3 ms·
Yes, that would be the most environmentally friendly option. I think, a lot of people miss the fact that a lot of the oil is used in the production of the car
by tomcar288 3y ago
Yes, that would be the most environmentally friendly option. I think, a lot of people miss the fact that a lot of the oil is used in the production of the car and battery. there's a breakdown on this somewhere.
Personally, I think a big part of the issue is the size of vehicles that have been mandated by regulatory agencies. Why don't we move towards micromobility?, something between a E-bike and a super light weight car. that would require far less lithium, and far less oil.
- paraselene_ 3y ago> between a E-bike and a super light weight car Like, a e-scooter/motorcycle? I see hundereds of them during my daily commute. Costs around $3000, and about $20 in monthly charge costs.
- tomcar288 3y agomost of those are all gas powered. the ones that are electric are usually limited to 28mph or just a little more than that. also, very few if any are 4 seaters.
- Loughla 3y agoI would kill for an ultra efficient, all-wheel drive, lightweight car the size of a smart car at most. But with a top speed of 70 or so. Also, a small trailer hitch so I can hook a small wagon on for groceries and other things to pack around. Edit: Unironically, something like the P45 (https://topgear.fandom.com/wiki/P45 https://topgear.fandom.com/wiki/P45), but maybe with a bubble instead of my arms out.
- xnx 3y ago> I think, a lot of people miss the fact that a lot of the oil is used in the production of the car and battery. You are not going to be happy to learn where the $128 billion for California's high speed rail and other mass transit infrastructure goes: concrete, asphalt, steel, and lots and lots of dirty fuel for the mining equipment and earth movers. Salaries for high-paid consultants on the project may be spent on air travel or other luxuries.