4 ms·

That's a brutally flawed thought process. 1. Electric vehicles use 1/4 or less the energy of gasoline vehicles for the same result. If 75% of cars were EVs, yo

That's a brutally flawed thought process. 1. Electric vehicles use 1/4 or less the energy of gasoline vehicles for the same result. If 75% of cars were EVs, your angle of cars would be "EVs only use 18%!". 2. Just because current state is mostly gas does not mean that we do not intend to change this. The current limitation is a propagation issue. EV cars for example are getting cheaper...but fewer people can own new cars anyways, it's going to take time. 3. Heating is a major use of energy and much of the world is behind on better solutions such as heat pumps.

throwaway167 3y ago
Please check the link. It's total global energy consumption, of which cars are a very small part of the mix, of which electric are most useful at displacing pollution from cities to production facilities, not reducing it. Just stop driving so much. Replacing use of car A for car B doesn't address the underlying problem of needing a car, it's like hitting 'favourite' on Facebook for a feel good cause and believing you've made a difference.
- agloe_dreams 3y ago
  I checked the link, my point stands and your explanation makes basically zero impact on anything here. This invention is only applicable to gasoline. Nothing in that link is applicable. Additionally, an EV powered by coal emits less emissions than a gasoline car. That is a fact, additionally, it enables a world where you replace the coal plant with zero emission options. Additionally, while I fully agree with your angle...in a city...much of the world does not actually work like that. You tell someone in Montana to stop using a car and they will ask for you to build a shrink ray. Saying' Stop using a car' is exactly the same as hitting like on FB for a social cause: It doesn't change reality of people needing to be at work, have food, or live life. The world isn't a happy imaginary place where 'Oh, just walk/take a bike/public transport!' works. It only works if it is better than the car. That is true in NYC and SF, that is not true between them.

throwaway167 3y ago

Please check the link. It's total global energy consumption, of which cars are a very small part of the mix, of which electric are most useful at displacing pollution from cities to production facilities, not reducing it. Just stop driving so much. Replacing use of car A for car B doesn't address the underlying problem of needing a car, it's like hitting 'favourite' on Facebook for a feel good cause and believing you've made a difference.

agloe_dreams 3y ago
I checked the link, my point stands and your explanation makes basically zero impact on anything here. This invention is only applicable to gasoline. Nothing in that link is applicable. Additionally, an EV powered by coal emits less emissions than a gasoline car. That is a fact, additionally, it enables a world where you replace the coal plant with zero emission options. Additionally, while I fully agree with your angle...in a city...much of the world does not actually work like that. You tell someone in Montana to stop using a car and they will ask for you to build a shrink ray. Saying' Stop using a car' is exactly the same as hitting like on FB for a social cause: It doesn't change reality of people needing to be at work, have food, or live life. The world isn't a happy imaginary place where 'Oh, just walk/take a bike/public transport!' works. It only works if it is better than the car. That is true in NYC and SF, that is not true between them.