7 ms·

Electric Vehicles for Everyone? The Impossible Dream

30 points by RickJWagner 3y ago

ZeroGravitas 3y ago
One of the silver linings of the whole climate change debacle, is the libertarian right utterly immolating their already flimsy credibility, and with every appearance of being determined to go down with the ship. https://www.desmog.com/mark-p-mills/ https://www.desmog.com/mark-p-mills/
- the_other 3y ago
  [flagged]
j-pb 3y ago
I don't want every ICE car replaced with an electric one. I want liveable, walkable cities, with good bike infrastructure, proper public transport, trees, parks, and public spaces. And fast long distance maglev. And whatever remains should be electric.
- turnsout 3y ago
  This! Don’t build charger networks—build canals and plant trees.
- AlexandrB 3y ago
  Unfortunately there's already a backlash brewing against "15 minute cities"[1][2]. I wonder how much of this stuff is "organic" and how much is astroturf. [1] https://rairfoundation.com/british-protest-15-minute-cities-where-they-will-become-prisoners-of-the-state/ https://rairfoundation.com/british-protest-15-minute-cities-... [2] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-edmonton-15-minute-city-protests/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-edmonton-15-m...
  - padjo 3y ago
    I think that backlash is mostly from the “5g is globalist plot to control us” folks. Although given one of those people is running for the Democratic nomination maybe it’s not as safe to ignore them as I think…
    - Goronmon 3y ago
      I think that backlash is mostly from the “5g is globalist plot to control us” folks. I've definitely seen it framed as a "left-wing" plot that the right/Republicans need to fight against. Same thing as the fight against LGBTQ+ rights, abortion rights, etc.
    - ZeroGravitas 3y ago
      It's sadly a mainstream right-wing talking point these days. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-02/how-did-the-15-minute-city-get-tangled-up-in-a-far-right-conspiracy https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-02/how-did-t...
  - mwbajor 3y ago
    I live in one of the few 15 minute cities and I hate it. You might as well live in a jail or a zoo. Are you envious of the lions that live in their cages? They have everything they need close by! Water, companionship, food, etc....
    - AlexandrB 3y ago
      Can you elaborate on what's so bad about it? I lived in Toronto for a while and rarely had to drive because most things I needed were ~15 minutes away by subway/walking. It was awesome! It's not like someone is going to put an ankle monitor on you to prevent you from going further for stuff if you want to.
      - mwbajor 3y ago
        Can you elaborate on what you want me to elaborate on? I've been to Toronto, its another "sick town" and nothing I say is going to change your mind if you think living like an ant is "awesome!"
- sMarsIntruder 3y ago
  You know that the majority still lives outside cities, right? And the city attractiveness is getting worse every damn year, at least in the “west”.
  - stavros 3y ago
    > And the city attractiveness is getting worse every damn year, at least in the “west”. Maybe that would change if US cities were, you know, livable? Europe is the "west" too, and the cities are a far cry better for people.
    - Ultimatt 3y ago
      Everyone in the USA needs to take a pilgrimage to almost any city in the Netherlands.
  - CCRpoundher 3y ago
    Cool. I would love to live in the country. Have internet and work remote. Little farm and grow some of my own food. Use solar and wind to power my EV Ford-150.
  - piva00 3y ago
    If 100+ million Americans lives in cities, making cities not requiring cars to live in them is a pretty good plus, no? Rural people can keep having their vehicles if they need them, GP didn't say anything against that.
    - Izkata 3y ago
      > making cities not requiring cars to live in them is a pretty good plus, no? Some cities are doing this, but they're not the ones attempting 15-minute cities. The 15-minute cities are doing things like putting up barricades to make driving more of a pain, without actually making them more livable in those confined locations.
      - piva00 3y ago
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- cypress66 3y ago
  People like different things. Some people like high density urban areas, and some people like low density urban areas. We should have both so people can enjoy what they like.
  - gaff33 3y ago
    The problem is that low density urban areas are subsidsed by high densisty urban areas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IsMeKl-Sv0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IsMeKl-Sv0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVUeqxXwCA0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVUeqxXwCA0 etc They are also terrible for the planet.
    - mwbajor 3y ago
      So does my ant colony analogy apply here? When do we get to move into our hexagonal cell I mean house? You know, bees use hexagons because they are the most efficient use of space. But please do keep using the "redneck" trope. We're all uneducated hillbillies that obviously aren't as smart and sophisticated as everyone else.
  - turnsout 3y ago
    It's true! Some people don't mind or even like climate change—don't they count? What about the flat earthers? We should have a city for them with school districts that cater to their beliefs. Some people abuse animals—where's their city? People should be able to enjoy what they like!
- pipo234 3y ago
  +1, but minus the long distance maglev. The strength of cities lies in their density. A well planned city has short commutes. Long distance transport ought to be mostly for goods, not people. If people travel far, travel slow and enjoy the journey. Relying on fast long distance (business) travel is a sign of organizational immaturity at some level.
  - troupo 3y ago
    I don't want to travel fast and slow from Stockholm to, say, Copenhagen, or to Hamburg when I visit friends or family. I want to get to the destination, fast.
    - mwbajor 3y ago
      Exactly. Its almost like decentralized systems are more efficient.
    - pipo234 3y ago
      This is what we do, but why? What is it exactly that we hate so much about traveling? Personally, I hate traffic jams, cancelled trains, flight delays. But I love spending time hiking, cycling, or driving through the empty country at my own pace. More so if I get to spend time with friends and family, for sure.
      - throwuwu 3y ago
        If the goal of your trip is to hike then fine, hike. But if you’re visiting family that you only see for a few days out of a year you want to maximize that time with them.
        pipo234 3y ago
        If they live far ways, you might consider visiting them only once in two years, spending twice as long. During the pandemic, may people were force to do this and found other ways to stay in touch, like Zoom. (I wouldn't claim that the perfect solution, or good at all. Just something to consider.)
- freedude 3y ago
  What have you done to ensure your city is "liveable, walkable cities, with good bike infrastructure, proper public transport, trees, parks, and public spaces. And fast long distance maglev."? How are you moving public policy and private investment towards this goal? In my limited experience wanting it isn't enough. These types of changes require action.
greenthrow 3y ago
Catalytic converters contain much less common materials than anything in the battery or motor of EVs. This idea EVs are harder to make than ICE cars is nothing but FUD.
- AlexandrB 3y ago
  I think you're getting downvoted because the quantities of rare earth metal required for these two things are vastly different. Some quick googling shows that a catalytic converter for a car contains 1-2g of platinum, while an EV uses 8kg of cobalt. So while platinum is more rare, you only need a tiny amount for each vehicle.
  - Tade0 3y ago
    Cobalt is not a rare-earth though. Neither is platinum. Also LFP batteries - something e.g. China went all in on require no cobalt whatsoever. NiMH batteries in old hybrids used Lanthanum and BLDC motors use Neodymium, but the former was never used in mass-produced EVs and the latter can be supplanted by either AC induction motors (like in early Teslas) or, more recently, switched reluctance motors.
- mudetroit 3y ago
  Totally agree that it is just something being thrown around to little benefit. That said don't compare catalytic converter materials to what they are talking about in EVs. The quantities needed are orders of magnitude different. The easier thing to talk about that gets glossed over is all of the energy expended to extract fossil fuels in the first place.
slashdev 3y ago
This article irritates me. Yes there are some emissions involved in mining and manufacturing to produce electric vehicles. No, it does not outweigh the emissions of the vehicle over its lifetime. That’s straight up FUD. I’d like to point out there’s a lot of emissions in the extraction of oil too. Just look at the tar sands of Alberta where heavy oil is literally dug and steamed from the earth at great environmental cost, and then shipped via diesel trains to the US because a pipeline was politically untenable in the US. We’re going electric for most vehicles, it will be a good thing once there’s enough momentum behind it, and there’s no other viable option. We cannot keep burning oil. People trying to cling to the ICE are on the wrong side of history.
- CCRpoundher 3y ago
  I agree with you. I love how articles like this try to make EV's less enticing to justify ICE. I want clean air in the city. Less combustion = less air pollution = less cancer. Less cancer = more years contributing to the economy. We're in a society. Society is about people. We want to make society better (as Engineers I would like to think so). EV's arguably make society better for people.
- cornercasechase 3y ago
  > No, it does not outweigh the emissions of the vehicle over its lifetime. Do you have some data to back this up? It seems very unlikely that you’d save an entire vehicle’s worth of ecological destruction by moving from ICE to power plant. The real answer is walkways, bike paths, public transportation, trains, remote work and to turn all of our freeways into green spaces.
  - mwint 3y ago
    > to turn all of our freeways into green spaces. And live and die within 20mi of where you’re born?
    - cornercasechase 3y ago
      Sounds nice! But of course not necessary when you have high speed rail.
melling 3y ago
“In another example of illusory precision, the Wall Street Journal—in a 2021 investigation seeking to unearth the truth about EV emissions” The Wall Street Journal is biased garbage when it comes to climate change. They’ve spent decades doing everything they can to provide their climate change denying audience with plenty of noise to slow any transition to a greener economy. The Editorial Board likes to chime in too: https://www.wsj.com/articles/climate-doomsday-is-nigh-again-united-nations-environment-climate-change-fossil-fuels-11666989086 https://www.wsj.com/articles/climate-doomsday-is-nigh-again-... “Climate Doomsday Is Nigh—Again And the U.N. says it’s your fault for eating meat, among other sins.”
rhaway84773 3y ago
> conventionally powered vehicles Just so we’re clear, by conventionally powered vehicles we’re talking about petrol/diesel, which even setting aside any greenhouse effects, and completely ignoring the massive negative health externalities of pollution, is at the very least a ridiculously expensive supply chain spanning the globe that requires a massive naval machinery to even exist, has driven and caused multiple wars, props up the most awful dictatorships, and is entirely responsible for funding global terror networks. It’s a system which causes massive inflation to the point of having sunk several countries (Sri Lanka, Pakistan) over the last few years itself for reasons completely out of their control. If not 1 mg of carbon emissions was reduced by switching over to EVs, and not one life was saved or lengthened thanks to reducing the toxic pollution anyone living in a city is forced to breathe thanks to ICE cars, the switch to EVs with the subsequent the elimination of the dependence on this global war and terror machine would in itself be a massive win. Of course, contrary to what this article suggests we do have fairly good ideas as to the impact of switching to EVs on emissions, etc. We can’t mail it down exactly, but we know what the ranges look like. And even the least optimistic side of those ranges make EVs a better option than ICE vehicles.
- jeepers6 3y ago
  [flagged]
- freedude 3y ago
  "Of course, contrary to what this article suggests we do have fairly good ideas as to the impact of switching to EVs on emissions, etc. We can’t mail it down exactly, but we know what the ranges look like. And even the least optimistic side of those ranges make EVs a better option than ICE vehicles. " You just restated the case the report made with a different spin. The spin it is arguing against. The spin it states many facts against saying it is fundamentally flawed.
rhn_mk1 3y ago
> But in banning ICE cars and mandating the use of EVs, policymakers are explicitly betting on the truth of three crucial claims: > EVs will lead to “profound” reductions in CO2 emissions Seems so, okay. > EVs are now, or will soon be, cheaper than, and operationally equal to, ICE cars No, why? The governance bodies can ban fossil fuel vehicles and let the people figure out what they want to replace it with, if anything. This is not a required assumption (maybe required if you want to get re-elected, but I'm not even sure of that). > There is a diminishing role for the automobile in modern times; in effect, there is a generational realignment in how citizens seek personal mobility. How about "the regulation will diminish the role of the automobile"? The law doesn't have to be reactive. It can drive change, too, and a lot of people want that change.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
swayvil 3y ago
Or maybe there's something weird about people driving long distances all the time. Seriously. The average person drives like 50 miles a day. That's crazy.
- robohoe 3y ago
  Have you seen the distances in the United States? I mean, good luck evolving our cities to become walkable and more compact. We can’t even build more dense housing without NIMBYs flipping about.
mbgerring 3y ago
Thousands of words and climate change is mentioned 7 times, often in quotes, usually disparagingly. Meanwhile, I am pulling an all-nighter in my workshop as I write this, building hardware to overcome the challenges this guy is grumping about. Climate change is not a war of words anymore. Either put your shoulder to the wheel or get out of the way.
anovikov 3y ago
But they don't need to have cost parity. ICE cars will be banned, period. People will have to buy EVs no matter the cost.
- timbit42 3y ago
  The prices are coming down but at the same time they are increasing the range and other features which are keeping the prices from falling as fast. In 5 years, EVs will be less expensive than ICEVs. ICEVs have had over 100 years to be optimized and cost reduced. EVs have had less than 15 years so far. They will keep getting less expensive for a long time yet.
  - anovikov 3y ago
    Well the only cost reduction driver now is increase in volumes. As PHEVs will die out, we will see about 10x increase in volumes vs 2022, in maybe 20 years (to fill in ~90% of today's or ~75% of that time's global demand, assuming demand grows 20%). Normally for every high tech product, a 10x increase in volumes results in about 2x reduction of price, give or take - we are about to see whether it comes true.
dukeofdoom 3y ago
The price is too high for mass adaption. Two wheels, you can buy something for under 3k. Add an extra two wheels, price jumps to 50k.
- tw04 3y ago
  You can buy a Chevy bolt, right now, for under $30k and a used one for just over $20k
  - freedude 3y ago
    Is that a family car? How does it compare to the minivan, CUV or SUV most families currently drive? What does a family have to move up to? Is that economical to the average family on a budget?
- timbit42 3y ago
  The price of EVs is coming down but at the same time they are adding more range and other features which are pushing the prices up. In about 5 years EVS will become less expensive than ICEVs.
perfunctory 3y ago
Every time I see this kind of title I suggest to imagine a 200 year old article titled "Horseless Carriage for Everyone? The Impossible Dream"
PaulHoule 3y ago
The comparison of 80kg of gas in a tank to a 1000kg battery is disingenuous as the gas is turned over frequently, it’s a reasonable rule of thumb (at the Fermi problem level) that a car uses about it’s own weight in gas in a year. Conservatives (like the old man I met a the gas station last week) hear a lot about the problem of battery recycling. It is a real problem, but it's got answers. I was amused to see that the methods planned for extracting critical elements from batteries are essentially the same methods used to process used nuclear fuel. That is, you can use hydroprocessing where you dissolve the batteries in acid and use acid-base extractions to separate out the components or you can use pyroprocessing where you use melt them down and use molten salts, electrolysis, reducing gases, stuff like that. It's clear that batteries contain critical elements in a higher concentration than ores, and you don't have the special problems of plastic recycling. (e.g. any handling of the plastic spreads microplastics, simply melting and recasting the plastic produces an inferior product, chemical recycling back to the monomer is possible in principle but still not commercialized, even in the easy case of styrene, and chemical recycling by pyrolysis to "petrochemicals" is dirty)
mrcwinn 3y ago
There are emissions in refinement, production, and charging. But if a vehicle runs on a battery, those lifecycle emissions can be improved as we did with the fleet itself. It decouples the car’s energy source from what the manufacturing process produces. In the case of a gas car, the whole production chain revolves around the extraction and burning of oil and gas. There’s no escaping any of it.
rtp4me 3y ago
I will be very happy when the vast majority of consumer vehicles are electric. The amount of extra heat generated by people sitting in their running cars with the AC running is incredible. I get it - this can’t be helped while at a stop sign or red light, but the sheer number of people who just park their car waiting to get their groceries (while on their phone), having lunch, sleeping, etc with the car running is absolutely ridiculous. So much extra heat needlessly generated.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
Sankozi 3y ago
FUD ("No one knows...", "uncertainties" etc.), sprinkled with lies ("The arrival of useful EVs didn’t happen because of government mandates or incentives.", "In contrast to cars with internal combustion engines, it’s impossible to measure an EV’s CO2 emissions."). Not worth your time.
speedgoose 3y ago
I checked the source of the figure titled "Life-Cycle Emissions: Volkswagen EV vs. Diesel". I may be missing something but the figure does not match any figure in the source. I feel like the maths are probably right, but the source doesn’t include the production of the ICE car and one axis is the years and not the mileage. > The purpose of this analysis was to determine whether the replacement of an existing combustion car (that has already been manufactured; therefore, this part of the analysis does not include CO2 emissions in the production stage) with a new electric car, which has to be manufactured, therefore associated with additional CO2 emissions, would reduce cumulative CO2 emissions. I think it’s fair to change a figure and add additional data, but maybe don’t cite it as coming from a trusted source.
CivBase 3y ago
I'm less concerned with the production emissions of EVs and more concerned with how awful repairability is for EVs on the market right now. EVs are relatively simple compared to their ICE counterparts, so it should be easier to repair them. But instead I keep hearing horror stories about battery designs that require you to replace the whole pack when a few cells die. And since EVs are usually treated as "luxury" vehicles right now, they also often come with silly features that add very little functionality and mostly serve as additional points of failure. Fragile features and poor rapairability - especially for parts that are expected to wear out like batteries - reduces a vehicle's lifespan, meaning we have to produce more vehicles to keep up with demand. Production emissions are much less concerning to me if the vehicle is expected to last 30+ years.
- sokoloff 3y ago
  My LEAF had an individual battery module replaced (under warranty) and I’ve heard anecdotes of several other EV owners online with a similar repair story. They’re not “all or nothing” already, though some probably are. More details: https://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?t=30380 https://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?t=30380 By way of acknowledging the tradeoff, though, I think the Leaf battery is significantly easier to perform a module replacement on by virtue of it having such primitive (and less effective) thermal management. It's (poorly) air-cooled and thus degrades the battery modules more quickly than nearly any other EV on the market. > Production emissions are much less concerning to me if the vehicle is expected to last 30+ years. Rust due to environmentals and road salt usage precludes most New England cars lasting 30+ years now. Our 2005 Honda CR-V is a great car, still very good mechanically (at 229K miles), but will be retired within the next 5-10 years due to rust.
  - CivBase 3y ago
    I live in the midwest, so I'm definitely familiar with rust. But the rust doesn't usually harm much more than aesthetics for the first few decades. If your 2005 CR-V makes it just 11 more years, it'll join that 30+ club. As long as she still runs, you can probably find a high school kid who will take it off your hands for around the scrap yard price. It's nice to hear some confirmation that the battery replacement issue isn't ubiquitous. Modular batteries definitely make more sense. If manufacturers can divide up the batteries into enough modules and adhere to some kind of open standard for how those modules interface with the pack, that would go a long way towards making EV ownership economical and increasing their longevity.
wffurr 3y ago
Amazing that the right-wing institute here is pushing higher fuel efficiency standards in place of EV mandates after decades of the American right gutting fuel efficiency standards. "advancing opportunity, individual liberty, and the rule of law" - I wish I could trust statements like this and not just read them as code for "right wing conservatives determined to stand athwart history yelling stop". It makes me absolutely crazy that US ICE fuel efficiency standards remained as low as they were for so long with the bonkers carveout for SUVs and light duty trucks. The Prius hybrid and similar cars have some of the lowest total cost of ownership of any vehicle; a little nudge from the feds would have had similar powertrains in every car for the last decade, which would have made a real dent in emissions. Of course now it's too late for that, and going full EV at the same time as reducing power grid emissions is the only path left. And at that, the article is likely right, it's going to be fantastically expensive and cause lots of other problems. The solution, unlike the article posits, is alternatives to large, heavy, individual powered vehicles.
- taylodl 3y ago
  No one even talks about the alternate reality - the earth is already getting too warm for humans to live and they're literally dying from the heat. Oh sure, it's "only" the most vulnerable people, the really old and the really young, but it's coming for more and more of the population as temperatures continue to soar. Responsible people recognize there is a problem and work to resolve it. Irresponsible people simply bury their head in the sand.
xnx 3y ago
Cars sit unused 95% of their lives. We can have plenty of cars for everyone if we can increase their utilization even a little bit.
jiveturkey42 3y ago
"Census data, however, show that the urbanization trend ended around 2010, when net migration to nonmetro and rural areas began.[21] While that trend was briefly accelerated by the lockdowns, the net migration to rural and ex-urban zip codes reverted to the trend “observed prior to the pandemic.”[22] As one researcher noted in 2022, the de-urbanization trend could “become more commonplace” if late millennials and Gen Zs follow evidence suggesting that a rising share find “suburban and small-town life more attractive”"
taylodl 3y ago
People always mention the rare earth minerals used in EV's, while completely ignoring the rare earth minerals in a catalytic converter. I went to my new favorite AI tool, Google's Bard, to get an answer. I asked "how much rare earth materials are used in a catalytic converter versus an EV" and this is the answer: https://g.co/bard/share/5fca1d11f183 https://g.co/bard/share/5fca1d11f183 I don't know if it's right, Bard isn't 100% correct, but it is interesting and jives with what I know about catalytic converters and EV manufacturing. The TL;DR is anyone expressing concern about "rare earth minerals" with regards to EV's are simply spreading FUD.
audunw 3y ago
So happy to see so much sane critical thinking in the comments here. What I’d like to add is that the article lacks any reflection over the long term perspective. Mining/transportion/refining of materials could be completely carbon neutral. What’s missing for that to happen? Electrification. We’ve already seen some mining equipment move to electrification. What’s helping drive this? EV and battery technologies. We’ve also seen great strides in battery recycling. I have no doubt that lithium batteries will be part of a near 100% circular economy in the future. Similar to what’s already the case with lead acid batteries. Apple seems to have made serious commitments in this area and it’s significantly harder to make it economical for their use case than for EV batteries. By some accounts it seems like it’s already economical to reuse and recycle EV batteries. In this regard the skepticism in the article is deeply flawed: the materials mined for EV batteries will most likely provide economical value and offset CO2 emissions for decades after the life of the vehicle. In the best case the EV battery pack can be directly repurposed for grid energy storage after the life of the vehicle.
- tzs 3y ago
  > We’ve also seen great strides in battery recycling. I have no doubt that lithium batteries will be part of a near 100% circular economy in the future. Even if it takes a while to get good battery recycling it won't be a problem. Imagine every single person on Earth had an EV, and that they used them so much that the batteries had to be replaced every 5 years, and that we have no battery recycling so all those old batteries just get dumped in a landfill to await some future recycling advances. So we start building huge battery landfills in deserts and other uninhabited places, say 20 miles x 20 miles by 50 feet deep. If it took 200 years of this before we figured out how to recycle the batteries we'd have only needed to build ~70 of those landfills.
- freedude 3y ago
  "In this regard the skepticism in the article is deeply flawed: the materials mined for EV batteries will most likely provide economical value and offset CO2 emissions for decades after the life of the vehicle." The article addresses this exact issue in the executive summary and then later on in detail. "No one knows how much, if at all, CO2 emissions will decline as EV use rises. Every claim for EVs reducing emissions is a rough estimate or an outright guess based on averages, approximations, or aspirations."

30 points by RickJWagner 3y ago

One of the silver linings of the whole climate change debacle, is the libertarian right utterly immolating their already flimsy credibility, and with every appearance of being determined to go down with the ship. https://www.desmog.com/mark-p-mills/ https://www.desmog.com/mark-p-mills/

the_other 3y ago
[flagged]

j-pb 3y ago

I don't want every ICE car replaced with an electric one. I want liveable, walkable cities, with good bike infrastructure, proper public transport, trees, parks, and public spaces. And fast long distance maglev. And whatever remains should be electric.

turnsout 3y ago
This! Don’t build charger networks—build canals and plant trees.
AlexandrB 3y ago
Unfortunately there's already a backlash brewing against "15 minute cities"[1][2]. I wonder how much of this stuff is "organic" and how much is astroturf. [1] https://rairfoundation.com/british-protest-15-minute-cities-where-they-will-become-prisoners-of-the-state/ https://rairfoundation.com/british-protest-15-minute-cities-... [2] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-edmonton-15-minute-city-protests/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-edmonton-15-m...
- padjo 3y ago
  I think that backlash is mostly from the “5g is globalist plot to control us” folks. Although given one of those people is running for the Democratic nomination maybe it’s not as safe to ignore them as I think…
  - Goronmon 3y ago
    I think that backlash is mostly from the “5g is globalist plot to control us” folks. I've definitely seen it framed as a "left-wing" plot that the right/Republicans need to fight against. Same thing as the fight against LGBTQ+ rights, abortion rights, etc.
  - ZeroGravitas 3y ago
    It's sadly a mainstream right-wing talking point these days. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-02/how-did-the-15-minute-city-get-tangled-up-in-a-far-right-conspiracy https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-02/how-did-t...
- mwbajor 3y ago
  I live in one of the few 15 minute cities and I hate it. You might as well live in a jail or a zoo. Are you envious of the lions that live in their cages? They have everything they need close by! Water, companionship, food, etc....
  - AlexandrB 3y ago
    Can you elaborate on what's so bad about it? I lived in Toronto for a while and rarely had to drive because most things I needed were ~15 minutes away by subway/walking. It was awesome! It's not like someone is going to put an ankle monitor on you to prevent you from going further for stuff if you want to.
    - mwbajor 3y ago
      Can you elaborate on what you want me to elaborate on? I've been to Toronto, its another "sick town" and nothing I say is going to change your mind if you think living like an ant is "awesome!"
sMarsIntruder 3y ago
You know that the majority still lives outside cities, right? And the city attractiveness is getting worse every damn year, at least in the “west”.
- stavros 3y ago
  > And the city attractiveness is getting worse every damn year, at least in the “west”. Maybe that would change if US cities were, you know, livable? Europe is the "west" too, and the cities are a far cry better for people.
  - Ultimatt 3y ago
    Everyone in the USA needs to take a pilgrimage to almost any city in the Netherlands.
- CCRpoundher 3y ago
  Cool. I would love to live in the country. Have internet and work remote. Little farm and grow some of my own food. Use solar and wind to power my EV Ford-150.
- piva00 3y ago
  If 100+ million Americans lives in cities, making cities not requiring cars to live in them is a pretty good plus, no? Rural people can keep having their vehicles if they need them, GP didn't say anything against that.
  - Izkata 3y ago
    > making cities not requiring cars to live in them is a pretty good plus, no? Some cities are doing this, but they're not the ones attempting 15-minute cities. The 15-minute cities are doing things like putting up barricades to make driving more of a pain, without actually making them more livable in those confined locations.
    - piva00 3y ago
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
cypress66 3y ago
People like different things. Some people like high density urban areas, and some people like low density urban areas. We should have both so people can enjoy what they like.
- gaff33 3y ago
  The problem is that low density urban areas are subsidsed by high densisty urban areas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IsMeKl-Sv0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IsMeKl-Sv0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVUeqxXwCA0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVUeqxXwCA0 etc They are also terrible for the planet.
  - mwbajor 3y ago
    So does my ant colony analogy apply here? When do we get to move into our hexagonal cell I mean house? You know, bees use hexagons because they are the most efficient use of space. But please do keep using the "redneck" trope. We're all uneducated hillbillies that obviously aren't as smart and sophisticated as everyone else.
- turnsout 3y ago
  It's true! Some people don't mind or even like climate change—don't they count? What about the flat earthers? We should have a city for them with school districts that cater to their beliefs. Some people abuse animals—where's their city? People should be able to enjoy what they like!
pipo234 3y ago
+1, but minus the long distance maglev. The strength of cities lies in their density. A well planned city has short commutes. Long distance transport ought to be mostly for goods, not people. If people travel far, travel slow and enjoy the journey. Relying on fast long distance (business) travel is a sign of organizational immaturity at some level.
- troupo 3y ago
  I don't want to travel fast and slow from Stockholm to, say, Copenhagen, or to Hamburg when I visit friends or family. I want to get to the destination, fast.
  - mwbajor 3y ago
    Exactly. Its almost like decentralized systems are more efficient.
  - pipo234 3y ago
    This is what we do, but why? What is it exactly that we hate so much about traveling? Personally, I hate traffic jams, cancelled trains, flight delays. But I love spending time hiking, cycling, or driving through the empty country at my own pace. More so if I get to spend time with friends and family, for sure.
    - throwuwu 3y ago
      If the goal of your trip is to hike then fine, hike. But if you’re visiting family that you only see for a few days out of a year you want to maximize that time with them.
      - pipo234 3y ago
        If they live far ways, you might consider visiting them only once in two years, spending twice as long. During the pandemic, may people were force to do this and found other ways to stay in touch, like Zoom. (I wouldn't claim that the perfect solution, or good at all. Just something to consider.)
freedude 3y ago
What have you done to ensure your city is "liveable, walkable cities, with good bike infrastructure, proper public transport, trees, parks, and public spaces. And fast long distance maglev."? How are you moving public policy and private investment towards this goal? In my limited experience wanting it isn't enough. These types of changes require action.

greenthrow 3y ago

Catalytic converters contain much less common materials than anything in the battery or motor of EVs. This idea EVs are harder to make than ICE cars is nothing but FUD.

AlexandrB 3y ago
I think you're getting downvoted because the quantities of rare earth metal required for these two things are vastly different. Some quick googling shows that a catalytic converter for a car contains 1-2g of platinum, while an EV uses 8kg of cobalt. So while platinum is more rare, you only need a tiny amount for each vehicle.
- Tade0 3y ago
  Cobalt is not a rare-earth though. Neither is platinum. Also LFP batteries - something e.g. China went all in on require no cobalt whatsoever. NiMH batteries in old hybrids used Lanthanum and BLDC motors use Neodymium, but the former was never used in mass-produced EVs and the latter can be supplanted by either AC induction motors (like in early Teslas) or, more recently, switched reluctance motors.
mudetroit 3y ago
Totally agree that it is just something being thrown around to little benefit. That said don't compare catalytic converter materials to what they are talking about in EVs. The quantities needed are orders of magnitude different. The easier thing to talk about that gets glossed over is all of the energy expended to extract fossil fuels in the first place.

slashdev 3y ago

This article irritates me. Yes there are some emissions involved in mining and manufacturing to produce electric vehicles. No, it does not outweigh the emissions of the vehicle over its lifetime. That’s straight up FUD. I’d like to point out there’s a lot of emissions in the extraction of oil too. Just look at the tar sands of Alberta where heavy oil is literally dug and steamed from the earth at great environmental cost, and then shipped via diesel trains to the US because a pipeline was politically untenable in the US. We’re going electric for most vehicles, it will be a good thing once there’s enough momentum behind it, and there’s no other viable option. We cannot keep burning oil. People trying to cling to the ICE are on the wrong side of history.

CCRpoundher 3y ago
I agree with you. I love how articles like this try to make EV's less enticing to justify ICE. I want clean air in the city. Less combustion = less air pollution = less cancer. Less cancer = more years contributing to the economy. We're in a society. Society is about people. We want to make society better (as Engineers I would like to think so). EV's arguably make society better for people.
cornercasechase 3y ago
> No, it does not outweigh the emissions of the vehicle over its lifetime. Do you have some data to back this up? It seems very unlikely that you’d save an entire vehicle’s worth of ecological destruction by moving from ICE to power plant. The real answer is walkways, bike paths, public transportation, trains, remote work and to turn all of our freeways into green spaces.
- mwint 3y ago
  > to turn all of our freeways into green spaces. And live and die within 20mi of where you’re born?
  - cornercasechase 3y ago
    Sounds nice! But of course not necessary when you have high speed rail.

melling 3y ago

“In another example of illusory precision, the Wall Street Journal—in a 2021 investigation seeking to unearth the truth about EV emissions” The Wall Street Journal is biased garbage when it comes to climate change. They’ve spent decades doing everything they can to provide their climate change denying audience with plenty of noise to slow any transition to a greener economy. The Editorial Board likes to chime in too: https://www.wsj.com/articles/climate-doomsday-is-nigh-again-united-nations-environment-climate-change-fossil-fuels-11666989086 https://www.wsj.com/articles/climate-doomsday-is-nigh-again-... “Climate Doomsday Is Nigh—Again And the U.N. says it’s your fault for eating meat, among other sins.”

rhaway84773 3y ago

> conventionally powered vehicles Just so we’re clear, by conventionally powered vehicles we’re talking about petrol/diesel, which even setting aside any greenhouse effects, and completely ignoring the massive negative health externalities of pollution, is at the very least a ridiculously expensive supply chain spanning the globe that requires a massive naval machinery to even exist, has driven and caused multiple wars, props up the most awful dictatorships, and is entirely responsible for funding global terror networks. It’s a system which causes massive inflation to the point of having sunk several countries (Sri Lanka, Pakistan) over the last few years itself for reasons completely out of their control. If not 1 mg of carbon emissions was reduced by switching over to EVs, and not one life was saved or lengthened thanks to reducing the toxic pollution anyone living in a city is forced to breathe thanks to ICE cars, the switch to EVs with the subsequent the elimination of the dependence on this global war and terror machine would in itself be a massive win. Of course, contrary to what this article suggests we do have fairly good ideas as to the impact of switching to EVs on emissions, etc. We can’t mail it down exactly, but we know what the ranges look like. And even the least optimistic side of those ranges make EVs a better option than ICE vehicles.

jeepers6 3y ago
[flagged]
freedude 3y ago
"Of course, contrary to what this article suggests we do have fairly good ideas as to the impact of switching to EVs on emissions, etc. We can’t mail it down exactly, but we know what the ranges look like. And even the least optimistic side of those ranges make EVs a better option than ICE vehicles. " You just restated the case the report made with a different spin. The spin it is arguing against. The spin it states many facts against saying it is fundamentally flawed.

rhn_mk1 3y ago

> But in banning ICE cars and mandating the use of EVs, policymakers are explicitly betting on the truth of three crucial claims: > EVs will lead to “profound” reductions in CO2 emissions Seems so, okay. > EVs are now, or will soon be, cheaper than, and operationally equal to, ICE cars No, why? The governance bodies can ban fossil fuel vehicles and let the people figure out what they want to replace it with, if anything. This is not a required assumption (maybe required if you want to get re-elected, but I'm not even sure of that). > There is a diminishing role for the automobile in modern times; in effect, there is a generational realignment in how citizens seek personal mobility. How about "the regulation will diminish the role of the automobile"? The law doesn't have to be reactive. It can drive change, too, and a lot of people want that change.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

swayvil 3y ago

Or maybe there's something weird about people driving long distances all the time. Seriously. The average person drives like 50 miles a day. That's crazy.

robohoe 3y ago
Have you seen the distances in the United States? I mean, good luck evolving our cities to become walkable and more compact. We can’t even build more dense housing without NIMBYs flipping about.

mbgerring 3y ago

Thousands of words and climate change is mentioned 7 times, often in quotes, usually disparagingly. Meanwhile, I am pulling an all-nighter in my workshop as I write this, building hardware to overcome the challenges this guy is grumping about. Climate change is not a war of words anymore. Either put your shoulder to the wheel or get out of the way.

anovikov 3y ago

But they don't need to have cost parity. ICE cars will be banned, period. People will have to buy EVs no matter the cost.

timbit42 3y ago
The prices are coming down but at the same time they are increasing the range and other features which are keeping the prices from falling as fast. In 5 years, EVs will be less expensive than ICEVs. ICEVs have had over 100 years to be optimized and cost reduced. EVs have had less than 15 years so far. They will keep getting less expensive for a long time yet.
- anovikov 3y ago
  Well the only cost reduction driver now is increase in volumes. As PHEVs will die out, we will see about 10x increase in volumes vs 2022, in maybe 20 years (to fill in ~90% of today's or ~75% of that time's global demand, assuming demand grows 20%). Normally for every high tech product, a 10x increase in volumes results in about 2x reduction of price, give or take - we are about to see whether it comes true.

dukeofdoom 3y ago

The price is too high for mass adaption. Two wheels, you can buy something for under 3k. Add an extra two wheels, price jumps to 50k.

tw04 3y ago
You can buy a Chevy bolt, right now, for under $30k and a used one for just over $20k
- freedude 3y ago
  Is that a family car? How does it compare to the minivan, CUV or SUV most families currently drive? What does a family have to move up to? Is that economical to the average family on a budget?
timbit42 3y ago
The price of EVs is coming down but at the same time they are adding more range and other features which are pushing the prices up. In about 5 years EVS will become less expensive than ICEVs.

perfunctory 3y ago

Every time I see this kind of title I suggest to imagine a 200 year old article titled "Horseless Carriage for Everyone? The Impossible Dream"

PaulHoule 3y ago

The comparison of 80kg of gas in a tank to a 1000kg battery is disingenuous as the gas is turned over frequently, it’s a reasonable rule of thumb (at the Fermi problem level) that a car uses about it’s own weight in gas in a year. Conservatives (like the old man I met a the gas station last week) hear a lot about the problem of battery recycling. It is a real problem, but it's got answers. I was amused to see that the methods planned for extracting critical elements from batteries are essentially the same methods used to process used nuclear fuel. That is, you can use hydroprocessing where you dissolve the batteries in acid and use acid-base extractions to separate out the components or you can use pyroprocessing where you use melt them down and use molten salts, electrolysis, reducing gases, stuff like that. It's clear that batteries contain critical elements in a higher concentration than ores, and you don't have the special problems of plastic recycling. (e.g. any handling of the plastic spreads microplastics, simply melting and recasting the plastic produces an inferior product, chemical recycling back to the monomer is possible in principle but still not commercialized, even in the easy case of styrene, and chemical recycling by pyrolysis to "petrochemicals" is dirty)

mrcwinn 3y ago

There are emissions in refinement, production, and charging. But if a vehicle runs on a battery, those lifecycle emissions can be improved as we did with the fleet itself. It decouples the car’s energy source from what the manufacturing process produces. In the case of a gas car, the whole production chain revolves around the extraction and burning of oil and gas. There’s no escaping any of it.

rtp4me 3y ago

I will be very happy when the vast majority of consumer vehicles are electric. The amount of extra heat generated by people sitting in their running cars with the AC running is incredible. I get it - this can’t be helped while at a stop sign or red light, but the sheer number of people who just park their car waiting to get their groceries (while on their phone), having lunch, sleeping, etc with the car running is absolutely ridiculous. So much extra heat needlessly generated.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

Sankozi 3y ago

FUD ("No one knows...", "uncertainties" etc.), sprinkled with lies ("The arrival of useful EVs didn’t happen because of government mandates or incentives.", "In contrast to cars with internal combustion engines, it’s impossible to measure an EV’s CO2 emissions."). Not worth your time.

speedgoose 3y ago

I checked the source of the figure titled "Life-Cycle Emissions: Volkswagen EV vs. Diesel". I may be missing something but the figure does not match any figure in the source. I feel like the maths are probably right, but the source doesn’t include the production of the ICE car and one axis is the years and not the mileage. > The purpose of this analysis was to determine whether the replacement of an existing combustion car (that has already been manufactured; therefore, this part of the analysis does not include CO2 emissions in the production stage) with a new electric car, which has to be manufactured, therefore associated with additional CO2 emissions, would reduce cumulative CO2 emissions. I think it’s fair to change a figure and add additional data, but maybe don’t cite it as coming from a trusted source.

CivBase 3y ago

I'm less concerned with the production emissions of EVs and more concerned with how awful repairability is for EVs on the market right now. EVs are relatively simple compared to their ICE counterparts, so it should be easier to repair them. But instead I keep hearing horror stories about battery designs that require you to replace the whole pack when a few cells die. And since EVs are usually treated as "luxury" vehicles right now, they also often come with silly features that add very little functionality and mostly serve as additional points of failure. Fragile features and poor rapairability - especially for parts that are expected to wear out like batteries - reduces a vehicle's lifespan, meaning we have to produce more vehicles to keep up with demand. Production emissions are much less concerning to me if the vehicle is expected to last 30+ years.

sokoloff 3y ago
My LEAF had an individual battery module replaced (under warranty) and I’ve heard anecdotes of several other EV owners online with a similar repair story. They’re not “all or nothing” already, though some probably are. More details: https://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?t=30380 https://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?t=30380 By way of acknowledging the tradeoff, though, I think the Leaf battery is significantly easier to perform a module replacement on by virtue of it having such primitive (and less effective) thermal management. It's (poorly) air-cooled and thus degrades the battery modules more quickly than nearly any other EV on the market. > Production emissions are much less concerning to me if the vehicle is expected to last 30+ years. Rust due to environmentals and road salt usage precludes most New England cars lasting 30+ years now. Our 2005 Honda CR-V is a great car, still very good mechanically (at 229K miles), but will be retired within the next 5-10 years due to rust.
- CivBase 3y ago
  I live in the midwest, so I'm definitely familiar with rust. But the rust doesn't usually harm much more than aesthetics for the first few decades. If your 2005 CR-V makes it just 11 more years, it'll join that 30+ club. As long as she still runs, you can probably find a high school kid who will take it off your hands for around the scrap yard price. It's nice to hear some confirmation that the battery replacement issue isn't ubiquitous. Modular batteries definitely make more sense. If manufacturers can divide up the batteries into enough modules and adhere to some kind of open standard for how those modules interface with the pack, that would go a long way towards making EV ownership economical and increasing their longevity.

wffurr 3y ago

Amazing that the right-wing institute here is pushing higher fuel efficiency standards in place of EV mandates after decades of the American right gutting fuel efficiency standards. "advancing opportunity, individual liberty, and the rule of law" - I wish I could trust statements like this and not just read them as code for "right wing conservatives determined to stand athwart history yelling stop". It makes me absolutely crazy that US ICE fuel efficiency standards remained as low as they were for so long with the bonkers carveout for SUVs and light duty trucks. The Prius hybrid and similar cars have some of the lowest total cost of ownership of any vehicle; a little nudge from the feds would have had similar powertrains in every car for the last decade, which would have made a real dent in emissions. Of course now it's too late for that, and going full EV at the same time as reducing power grid emissions is the only path left. And at that, the article is likely right, it's going to be fantastically expensive and cause lots of other problems. The solution, unlike the article posits, is alternatives to large, heavy, individual powered vehicles.

taylodl 3y ago
No one even talks about the alternate reality - the earth is already getting too warm for humans to live and they're literally dying from the heat. Oh sure, it's "only" the most vulnerable people, the really old and the really young, but it's coming for more and more of the population as temperatures continue to soar. Responsible people recognize there is a problem and work to resolve it. Irresponsible people simply bury their head in the sand.

xnx 3y ago

Cars sit unused 95% of their lives. We can have plenty of cars for everyone if we can increase their utilization even a little bit.

jiveturkey42 3y ago

"Census data, however, show that the urbanization trend ended around 2010, when net migration to nonmetro and rural areas began.[21] While that trend was briefly accelerated by the lockdowns, the net migration to rural and ex-urban zip codes reverted to the trend “observed prior to the pandemic.”[22] As one researcher noted in 2022, the de-urbanization trend could “become more commonplace” if late millennials and Gen Zs follow evidence suggesting that a rising share find “suburban and small-town life more attractive”"

taylodl 3y ago

People always mention the rare earth minerals used in EV's, while completely ignoring the rare earth minerals in a catalytic converter. I went to my new favorite AI tool, Google's Bard, to get an answer. I asked "how much rare earth materials are used in a catalytic converter versus an EV" and this is the answer: https://g.co/bard/share/5fca1d11f183 https://g.co/bard/share/5fca1d11f183 I don't know if it's right, Bard isn't 100% correct, but it is interesting and jives with what I know about catalytic converters and EV manufacturing. The TL;DR is anyone expressing concern about "rare earth minerals" with regards to EV's are simply spreading FUD.

audunw 3y ago

So happy to see so much sane critical thinking in the comments here. What I’d like to add is that the article lacks any reflection over the long term perspective. Mining/transportion/refining of materials could be completely carbon neutral. What’s missing for that to happen? Electrification. We’ve already seen some mining equipment move to electrification. What’s helping drive this? EV and battery technologies. We’ve also seen great strides in battery recycling. I have no doubt that lithium batteries will be part of a near 100% circular economy in the future. Similar to what’s already the case with lead acid batteries. Apple seems to have made serious commitments in this area and it’s significantly harder to make it economical for their use case than for EV batteries. By some accounts it seems like it’s already economical to reuse and recycle EV batteries. In this regard the skepticism in the article is deeply flawed: the materials mined for EV batteries will most likely provide economical value and offset CO2 emissions for decades after the life of the vehicle. In the best case the EV battery pack can be directly repurposed for grid energy storage after the life of the vehicle.

tzs 3y ago
> We’ve also seen great strides in battery recycling. I have no doubt that lithium batteries will be part of a near 100% circular economy in the future. Even if it takes a while to get good battery recycling it won't be a problem. Imagine every single person on Earth had an EV, and that they used them so much that the batteries had to be replaced every 5 years, and that we have no battery recycling so all those old batteries just get dumped in a landfill to await some future recycling advances. So we start building huge battery landfills in deserts and other uninhabited places, say 20 miles x 20 miles by 50 feet deep. If it took 200 years of this before we figured out how to recycle the batteries we'd have only needed to build ~70 of those landfills.
freedude 3y ago
"In this regard the skepticism in the article is deeply flawed: the materials mined for EV batteries will most likely provide economical value and offset CO2 emissions for decades after the life of the vehicle." The article addresses this exact issue in the executive summary and then later on in detail. "No one knows how much, if at all, CO2 emissions will decline as EV use rises. Every claim for EVs reducing emissions is a rough estimate or an outright guess based on averages, approximations, or aspirations."