentioned, the quote you are citing means that you shouldn't spin the wheels of an automatic while the engine is not spinning. The input shaft of an automatic transmission typically drives the transmission's lubrication pump. If you spin the output shaft of a transmission of this design without spinning the input shaft, you are rotating the mechanism without lubrication.
      - mullingitover 6y ago
        I have a Civic with a CVT, and it engine brakes if I'm going downhill and I tap the brakes.
xiphias2 6y ago
As a person who's suffering from air pollution every day because of my extreme sensitivity, I have to see a case when I feel sick from those harzardous materials. It hasn't been the case so far, which means that it's probably far not as bad as diesel exhaust. On the topic of living near a main road: I suggest you to move away from it as fast as possible. If I could change one thing in my past, it would be that I was living near a main road as well. It was far the worst decision of my life :(

strstr 6y ago

With long enough time horizon and some limited exceptions, I’m not certain this is controversial. The moment you add a specific date, I suspect this does become polarizing. Many would like gas cars to be gone in 10 years, others 50 years, and others whenever it becomes cost effective.

polishdude20 6y ago
I'd switch to electric once it is cost effective for me. And that means I need to be able to find a used electric car on Craigslist for $2000 that still runs well just like my 2002 corolla. Other than that, id be forced to now spend $15000 or more on a car.

labster 6y ago

Electric vehicles do not reduce PM emissions, and produce more microplastics as heavier vehicles erode tires faster. As helpful as EVs are they're not a cure-all for air pollution.

xenonite 6y ago
..all in addition to power plant pollution.
- TomMarius 6y ago
  Nuclear energy does not pollute much.
  - xenonite 6y ago
    1.) nuclear isn't the only source of energy 2.) nuclear power emits greenhouse gases indirectly: (a) construction/decommission of the power plant, (b) mining and extraction of Uranium, (c) contamination of nuclear waste.
    - Mayzie 6y ago
      per megawatt, it's much less than any other source (even if you include construction and extraction costs, it'd be disingenuous not to)
      - andromeduck 6y ago
        Yup, I think the only renewable that competes is geothermal.
    - sjwright 6y ago
      The construction and decommissioning of nuclear has an exceedingly negligible carbon footprint relative to its lifetime energy generation. The same criticisms apply to wind and solar as well, they’re also energy intensive to manufacture, transport and install. Besides, in a world with a surplus of nuclear energy, much of the plant construction and mining could be performed using nuclear generated electricity rather than burning diesel.

lazyjones 6y ago

Why limit this to consumer gas vehicles? Public transport and delivery trucks in cities are just as bad..

nicbou 6y ago
Things still need to be delivered.
sjwright 6y ago
Public transport emits far less per passenger. Public transport and last mile delivery are actually ripe for hybridisation and electrification because they spend a lot of their time stopped. As for long haul delivery—take the Tesla Semi and add a small diesel electric generator. Now it can go all day and still emit far less than regular trucks. This, not pure electric, is where disruption will happen.
- lazyjones 6y ago
  > Public transport emits far less per passenger. Untrue. You're thinking of CO2, where this is debatable (for my city I ran the numbers, our diesel buses fare much worse than my EV per passenger). A modern EV will always beat a diesel bus at total emissions per passenger, simply because it doesn't emit most of the harmful stuff. > As for long haul delivery—take the Tesla Semi and add a small diesel electric generator. Now it can go all day and still emit far less than regular trucks. Most trucks in cities cover only small distances.
  - sjwright 6y ago
    When I said "Public transport emits far less per passenger" I was not making an assertion about specific methods of locomotion. If you can claim to have an electric car, I can claim (with greater warrant, mind you) to have electric public transport. As it stands right now, public transport is SUBSTANTIALLY more electrified than passenger vehicles. Thus your insistence that we your electric passenger vehicle up against diesel powered public transport isn't just disingenuous, it's factually inverted. When I said "last mile delivery" I am referring to trucks in cities which cover small distances. Thus I don't understand what your point is when you reply to me with "Most trucks in cities cover only small distances." When I said "As for long haul delivery..." I am speaking about trucks outside of cities by definition. I referenced trucks which travel short distances in the prior paragraph. I'm sorry but I think you might have just entirely failed to read my post as it was written. Hopefully you were not having a stroke at the time of replying as I wish you to be well and uninjured.

morsch 6y ago

We need to phase out cars. There is no solution in sight to make driving around >1000kg for an hour a day sustainable for everybody. At least 9/10 cars need to go. That still leaves plenty to serve special needs.

artificialidiot 6y ago
Half the world economy is dedicated to run the automotive industry. Not happening anytime soon sadly..
- tonyedgecombe 6y ago
  It's interesting that the countries that are further along with this transition tend not to have much of an automotive industry.
- spodek 6y ago
  All the more reason to start now -- not taking the next unnecessary trip, biking, carpooling, making a "necessary" trip unecessary, etc.
- fulafel 6y ago
  This hyperbole got me thinking, what is the industry size really as share of the world economy? Germany is often cited as the most heavily automotive leaning economy. WP says the industry employs around 800k people. Germany's total workforce is cited at 44 million.
  - kube-system 6y ago
    There's a lot of companies that rely on automotive manufacturing that aren't in the automotive industry. Some of that workforce would be categorized as being in the industries of manufacturing, engineering services, chemical products, electronics, etc. In Michigan, for example, there are many hundreds of non-automotive companies who rely on nearby automakers for virtually 100% of their contracts.

pietrovismara 6y ago

Electric is not a solution yet. With the technology we currently have, the only solution is to stop using cars for private transportation altogether.

koonsolo 6y ago
How is that a solution for people living in rural areas?
- echelon 6y ago
  It isn't. In reality, the world will continue chugging along on gas for some time until the entire economic equation flips. We're still not ready for that, and I don't think it's going to happen in the next decade. Oil is still what the market chooses.
  - sjwright 6y ago
    But for the cost of batteries, electric has already won. As soon as we can 10x the manufacturing volume of lithium ion cells, price per cell will plummet and private transport will shift to electric rapidly. (Obviously that isn’t trivial.)
    - pietrovismara 6y ago
      You're missing the fundamental factor here: There isn't enough lithium on earth to sustain a full switch to eletric. This article from 2015 sums it up pretty well: https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Is-There-Enough-Lithium-to-Maintain-the-Growth-of-the-Lithium-Ion-Battery-M https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Is-There-Enough... Edit: and to add, I don't want to attack you personally but the kind of "market will take care of it" thinking you shown here is exactly the problem. The market will just exhaust our lithium reserves in a few decades if let on its own. I'd even argue that the market should be excluded outright from limited resources at this point.
      - 6y ago

stormdennis 6y ago

Saw something recently that suggested that an awful lot of the particulates in the air are from tyres being worn through driving

kilroy123 6y ago

The thing I'm most excited about is electric _buses_ I think that will have a huge effect on cleaning up pollution in cities. Especially in other countries. I lived in Mexico City for a few years and the pollution there is over the top bad. I'm talking almost as bad as Chinese cities. They have all these ancient horribly polluting busses that spew out huge amounts of pollution. If you replace all of those with electric buses things would dramatically improve.

cknight 6y ago
I'm most excited about these too, but for another reason: noise. Looking for a place to live, and there are many nice suburban streets which I pretty much have to avoid because I am such a light sleeper. A late night or early morning bus route would drive me insane.
tonyedgecombe 6y ago
I don't know why we don't bring back trolley buses, no worries about batteries then.
fiftyfifty 6y ago
Where I'm at they've replaced nearly all of our diesel buses with natural gas. They certainly look a lot cleaner driving down the road and I'm guessing they are cheaper to operate as well. Something like that might be a good intermittent step for a lot of these places while the cost on electric buses comes down.

arijun 6y ago

This is a more polarizing opinion, but as someone who doesn't own a car I firmly support removing private cars from many cities altogether. Make anyone who wants to come in or out park outside the city and take public transport/bikes within the city. There are so many benefits including: - Greatly reduced air and noise polution - Much more pedestrian friendly, walkable streets - Put the enormous amount of land reserved for parking in these expensive areas to better use - Fewer pedestrian deaths If you look at experiments like Barcelona, these types of changes usually result in resounding success.

rimliu 6y ago
Do you have kids? Have fun moving them around without a car.
- adrianN 6y ago
  Me and my sister were raised without much trouble despite not having a car. The trick is living a city that is not built for cars with humans as an afterthought.
- DoingIsLearning 6y ago
  I think this is absolutely dependent on the transport network you have available in your residence area. I have lived in cities where I _needed_ a car to do anything or wait for hourly buses + walking several miles. I've been living in a city where I just use public transport (with a baby + wife) and I have only rented a car twice in 3 years, once to do a house move and another time to visit friends in a remote countryside location. Demand more from local governments or move to a location that provides adequate transport as a service.
- dasil003 6y ago
  I lived in London when my daughter was aged 2-6 without a car and without a stroller and never thought twice.
  - stx 6y ago

ramraj07 6y ago

Many have already pointed out numerous ways in which you might not actually be more environmentally friendly, so I'll refrain from that. Even if you assume your "exclusively" electric car doesn't pollute more, it still pollutes one way or another. Furthermore, perhaps you buck the trend, but every Tesla owning "person" I know also does an insane amount of travel both in the name of business and pleasure, releasing a ton or more of CO2 for each transatlantic trip. Rich smug people who drive Teslas probably pollute far more than some dude in the countryside with a gas guzzling pickup, at least he only drives it around in his small town and doesn't fly anywhere almost ever. Its probably best we all try to get off our holier than thou horses and acknowledge that we all are slaves to our wants and want a comfortable lives. Perhaps then we might be able to have a productive conversation on how to truly save this planet (as if the planet needs saving rather than ourselves).

lallysingh 6y ago
Do they drive more because they have Teslas, or would they drive the same amount in a fady guzzler?
- bluGill 6y ago
  They drive a lot. What they drive is always a new whatever the latest fad is. Sometimes it is a large suv, sometimes a prius, sometimesaa BMW now it is a Tesla. I decline to speculate what will be next, but there will be a next
  - polishdude20 6y ago
    So the question still stands. If people have to drive a lot, is it better they drive a Tesla? Or a 1991 ford pickup?
    - antasvara 6y ago
      Seems as though over the lifespan of the car, a Tesla is better for the environment. However, the point of the comment was that people who drive Teslas are offsetting their environmentally friendly car with a larger house, more air travel, and other things that wealthy people who can afford Teslas tend to do.