3 ms·
The point of the article is that rising EV sales, even at 87% in Norway (which yields only 20% EVs on the road), is not enough to fix the environmental problems
by dcsommer 3y ago
The point of the article is that rising EV sales, even at 87% in Norway (which yields only 20% EVs on the road), is not enough to fix the environmental problems of car driving. TFA talks about the need to end the car-size arms-race and the need for viable alternatives to car transportation as necessary for actually addressing the issues EV tax incentives are meant to tackle.
Agreed the title is useless, but I found the analysis insightful.
- martindbp 3y agoThat observation is completely pointless. Yes, even at 100% adoption it will take a long time to replace the whole fleet of cars, does that mean we shouldn't be doing it? Just the fact they bring this up shows they have an agenda. Tesla is also recognizing this fact and it's one reason they're pushing for robotaxis, because robotaxis can increase utilization by 5x, the same as selling 5x as many cars.
- dcsommer 3y agoIt is not a useless observation. Of course there is an "agenda" (strange word choice for "thesis" or "point"). Like I said, the point in the article is that there needs to be alternatives to car ownership and car-centric development to achieve environmental goals, and subsidizing purchases of EVs is not going to do that. Taxis might help a bit, but I would want to see data or modeling on impacts for that. It's strange you start out with "this observation is pointless" and then follow up with an example of a company making big investments and strategic changes based on "this fact". Perhaps it's not pointless after all?