4 ms·
> it does seem to me that we have decided on a date for the solution (EVs) without high confidence that the dependencies (generation) will actually be ready by
by throw0101b 3y ago
> it does seem to me that we have decided on a date for the solution (EVs) without high confidence that the dependencies (generation) will actually be ready by that date.
"We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard…":
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_choose_to_go_to_the_Moon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_choose_to_go_to_the_Moon
Perhaps we should consider being more aspirational than practical.
> but besides that, I'm not convinced that EVs are the best solution to begin with.
I'm all for putting more effort into moving towards less car-centric and more human-centric developments, but until there's (more) progress on that front, we need to make parallel progress on reducing carbon in our current system:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetcar_suburb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetcar_suburb
- leetcrew 3y agoI think using a rare moment of broad public alignment to change our transit paradigm is a lot more aspirational than issuing patches to a fundamentally broken system.
- yellowapple 3y agoI suspect that broad public alignment would be far less broad and far less aligned the moment one suggests actually changing said transit paradigm to any significant degree.