3 ms·
In the context of the statement, ("sole reason..") I call it tiny. I mean cars are very visible, so any movement there helps with the public image that things
by hutzlibu 5y ago
In the context of the statement, ("sole reason..") I call it tiny.
I mean cars are very visible, so any movement there helps with the public image that things can change.
But he still was only one player in a comparitivly small segment, when green technology is so much bigger than just "cars". And "green cars" was and is much more than just "Tesla".
- fshr 5y ago1 guy out of billions of people dealing with one 20th of the problem? That’s not tiny.
- bradknowles 5y agoTransportation is not just cars. However, if you can force a break in one area, that frequently opens up opportunities in others. And such is the case here. But Tesla is not just going after cars. They’re going after the whole energy production/transportation complex, which really is the biggest single contributor to greenhouse gases. It just so happens that cars was the weak point that could be most easily attacked, and Tesla went for it. But there is much more on the table than just cars.
- hutzlibu 5y ago"But there is much more on the table than just cars." There is. And I do consider Tesla to be a driving force for necessary revolutionary change. I just do not agree, that they are the sole reason we had the change and momentum we are witnessing.
- admax88qqq 5y agoDoes he deserve credit for all green technologies? Certainly not, but its disingenuous to say that cars account for a "tiny fraction" of CO2. Before Tesla, "green cars" were basically hybrids like the Prius. Tesla legitimized purely electric cars as an actual alternative.