3 ms·

I agree that climate change is an issue, but I've become so disappointed in the environmentalists response to it. They simply resort to zealotry over their one

I agree that climate change is an issue, but I've become so disappointed in the environmentalists response to it. They simply resort to zealotry over their one "true" solution without any practical considerations. For example, the one "true" solution that they consider as only acceptable is replacing all cars with full EVs. Which is foolish considering the urgency (2050 according to IPCC is a tipping point). They ignore that the battery technology simply isn't there yet or the infrastructure. Instead of their plans, consider this much more quickly achievable alternative: - Government policy should require a regular hybrid as the base minimum in all new cars. It's 2021, there's no excuse now for a car to be pure ICE. - New policy to favor PHEVs. The battery in one full EV can build four PHEVs. A 50 mile PHEV gets most of the benefits of CO2 reduction of a full EV. Also no new infrastructure is required, overnight level 1 charging is good enough. The suburbs will buy PHEVs (since they have a garage), the urban areas will buy hybrids (which will now be the minimum). - All utility type vehicles (mail trucks, garbage trucks, delivery trucks), must be full EV. These vehicles are the perfect fit for the current battery technology (overnight centralized charging, frequent stops on short routes). - Slowly raise the gas tax. Slowly is important otherwise there will be riots. But the impact on low income population should be minimal with the increasing supply of used hybrid and PHEVs. The key feature of this plan is that it's a fast way to reduce CO2. Instead, look at what the infrastructure bill and the proposed BBB is doing. Billions on new charging stations, current version of BBB would reduce PHEV tax credit. Is this really the best way to get quick action on reducing CO2 from cars? Aren't those billions better spent getting hybrids and PHEVs (which have none of the charging or range issues of full EVs) to the public as quickly and widely as possible? Why is the goal suddenly to make all cars full EV, isn't the actual goal to reduce CO2 as fast as possible?

barbazoo 5y ago
> I've become so disappointed in the environmentalists response to it. They simply resort to zealotry over their one "true" solution without any practical considerations. For example, the one "true" solution that they consider as only acceptable is replacing all cars with full EVs I'm not sure where you get that from but it's not at all what I've been experiencing. Yes, the overarching goal is to reduce green house emissions but how to get there is quite diverse and usually laid out in details in for instance the green parties' platforms, e.g. https://europeangreens.eu/positions/climate-energy https://europeangreens.eu/positions/climate-energy, https://www.greenparty.ca/en/platform/green-future https://www.greenparty.ca/en/platform/green-future and contains more than just individual mobility. Similarly, Greenpeace: https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/issues/climate-change-impacts/ https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/issues/climate-change-impacts...
NineStarPoint 5y ago
I don’t think you can consider the infrastructure bill to be a primarily environmentalist driven piece of legislation. The deciding vote is Joe Manchin, who gets most of his money from coal. And there are plenty of quotes from him on how he would never allow things like a C02 tax into law.
megablast 5y ago
This is just bullshit. Where are all these environmentalists arguing for electric cars?? All cars are a problem. Most environmentalists want no cars, as they should. Of course, convincing people to get rid of their cars, even when there are great alternatives available, is very hard.
- notacoward 5y ago
  > Most environmentalists want no cars I don't believe you. Back it up. > as they should What percentage of housing stock today where you live is situated where being car-less wouldn't be a major handicap? Make sure to account for people with families, people with vision/mobility issues, people who need to move materials to/from worksites regularly, etc. even if those concerns don't apply to you personally. Reducing the number of cars on the road, and the environmental impact of those that are, is a fine goal over the long term. OTOH, extreme anti-car activism - especially that which is just a cloak for a phobia about driving - quickly makes a mockery of itself.

barbazoo 5y ago

> I've become so disappointed in the environmentalists response to it. They simply resort to zealotry over their one "true" solution without any practical considerations. For example, the one "true" solution that they consider as only acceptable is replacing all cars with full EVs I'm not sure where you get that from but it's not at all what I've been experiencing. Yes, the overarching goal is to reduce green house emissions but how to get there is quite diverse and usually laid out in details in for instance the green parties' platforms, e.g. https://europeangreens.eu/positions/climate-energy https://europeangreens.eu/positions/climate-energy, https://www.greenparty.ca/en/platform/green-future https://www.greenparty.ca/en/platform/green-future and contains more than just individual mobility. Similarly, Greenpeace: https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/issues/climate-change-impacts/ https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/issues/climate-change-impacts...

NineStarPoint 5y ago

I don’t think you can consider the infrastructure bill to be a primarily environmentalist driven piece of legislation. The deciding vote is Joe Manchin, who gets most of his money from coal. And there are plenty of quotes from him on how he would never allow things like a C02 tax into law.

megablast 5y ago

This is just bullshit. Where are all these environmentalists arguing for electric cars?? All cars are a problem. Most environmentalists want no cars, as they should. Of course, convincing people to get rid of their cars, even when there are great alternatives available, is very hard.

notacoward 5y ago
> Most environmentalists want no cars I don't believe you. Back it up. > as they should What percentage of housing stock today where you live is situated where being car-less wouldn't be a major handicap? Make sure to account for people with families, people with vision/mobility issues, people who need to move materials to/from worksites regularly, etc. even if those concerns don't apply to you personally. Reducing the number of cars on the road, and the environmental impact of those that are, is a fine goal over the long term. OTOH, extreme anti-car activism - especially that which is just a cloak for a phobia about driving - quickly makes a mockery of itself.