18 ms·

No surprises. No matter how we look at it, EVs are much friendlier and safer to the environment. Some people argue the source of electricty can be contested ag

No surprises. No matter how we look at it, EVs are much friendlier and safer to the environment. Some people argue the source of electricty can be contested against because that involves fossil fuel burning again, but in today's world we are rapidly moving away from it and towards nuclear/hydel/wind methods for generating power. I hope ICE cars completely become a thing of the past in the next couple of decades to come.

ares623 9mo ago
I just hope "dumb" EV's become a thing soon. I cannot and will not own a smart car any more I want to own a smart TV or smart fridge or smart toaster.
- shiftpgdn 9mo ago
  Just buy one and remove the SIM card.
  - i80and 9mo ago
    They often have eSIMs I think, but (depending probably on the car) pulling the modem's fuse can be safe. That's the case for the VW ID.4 at least.
    - Nextgrid 9mo ago
      If the modem has no fuse, physically damaging the NIC chip in the module will also work.
    - wizzwizz4 9mo ago
      I want the car to be able to contact emergency services, but not to otherwise be able to use the cellular network. Is there a good way to sabotage the eSIM, without otherwise breaking the modem? (This would still allow the car to be tracked via IMEI, but I'm not too worried about that: anyone capable of that is also capable of tracking my actual phone, and anyone buying that data will already know what car I own.)
      - eldaisfish 9mo ago
        why do you want your car to contact emergency services? the people around you can do that just fine and very reliably. How on earth did we survive as a species before our cars could make automated phone calls?
        charcircuit 9mo ago
        The parent comment is interested in the survival of themselves and passengers. The survival of the human race is a low bar to pass.
        mattlondon 9mo ago
        There's often been a few cases of "disappeared" people who went missing and it turns out they actually crashed off the road somewhere and weren't found for a week or two. That's extreme of course but there are probably a lot of accidents that happen in low-density rural country areas or late at night when there aren't many people around. The automatic e-call from the car gives exact GPS coordinates and severity of the accident, even if you are unconscious or if your phone that was neatly in the cup holder before the crash was flung somewhere else (potentially even flew out of the car etc) and you're trying to find it while someone might be dying in the seat next to you etc. People didn't survive before all this. It's a mandatory feature now because it's so effective at saving lives. 2 to 10% reduction in fatalities and serious injuries apparently. Would you also question why we have mandatory airbags and traction control?!
        deleted 9mo ago
        [deleted]
        eldaisfish 9mo ago
        right, but airbags, seatbelts, etc. are not internet connected. That's the critical distinction. I do not want the risks that come with my car connecting to the internet. A much more reasonable ask would be for your car's systems to use your phone to place a call to emergency services. I absolutely do not want yet another internet connected device in my life, especially one like a car, where examples exist of hackers being able to disable the electronics remotely.
- ebiederm 9mo ago
  Does the 2026 Nissan Leaf meet your criteria for a dumb car? All it's connected features appear to come from Android Auto or Apple Car Play. AKA from a connection to your phone. I like the looks of it because it appears to be a serious EV unlike too many which are just some company getting their toes wet.
  - 46493168 9mo ago
    Does Nissan still air cool their batteries or have they wised up?
    - i80and 9mo ago
      The 2026 redesign has put in a proper liquid cooling loop. (Battery heating is inexplicably an extra $300 option, and not available on the base trim AFAICS?)
  - everdrive 9mo ago
    Does Nissan still not put telematics in the base model in 2026?
  - everdrive 9mo ago
    Looking at the specs page the base model includes "Dual 12.3" widescreen displays" Why? What the hell is wrong with modern cars?
    - rootusrootus 9mo ago
      Lots (most?) cars are going to LCDs for the instrument panel. The second screen is the infotainment.
      - al_borland 9mo ago
        My previous car had its infotainment system reboot several times while I was on the expressway. The idea of my instrument panel, or other more critical systems, crashing and rebooting while driving terrifies me.
- alephnerd 9mo ago
  > I just hope "dumb" EV's become a thing soon What business case is there for a "dumb" EV? By using touchscreens and software for most functionality, you dramatically reduce your supply chain overhead and better enhance margins (instead of managing the supply chain for dozens of extruded buttons, now you manage the supply chain of a single LCD touchscreen). This was a major optimization that Chinese automotive manufacturers (ICE and EV) found and took advantage of all the way back in 2019 [0] - treat cars as consumer electronics instead of as "cars". Edit: Any answer that does not take COGS or Magins into account is moot. [0] - https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/automotive%20and%20assembly/our%20insights/winning%20the%20race%20chinas%20auto%20market%20shifts%20gears/winning-the-race-chinas-auto-market-shifts-gears.pdf https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/automot...
  - mixmastamyk 9mo ago
    The case is that you’ll sell more cars giving people options. Slate is bucking the trend, we’ll see if successful.
  - derf_ 9mo ago
    The business case is that I will actually buy it. I won't buy "consumer electronics" garbage when I want to buy safe and reliable transportation.
    - MBCook 9mo ago
      That hasn’t worked for TVs. Or phones. Or plenty of other things.
      - pinnochio 9mo ago
        Not sure what your point is when we're talking about cars, where fixed physical controls are demonstrably more usable and safer for drivers that need to keep their eyes on the road. Multiple manufacturers have pulled back from excessive touch controls (not just touchscreens, but capacitive buttons and sliders) and reinstated more traditional buttons and dials.
- jayd16 9mo ago
  We'll probably see the death of the dumb ICE car first.
- rootusrootus 9mo ago
  The differentiating factor is not EV vs ICE. All cars have or will soon have telematics and such.
- tshaddox 9mo ago
  Are EVs more “smart” than comparably priced ICE vehicles?
  - seanmcdirmid 9mo ago
    Not really, they are just newer than the average ICE car. Parent wants an EV from the early 2000s or the 1990s.
    - princevegeta89 9mo ago
      Depends. They get a virtually continual supply of standby power that can last for months if left untouched. So from a technology standpoint that enables them to do many things - from being connected to the network, aware of their location on the map, recording camera footage and other remote capabilities. ICE cars do have some of these but the huge battery packs on EVs make these very feasible.
      - MBCook 9mo ago
        Do they? I was under the impression most EVs cut off the connection to the high voltage battery almost all the time they’re not in use. They rely on a 12 V battery or a 48 V battery like a normal car. The only thing I’m aware of that special is that if that low voltage battery gets low enough the car will detect it and recharge it from the high voltage battery, temporarily connecting it for that purpose.
        princevegeta89 9mo ago
        Well that was what I meant - the battery pack meaning the entire system of batteries, be it 1 or 2 or 3. That really enables them to have a continuous state of power supply for a long long time. This cannot be achieved by ICE cars and not even hybrids for that matter.
        cosmic_cheese 9mo ago
        In theory. In practice, a lot of EVs (and hybrids, which could do the same thing to a more limited extent) ship with the same cheap flooded lead acid 12v batteries that ship with ICE cars and don't handle constant charging/discharging well. This puts a cap on how much the "smart" systems can do because it dramatically increases cycle count and thus the risk of the 12v battery losing the ability to produce enough voltage to start the car, leaving the driver marooned somewhere. It could also result in a noticeable "vampire" drain on the high voltage battery which looks bad and could put you at a disadvantage vs. competitors.
- shmoe 9mo ago
  Have you met https://slate.auto https://slate.auto ? :) Doesn't even have automatic windows.
  - usui 9mo ago
    Ah yes, the previously-marketed $20,000 Slate which is actually $30,000 now, still comes with nothing, and hasn't hit production yet. If only BYD could come in and destroy the non-smart/budget EV market.
    - shmoe 9mo ago
      I mean, dude asked for a non-smart car.. BYD isn't fitting that either.
  - princevegeta89 9mo ago
    Jesus Christ... this entire thing looks like such a far-fetched dream to me. I am worried for the VCs that dumped their money into this idea.
    - al_borland 9mo ago
      Jeff Bezos was one of them. He’ll be ok.
    - shmoe 9mo ago
      We'll see soon enough, they promise trucks on the road later this year.
- tombert 9mo ago
  I don't love smart TVs either, but why not just buy a smart TV and not use the smart features? I have a few "smart TVs", but I haven't even connected them to Wi-Fi, and I instead opt for an Nvidia Shield TV or just a laptop computer plugged in instead.
  - al_borland 9mo ago
    Depending on the TV, it will still kick you to their bloated “smart” interface all the time, instead of just simply cycling through inputs.
  - stephenr 9mo ago
    A few years ago it came out that one of the manufacturers (my hunch is Samsung but I don't remember the specifics) had their "smart" tvs aggressively try connecting to any and all networks it can find in range, if you didn't connect it to one. I reluctantly bought an LG with webOS (least bad option available) a couple of years ago. For some reason they weren't content to let the TV menu/remote work with up/down/left/right buttons. That's too fucking predictable, and anyone who's used a tv in the last 2 decades could use it.... Let's give it a fucking nipple, just like those horrific fucking IBM/Lenovo laptops. Then of course it also tries to "help" by detecting HDR content and change view mode... while something is playing.... which makes the screen go black for several seconds.
- stevenjgarner 9mo ago
  Why? Are you worried from a liberty/privacy standpoint? "Smart" EV's are demonstrated to be significantly safer than "dumb" EVs. Waymo’s 2025/2026 data shows an 80–90% reduction in injury-causing crashes compared to human drivers in the same cities. [1, 2, 3, 4] [1] https://www.reinsurancene.ws/waymo-shows-90-fewer-claims-than-advanced-human-driven-vehicles-swiss-re/ https://www.reinsurancene.ws/waymo-shows-90-fewer-claims-tha... [2] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11305169/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11305169/ [3] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39485678/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39485678/ [4] https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Comparison-of-Swiss-Re-human-driver-baselines-with-Waymo-liability-insurance-claims-for_fig2_382262837 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Comparison-of-Swiss-Re-h...
  - somehnguy 9mo ago
    Personally I’m not very keen on owning a vehicle the manufacturer can completely brick at will
    - stevenjgarner 9mo ago
      So liberty then. I don't disagree with you, but this modern flashpoint in the classic debate between individual liberty and collective safety does bring up the question what is saving 50,000+ lives annually actually worth in terms of loss of personal freedoms? I am personally struggling with this debate having lost loved ones in this manner.
      - direwolf20 9mo ago
        Remote bricking of cars does not save 50,000 lives.
        stevenjgarner 9mo ago
        That is not the argument being made. We are discussing how "dumb" vehicles (e.g. vehicles that contribute to 50,000+ fatalities annually) provide independence, privacy and freedom that "smart" vehicles (e.g. vehicles with self-driving that can be bricked at will) do not ensure.
- thegreatpeter 9mo ago
  Have you been in the new Model Y? I was all for the „dumb car” until I tried one of those. Never going back. You only want „dumb” bc the other car companies fk’d it all up.
  - bdangubic 9mo ago
    Other car companies fucked it up is funny way to put it. Tesla hasn’t made a new car in a decade and the whole lineup is for my 80-year old Dad. I have 2014 Tesla S, my neighbour 2025, same car. Tesla X is from a decade ago, Tesla 3 is basically Toyota Corolla and Y is basically Model 3 that was pumped up a bit to look like a “crossover”
    - sMarsIntruder 9mo ago
      Wow. This comment makes me wonder if really earth is flat.
      - bdangubic 9mo ago
        when I bought my Tesla S there was a lot of head injuries from people turning around to see this new amazing cars. now, not only are sales tanking but the cars look so old and dated that my first assumption when I see say Model Y is “gotta be someone’s grandma” when was the last time you saw a Tesla and went “oh cool car!”? been awhile, right? Now ask the same question for BMW, Benz…
- SloppyDrive 9mo ago
  Post crash connectivity (as well as complex video classification) are part of the ncap standards now. And with the way we are moving to centralized one system architectures, the device that does video processing can be the same soc that does smart infotainment. Smart connectivity essentially comes "for free" if the manufacturer wants to hit 5 safety stars, so its not going away, and will come to ICE cars as they modernize the vehicle architectures.
  - 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 9mo ago
    I hate that. If I live in the country, my car spies on me. If I live in the city everyone spies on me. One value I agree with the libertarians on is, I just want to be left alone.
  - mixmastamyk 9mo ago
    Connect and infotainment must be firewalled from the engine computer for security reasons. It’s not like two raspberry pis are that expensive.
    - SloppyDrive 9mo ago
      Not remotely true; Look up "one chip" designs. Yes, there are some security threats, but solving them is more valuable than trying to design a car around true firewalls.
      - mixmastamyk 9mo ago
        You must have missed the news about cars being hacked, while in movement no less. That some have tried to save money while risking lives is not an endorsement or evidence of a solved problem.
- pilingual 9mo ago
  Slate, or pull the cellular connection: http://techno-fandom.org/~hobbit/cars/ev/offnet.html http://techno-fandom.org/~hobbit/cars/ev/offnet.html
- conk 9mo ago
  Just get a used one that’s a decade old. The cell providers will all move on past 3g/4g etc and the cars won’t be able to connect. Plus I’m sure no one is paying to keep a cell connection going for a decade old EV.
- mnot 9mo ago
  We just bought a Cupra Tavascan; turns out VW Group Australia decided to forgo connected car features for EVs (or at least the ones we looked at). Win.
  - girvo 9mo ago
    Cupra Born in aus, same thing here haha Though it means connected charging via API stuff doesn’t work. Not that it’s mattered to me!
- girvo 9mo ago
  Amusingly my Cupra Born in Australia is a “dumb” EV, because Cupra/VW didn’t put a SIM in the car in this country. It’s quite lovely really, though it means I have to go to Cupra for a firmware update.
- rgmerk 9mo ago
  Not happening any time soon, sorry. Car manufacturers want that sweet sweet subscription revenue.
- RobGR 9mo ago
  I have hopes that the Slate vehicle will turn out to be a dumb EV, but I'm cynical enough that I want to wait til it hits the market and someone does a tear-down. https://www.slate.auto/ https://www.slate.auto/
MBCook 9mo ago
The number of ICE cars I get stuck behind from time to time that just REEK is amazing. I’m in a decently well off area too. Some putting off soot clouds, white smoke, nothing visible but clearly not doing complete combustion. Sometimes I wonder if half the cylinders are even working. I’ve heard one car like that is the equivalent of a surprisingly large number of modern ICE cars is in good shape. I love EVs. I’ve had one for 5 years now, and I’m glad they help. But I think the “are new EVs worse than new ICE” discussions so often miss a fact. The pollution from ICE isn’t just from very modern well tuned vehicles, things vary wildly. But all EVs use the same power supply (assuming local grid only), so no individual vehicles put off 10x the pollution per kWh.
- tonymet 9mo ago
  tragically, because of efficiency standards, modern engines are known to burn oil . Otherwise you may be smelling cars who have had the cats stolen.
  - seanmcdirmid 9mo ago
    A lot of old cars also since new cars are so expensive.
    - MBCook 9mo ago
      I think expense is basically the problem. Cost to replace the catalytic converter, cost for new exhaust pipes, cost to diagnose ignition timing problems. Whatever. If the car drives and you don’t have the money I can completely understand why someone wouldn’t get the problem fixed. Even if it means they’re burning a 1/3 of their fuel, that’s still less in the short term than the $1500 it may cost to fix it. It’s insanely rare I get the sense that the person is running really dirty on purpose. I don’t know what a realistic fairway to fix it is. They’re probably isn’t one. I don’t think fines would work, it would probably just make things worse. Seems like the kind of thing where a little government group to find the worst 0.1% of cars on the road and just get them back to reasonable levels would be a huge help. But that’s not how we do things.
kemiller 9mo ago
Even if you power a typical EV from 100% coal, it pencils out as about equivalent to a late model Prius. And any improvements in the energy mix take it further.
- cosmic_cheese 9mo ago
  I don't think many people really understand how awful automobile-scale internal combustion engines are at efficiency. The only reason they work at all is thanks to the absurd energy density of the fuels they burn.
  - heresie-dabord 9mo ago
    8.9 kWh / litre of petrol [1] But more than 60% of that is lost as heat. The inefficiency increases in colder temperatures. [1] _ https://natural-resources.canada.ca/energy-efficiency/transportation-energy-efficiency/personal-vehicles/understanding-tables https://natural-resources.canada.ca/energy-efficiency/transp...
omoikane 9mo ago
The surprising part to me is that there are now enough EVs to make a measurable difference, since I kept thinking they are still relatively rare. The linked study has this piece of data: From 2019 to 2023, ZEVs increased from 2.0% (559943 of 28237734) to 5.1% (1460818 of 28498496). So 1 out of 20 cars in California is an EV.
- justaboutanyone 9mo ago
  It really feels like more than 1 in 20 driving around the 101/280
  - omoikane 9mo ago
    Probably because Santa Clara County has more EV sales compared to its neighbors, according to this map: https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/zero-emission-vehicle-and-infrastructure-statistics-collection/new-zev https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/zero-e...
    - ZeroGravitas 9mo ago
      And newer cars get driven more than old cars on average so 1/20 cars being EVs will do more than 1/20th of the miles.
- ninalanyon 9mo ago
  Between 1 in 4 and 1 in 3 in Norway.
  - ccozan 9mo ago
    Germany maybe 1 in 5 to 1 in 7 ( at least in the south ). I drive mostly the commuter schedule and I am amazed how many are driving the EVs. Truth is: for commuting up to 100kms, the EVs are wastly cheaper long run ( you have to factor everything ! )
groundzeros2015 9mo ago
> No surprises. What about all the resources and people used to develop the cars?
- chaostheory 9mo ago
  It’s probably still more net efficient in the long run. Besides, the main advantage EVs bring isn’t being more environmentally friendly. The main advantage is that it allows a nation to have more flexibility with its energy sources. i.e. an EV can run on anything that can generate electricity like coal or natural gas, while ICE cars mostly only run on gasoline.
- dymk 9mo ago
  Six months break even and then it’s more carbon friendly than an ICE for the rest of its working lifetime
  - groundzeros2015 9mo ago
    Tesla has used more than 40 billion of capital
    - vel0city 9mo ago
      They've made almost 9 million cars overall, with a lot of those made in the last several years. Spreading it over the cars they've made so far, 40,000 / 9 = 4,444.44. Doesn't seem that crazy. I'm not seeing your point.
      - groundzeros2015 9mo ago
        That 40 billion is investment money, not the cost of goods sold. I’m saying its not obvious at all that environmental cost is recouped.
        vel0city 9mo ago
        That's 9 million (and probably many more unless Tesla disappears tomorrow) far cleaner cars on the road, offsetting what would have probably been ICE sales. I'm no Tesla-stan but spending $40B over a decade to inject massive amounts of change in an entrenched industry to move forward in efficiency and emissions sounds like a pretty good investment to me.
chaostheory 9mo ago
> Some people argue the source of electricty can be contested against because that involves fossil fuel burning again I would argue that this provides us the possibility of energy flexibility, which is a good thing given the current global geopolitical situation
psychoslave 9mo ago
That's framing the topic completely out of the issue with global impacts of humanity on ecosystemic sustainability, including biodiversity. Less commut and more collective transportation is going to be far more significant in term of global impact, whatever the engine type.
- yen223 9mo ago
  You can do both! Better trains and more EVs replacing gas cars can be done simultaneously!
  - spwa4 9mo ago
    You forget the most important aspect of policy: it can't cost a single dime, and everyone must lie about that. Read the first sentence of the article: "When California neighborhoods increased their number of zero-emissions vehicles" Obviously neighborhoods/cities/states didn't increase anything. It was just rich people living there buying fancy cars. Of course, this needs to be described as a great accomplishment of local government. And nowhere in the article is the obvious solution even suggested: advancing electric car technology so they're cheaper than ICE cars. And I don't mean charging extra tax while cutting public transport to make sure poor people don't go anywhere anymore, I mean fixing the technology so everyone has transport, for less money.
    - tpm 9mo ago
      > obvious solution Shouldn't the obvious solution be based on observable reality? Which is that there is no technology in sight that will make EVs cheaper to build than ICEs. Otherwise you are praying for a miracle, and that's not a sound policy.
      - spwa4 9mo ago
        Technological advance can be modeled like anything else. Everything about plug-in EVs is cheaper than ICE cars, except the battery. So you can model exactly what you need to get the same as you're currently seeing with solar panels. You can calculate at exactly what point they'll take over aviation and so on. I mean, this isn't even a very hard thing to model.
dyauspitr 9mo ago
We are about 2-3x battery capacity to never look back at ICE vehicles ever again. That or 5 min to 80% charge times with current capacity.
- neogodless 9mo ago
  The current generation of Lucid, BMW, etc. are 400+ mile vehicles. You think we need 800-1200 mile batteries? As for charge speed, the twice a year someone needs more than 400 miles isn't as significant in real world EV usage... I plug in on a dopey 1.3kW (~115V, ~12A) outlet and my car is at 80% charge in the morning. For commuting, a 5pm to 7am charge is ample for most people living ordinary lives.
  - dyauspitr 9mo ago
    Based on my firsthand experience, cold weather (big one) or hauling/towing significantly reduces that 400 mile range (sometimes by 50%+). Yes to comfortably get 400-500 miles per charge in the worst case scenario it needs to be atleast 2x.
    - neogodless 9mo ago
      If you're saying 100% only EVs with no use cases whatsoever for gasoline, then I suppose so. I don't think that's a smart goal, though. More like, more people should understand how EVs can easily work for them, and then try to shoehorn gas-powered vehicles into the few niche they need to be in. How often does someone need a 400 mile range again? Towing? When is the last time you towed something 400 miles? The most I ever towed was... using a rental truck and a rental trailer when I moved. (Anecdotes are not data!) But why in a rational purchasing decision would I need an 800 mile EV battery for a car just because sometimes it's cold out?
      - dyauspitr 9mo ago
        It depends on your lifestyle. I haul my RV around sometimes two weekends a month. In my F-150 lightning I get around 100 miles between charges which is pretty dismal. I’m assuming you live in a city or in Europe. Where I live people regularly haul RVs, boats etc. I also frequently drive long distances and even in the best case scenario 2.5 hours of driving followed by 40 minutes of charging is a pain. These aren’t unusual driving patterns where I live.
SecretDreams 9mo ago
Even if the fossil fuel argument at the source was/is valid, it's infinitely more efficient to do it at the source than in a car. You can extract far more energy and do better to mitigate byproducts.
- tetha 9mo ago
  Also, an EV is as green as the grid. Hamburgs public transportation is heavily investing into electrical busses, because a bus is expected to function for 10 - 15 years. Meaning, a diesel bus built today will be as polluting in 2035 as it is today, though they are also looking at alternatives there. But an electrical bus will become cleaner and cleaner over time.
deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]
unglaublich 9mo ago
Even if the electricity source would burn similar fuel, just the fact that you don't pullote right in the middle of population centers makes a huge difference. In reality, it's not only that, but _also_ that they use cleaner methods of energy production.
- fuckyah 9mo ago
  [dead]
- kakacik 9mo ago
  This is only the issue if you are a city dweller and want to spend your whole life there. For rural folks this is actually best possible situation. The pollution always goes somewhere, and its not like we have large swaths of useless places that we can pollute without consequences.
  - unglaublich 9mo ago
    Huh, no. Pollution close to humans is bad for both city and rural people. > The pollution always goes somewhere, "The solution to pollution is dilution". We want the concentration of pollution low, so the health effects are low too, and we can give natural processes the time to decay/oxidize/etc the pollutants. > not like we have large swaths of useless places We do... we mostly care about the lower ~100 meters of atmosphere because that's where people live. That's less than 1% of the total atmosphere. This means we can distribute pollution over a volume a 100x larger than that that is important for us. And then I'm not even counting the vast amount of the planet that's uninhabited / non-land. Also, smokestacks are designed to not directly pollute the air close to people, see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnYdt4T76mk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnYdt4T76mk
DyslexicAtheist 9mo ago
> I hope ICE cars completely become a thing of the past in the next couple of decades to come. for this to happen the EVs depreciation needs to drastically improve compared to ICE. I don't see this. On top of this EVs tend to push ideas from Software/Tech companies, such as recurring revenues (because the underlying technology lends itself to it better). Personally I'm unsure that this will be accepted by all consumers as much as is needed. After all the automotive marketing has since Ford insisted that driving was about "freedom". So some pivot needs to happen in the messaging. Suppose decades is a lot of time to change it. Personally I think EVs are nonsense, and a better utopia would be making sure public transport is abundant, high-quality and free.
- cbeach 9mo ago
  Public transport will never recreate the freedom of car ownership. It’s a collectivist dream not rooted in reality.
  - jodrellblank 9mo ago
    Rarely in everyday life situations do I feel as claustrophobic as being in a car in traffic in a typical road. Can’t change direction (one lane no junctions), can’t change speed (vehicles in front and behind), can’t stop (flow of traffic), can’t break concentration (driving), can’t change body position (car cabin is tiny, seats and hand/feet controls are fixed, no space to stand), can’t look away for more than a moment (responsibility of driving). And the only places to go are on the predetermined road, from a car park, to a car park, following a lot of strict prescribed rules about how. This meme of “freedom” is brainwashing and marketing (which has been picked up as an identity thing by the right wing recently). There’s nothing free about having to use a $20,000 vehicle to buy bread because no other options are available.
    - B1FIDO 9mo ago
      I do not own a vehicle, and most of my life I've depended on public transit. Lately, I take Waymos or I ride scooters, or use public transit as usual. Sometimes, for special errands, I rent a car. For example, I intended to move across town last year, so I rented a car for 3-4 days. It was the most excruciating pain I could have. I chose a little Mitsubishi Mirage, and firstly, it was the middle of July in the Sonoran Desert, and the A/C hardly worked, so I was sweating, and the car would heat up real good in parking lots. No sun shades, dark upholstery. Also, the USB connection was flaky, so sometimes my phone didn't charge, and whether or not, it was directly exposed to the Sun and overheating. By the second day, my legs hurt a lot. I had spent an unexpected amount of time on my feet and walking around, despite the vehicle. Do you know how big parking lots are these days?! I tried sitting down at every opportunity. I have a running gag/dispute at my bank to see whether they will allow me to "sit down" at the "ADA/Disabled" teller window. Driving home at night on the last night, my leg cramped up really bad. I was in such pain, I nearly pulled over because it was my accelerator/brake leg and I was going to lose control of the car. Thankfully I was able to hold it together, and returned the car the next day, but boy I did not want such a vehicle ever again. And it was not a stick-shift; it was an automatic transmission. Next time I'm going to be really sure that the USB and A/C work. And that my legs are super-comfortable and has cruise control.
memen 9mo ago
Is that true? EV have much higher emissions of micro plastics and pfas (or variations thereof) due to increased tier degradation. EVs are typically way heavier than similar ICE due to the batteries and combined with the higher torques, tires wear faster.
- cbeach 9mo ago
  I have a heavy and high performance EV (Tesla Model S) and I have replaced my tires twice in the last six years. So it’s about the same as an ICE vehicle in that regard. One thing that differs is brake wear. My car is ten years old and still on its original brake pads and discs. The regen braking is amazing for avoiding mechanical braking. So that means less particle emission from brakes, compared to ICE.
  - itsprobablyok 9mo ago
    >"I have a heavy and high performance EV (Tesla Model S) and I have replaced my tires twice in the last six years. So it’s about the same as an ICE vehicle in that regard." Well no, it's not "the same". We have things like physics to tell us that more torque and more weight means more tire wear, despite your anecdote. There are even studies on this. They also have a greater impact on road wear. EVs have many advantages over ICEs. I don't understand why people have to lie and say they are worse nowhere. https://www.jdpower.com/business/press-releases/2024-us-original-equipment-tire-customer-satisfaction-study https://www.jdpower.com/business/press-releases/2024-us-orig...
    - Tostino 9mo ago
      They were saying "the same" in context of how often you have to replace the tires. Now, EV tires are often a slightly different compound (and more expensive) to deal with the higher weight and torque. I don't know how that plays into the particle emissions from those tires though.
- raverbashing 9mo ago
  It is amazing the amount of bs and grasping at straws that the oil company will push to keep their amazing polluting stuff going on No I'm sure fracking and pipelines and all the crap the oil industry needs just to exist does not have any pfas or micro plastics
otabdeveloper4 9mo ago
The pollution and grime that cars produce comes from tires rubbing off, not exhaust. (The exhaust pollution is mostly invisible.) Electric cars are heavier and produce more tire grime.
jordanbeiber 9mo ago
Even if we still make a mess I think centralization of the mess is better than distributing it - what I mean is that polluting cities where millions sleep, eat, drink and breathe will probably be worse, net effect, than containing energy pollution to select places. Running EVs in densely populated regions is probably a lot better for the population on the whole even if the net pollution would stay the same, IMO. Still no EV is even better, but we’ve created a world where transport is often required so, one step at a time I guess.
SideburnsOfDoom 9mo ago
> Some people argue the source of electricty can be contested against because that involves fossil fuel burning again FYI, if you want to search for this, it is called "The long tailpipe" theory (1) or "long tailpipe fallacy". 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_tailpipe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_tailpipe And it is a fallacy for obvious reasons, including a) electricity generation is more flexible, and rapidly shifting to solar and other non-polluting sources. b) Moving pollution away from people is better. Cars are inherently around people, streets, residences etc. c) One centralised plant with no weight restrictions is easier to control for emissions and efficiency than many thousands of mobile, weight-constrained power plants. d) Wikipedia: "The extraction and refining of carbon based fuels and its distribution is in itself an energy intensive industry contributing to CO2 emissions."
ErroneousBosh 9mo ago
We're still burning massive amounts of fossil fuels as waste products from refining oil to make plastics and chemical feedstocks. A huge amount of that is propane that just gets flared off. We could have been running cars on that for decades, but getting people to make their dirty polluting inefficient old petrol cars run on fuel that emits carbon dioxide and water with no HC, CO, SOx, NOx, or particulates was nowhere near as profitable as selling them lots of debt to buy cleaner greener diesels. And we're burning the fuel they'd run on anyway.
- paulryanrogers 9mo ago
  Compressed propane is explosive, more so than liquid gasoline or batteries. Though batteries do burn hot and are hard to extinguish.
  - ErroneousBosh 9mo ago
    Actually it's considerably less explosive than petrol and far safer in a crash. If a petrol-fuelled car goes on fire, the fuel tank will explode. The tanks are usually thin plastic and will split open in an accident, spilling fuel everywhere. By contrast, the LPG tanks are pretty much indestructible and if you remove a tank from a car that's been on fire (a lot of taxis are LPG-powered and seem to go on fire late at night for some reason, especially if they're parked in the wrong part of town) you'll find the tank is still about as full as it was before the car got burnt.
    - paulryanrogers 9mo ago
      Is that really true? Liquid gasoline does evaporate pretty quickly, yet doesn't need special metal tanks. Isn't propane sold and kept in pressurized tanks? As I understand it, gasoline tanks on cars are unlikely to explode unless they are nearly empty.
      - ErroneousBosh 9mo ago
        The petrol in the tank will boil quickly and blow the tank apart, especially if it's already a bit melty. You won't get enough pressure for a proper "BLEVE" because the leaky plastic bucket won't hold enough pressure to stop it beginning to boil, but it'll throw burning fuel all over. An automotive LPG tank is a bit different to the kind of thing you'd run your barbecue off with a "multivalve" that's got a float to shut off the filling port when it's full and act as a level gauge (similar to a petrol tank) and a pipe to pick liquid up from the bottom. You get "four hole" tanks with a vapour tap that you can use a normal regulator in, which is handy for things like motorhomes - same tank runs the engine and the cooker :-) They're only pressurised to about 8 bar, low enough that you can use plastic pipe to connect them to the vapouriser at the engine. It's kind of nylon tubing with braid over and a PVC outer jacket, and it handles liquid propane at tank pressure. If there's an overpressure because it gets really hot (like, car is on fire hot) it'll burp out a bit of gas which will cause a puff of flame but you're talking about something like a deodorant can on a bonfire (and don't tell me you've never done that). Quite honestly, I'm more wary around the 15 bar air suspension tank and lines. That's where pressurised gases start to get a bit spicy.
IngvarLynn 9mo ago
I'm all for EVs, but half of PM10 pollution is independent of engine type as it comes from brake and tire wear: http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC89231/jrc89231-online%20final%20version%202.pdf http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JR... So direct environment impact is still huge for EVs and calling them ZEV is literally a scam.
- testing22321 9mo ago
  You mean we can do something today that will reduce PM10 pollution by half?! That’s fantastic news!
  - 1over137 9mo ago
    >You mean we can do something today that will reduce PM10 pollution by half?! We could. We could massively fund public transit and massively reduce private car ownership. But we won't, because then capitalists will make less money.
    - testing22321 9mo ago
      What do you mean? Plenty of countries are doing all of that and more.
- SideburnsOfDoom 9mo ago
  Yes, that's why regenerative braking, which only EVs have, is so useful.
- paulryanrogers 9mo ago
  Don't EVs use resistive breaking to recharge their batteries? I would hope that reduces particle emissions. Though I suppose that EVs and hybrids are heavier than similar gas powered counterparts, so tire wear is worse. At least until EVs can be made lighter.
- catketch 9mo ago
  scam is a bit of hyperbole. also, ZEV has always explicitly referenced tailpipe emissions, which is also why there's been the odd sounding "partial zero emissions vehicle" category. It's certainly valid to be concerned about additional sources of fine particles, but eliminating engine emissions is not something to be dismissed as a scam. Further, particle emission from brake dust is mitigated in EV's that use regen braking. One of my ev's can go days without phycical brake usage, and another uses the brake pads so infrequently it has an automatic mode to touch the discs occasionally just to keep them from building up rust. tire particles --- different compounds can effect that, but will always be a side effect of tires on vehicles.
spooky_action 9mo ago
Aren't fossil fuel plants much more efficient than ICEs for emissions per unit energy extracted?
- Loudergood 9mo ago
  Yes, a coal powered EV will be cleaner than the same vehicle burning gasoline under the hood.
rainsford 9mo ago
Even if the source of electricity used to charge an EV is mostly generated by fossil fuels, EVs are still probably more energy efficient because gas powered cars are not particularly efficient at turning gasoline into useful energy compared to the efficiency of larger scale power plants. Also as you point out, non-fossil fuel energy is becoming a larger part of the grid over time, so an EV you buy today will become cleaner over time, while the fossil fuel reliance of a gas car purchased today will never improve. Honestly the biggest blocker for EVs from my perspective is charging infrastructure. Public fast charging sites are too uncommon compared to gas stations and a less than ideal solution to use for all of your charging needs and lots of people live in housing where installing a charger at home is difficult or impossible. Eventually both of those will change, but it will lag significantly behind the quality of the vehicles themselves. The interesting thing to me is that even for people who can't charge at home, EVs and charging infrastructure have reached the tipping point where they're at least viable. They're less convenient in such situations than a gas powered car and so will be limited to people who are extra motivated for one reason or another. But the EV world is over the "possible" hurdle so the "practical" threshold seems inevitable.

ares623 9mo ago

I just hope "dumb" EV's become a thing soon. I cannot and will not own a smart car any more I want to own a smart TV or smart fridge or smart toaster.

shiftpgdn 9mo ago
Just buy one and remove the SIM card.
- i80and 9mo ago
  They often have eSIMs I think, but (depending probably on the car) pulling the modem's fuse can be safe. That's the case for the VW ID.4 at least.
  - Nextgrid 9mo ago
    If the modem has no fuse, physically damaging the NIC chip in the module will also work.
  - wizzwizz4 9mo ago
    I want the car to be able to contact emergency services, but not to otherwise be able to use the cellular network. Is there a good way to sabotage the eSIM, without otherwise breaking the modem? (This would still allow the car to be tracked via IMEI, but I'm not too worried about that: anyone capable of that is also capable of tracking my actual phone, and anyone buying that data will already know what car I own.)
    - eldaisfish 9mo ago
      why do you want your car to contact emergency services? the people around you can do that just fine and very reliably. How on earth did we survive as a species before our cars could make automated phone calls?
      - charcircuit 9mo ago
        The parent comment is interested in the survival of themselves and passengers. The survival of the human race is a low bar to pass.
      - mattlondon 9mo ago
        There's often been a few cases of "disappeared" people who went missing and it turns out they actually crashed off the road somewhere and weren't found for a week or two. That's extreme of course but there are probably a lot of accidents that happen in low-density rural country areas or late at night when there aren't many people around. The automatic e-call from the car gives exact GPS coordinates and severity of the accident, even if you are unconscious or if your phone that was neatly in the cup holder before the crash was flung somewhere else (potentially even flew out of the car etc) and you're trying to find it while someone might be dying in the seat next to you etc. People didn't survive before all this. It's a mandatory feature now because it's so effective at saving lives. 2 to 10% reduction in fatalities and serious injuries apparently. Would you also question why we have mandatory airbags and traction control?!
        deleted 9mo ago
        [deleted]
        eldaisfish 9mo ago
        right, but airbags, seatbelts, etc. are not internet connected. That's the critical distinction. I do not want the risks that come with my car connecting to the internet. A much more reasonable ask would be for your car's systems to use your phone to place a call to emergency services. I absolutely do not want yet another internet connected device in my life, especially one like a car, where examples exist of hackers being able to disable the electronics remotely.
ebiederm 9mo ago
Does the 2026 Nissan Leaf meet your criteria for a dumb car? All it's connected features appear to come from Android Auto or Apple Car Play. AKA from a connection to your phone. I like the looks of it because it appears to be a serious EV unlike too many which are just some company getting their toes wet.
- 46493168 9mo ago
  Does Nissan still air cool their batteries or have they wised up?
  - i80and 9mo ago
    The 2026 redesign has put in a proper liquid cooling loop. (Battery heating is inexplicably an extra $300 option, and not available on the base trim AFAICS?)
- everdrive 9mo ago
  Does Nissan still not put telematics in the base model in 2026?
- everdrive 9mo ago
  Looking at the specs page the base model includes "Dual 12.3" widescreen displays" Why? What the hell is wrong with modern cars?
  - rootusrootus 9mo ago
    Lots (most?) cars are going to LCDs for the instrument panel. The second screen is the infotainment.
    - al_borland 9mo ago
      My previous car had its infotainment system reboot several times while I was on the expressway. The idea of my instrument panel, or other more critical systems, crashing and rebooting while driving terrifies me.
alephnerd 9mo ago
> I just hope "dumb" EV's become a thing soon What business case is there for a "dumb" EV? By using touchscreens and software for most functionality, you dramatically reduce your supply chain overhead and better enhance margins (instead of managing the supply chain for dozens of extruded buttons, now you manage the supply chain of a single LCD touchscreen). This was a major optimization that Chinese automotive manufacturers (ICE and EV) found and took advantage of all the way back in 2019 [0] - treat cars as consumer electronics instead of as "cars". Edit: Any answer that does not take COGS or Magins into account is moot. [0] - https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/automotive%20and%20assembly/our%20insights/winning%20the%20race%20chinas%20auto%20market%20shifts%20gears/winning-the-race-chinas-auto-market-shifts-gears.pdf https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/automot...
- mixmastamyk 9mo ago
  The case is that you’ll sell more cars giving people options. Slate is bucking the trend, we’ll see if successful.
- derf_ 9mo ago
  The business case is that I will actually buy it. I won't buy "consumer electronics" garbage when I want to buy safe and reliable transportation.
  - MBCook 9mo ago
    That hasn’t worked for TVs. Or phones. Or plenty of other things.
    - pinnochio 9mo ago
      Not sure what your point is when we're talking about cars, where fixed physical controls are demonstrably more usable and safer for drivers that need to keep their eyes on the road. Multiple manufacturers have pulled back from excessive touch controls (not just touchscreens, but capacitive buttons and sliders) and reinstated more traditional buttons and dials.
jayd16 9mo ago
We'll probably see the death of the dumb ICE car first.
rootusrootus 9mo ago
The differentiating factor is not EV vs ICE. All cars have or will soon have telematics and such.
tshaddox 9mo ago
Are EVs more “smart” than comparably priced ICE vehicles?
- seanmcdirmid 9mo ago
  Not really, they are just newer than the average ICE car. Parent wants an EV from the early 2000s or the 1990s.
  - princevegeta89 9mo ago
    Depends. They get a virtually continual supply of standby power that can last for months if left untouched. So from a technology standpoint that enables them to do many things - from being connected to the network, aware of their location on the map, recording camera footage and other remote capabilities. ICE cars do have some of these but the huge battery packs on EVs make these very feasible.
    - MBCook 9mo ago
      Do they? I was under the impression most EVs cut off the connection to the high voltage battery almost all the time they’re not in use. They rely on a 12 V battery or a 48 V battery like a normal car. The only thing I’m aware of that special is that if that low voltage battery gets low enough the car will detect it and recharge it from the high voltage battery, temporarily connecting it for that purpose.
      - princevegeta89 9mo ago
        Well that was what I meant - the battery pack meaning the entire system of batteries, be it 1 or 2 or 3. That really enables them to have a continuous state of power supply for a long long time. This cannot be achieved by ICE cars and not even hybrids for that matter.
        cosmic_cheese 9mo ago
        In theory. In practice, a lot of EVs (and hybrids, which could do the same thing to a more limited extent) ship with the same cheap flooded lead acid 12v batteries that ship with ICE cars and don't handle constant charging/discharging well. This puts a cap on how much the "smart" systems can do because it dramatically increases cycle count and thus the risk of the 12v battery losing the ability to produce enough voltage to start the car, leaving the driver marooned somewhere. It could also result in a noticeable "vampire" drain on the high voltage battery which looks bad and could put you at a disadvantage vs. competitors.
shmoe 9mo ago
Have you met https://slate.auto https://slate.auto ? :) Doesn't even have automatic windows.
- usui 9mo ago
  Ah yes, the previously-marketed $20,000 Slate which is actually $30,000 now, still comes with nothing, and hasn't hit production yet. If only BYD could come in and destroy the non-smart/budget EV market.
  - shmoe 9mo ago
    I mean, dude asked for a non-smart car.. BYD isn't fitting that either.
- princevegeta89 9mo ago
  Jesus Christ... this entire thing looks like such a far-fetched dream to me. I am worried for the VCs that dumped their money into this idea.
  - al_borland 9mo ago
    Jeff Bezos was one of them. He’ll be ok.
  - shmoe 9mo ago
    We'll see soon enough, they promise trucks on the road later this year.
tombert 9mo ago
I don't love smart TVs either, but why not just buy a smart TV and not use the smart features? I have a few "smart TVs", but I haven't even connected them to Wi-Fi, and I instead opt for an Nvidia Shield TV or just a laptop computer plugged in instead.
- al_borland 9mo ago
  Depending on the TV, it will still kick you to their bloated “smart” interface all the time, instead of just simply cycling through inputs.
- stephenr 9mo ago
  A few years ago it came out that one of the manufacturers (my hunch is Samsung but I don't remember the specifics) had their "smart" tvs aggressively try connecting to any and all networks it can find in range, if you didn't connect it to one. I reluctantly bought an LG with webOS (least bad option available) a couple of years ago. For some reason they weren't content to let the TV menu/remote work with up/down/left/right buttons. That's too fucking predictable, and anyone who's used a tv in the last 2 decades could use it.... Let's give it a fucking nipple, just like those horrific fucking IBM/Lenovo laptops. Then of course it also tries to "help" by detecting HDR content and change view mode... while something is playing.... which makes the screen go black for several seconds.
stevenjgarner 9mo ago
Why? Are you worried from a liberty/privacy standpoint? "Smart" EV's are demonstrated to be significantly safer than "dumb" EVs. Waymo’s 2025/2026 data shows an 80–90% reduction in injury-causing crashes compared to human drivers in the same cities. [1, 2, 3, 4] [1] https://www.reinsurancene.ws/waymo-shows-90-fewer-claims-than-advanced-human-driven-vehicles-swiss-re/ https://www.reinsurancene.ws/waymo-shows-90-fewer-claims-tha... [2] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11305169/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11305169/ [3] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39485678/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39485678/ [4] https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Comparison-of-Swiss-Re-human-driver-baselines-with-Waymo-liability-insurance-claims-for_fig2_382262837 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Comparison-of-Swiss-Re-h...
- somehnguy 9mo ago
  Personally I’m not very keen on owning a vehicle the manufacturer can completely brick at will
  - stevenjgarner 9mo ago
    So liberty then. I don't disagree with you, but this modern flashpoint in the classic debate between individual liberty and collective safety does bring up the question what is saving 50,000+ lives annually actually worth in terms of loss of personal freedoms? I am personally struggling with this debate having lost loved ones in this manner.
    - direwolf20 9mo ago
      Remote bricking of cars does not save 50,000 lives.
      - stevenjgarner 9mo ago
        That is not the argument being made. We are discussing how "dumb" vehicles (e.g. vehicles that contribute to 50,000+ fatalities annually) provide independence, privacy and freedom that "smart" vehicles (e.g. vehicles with self-driving that can be bricked at will) do not ensure.
thegreatpeter 9mo ago
Have you been in the new Model Y? I was all for the „dumb car” until I tried one of those. Never going back. You only want „dumb” bc the other car companies fk’d it all up.
- bdangubic 9mo ago
  Other car companies fucked it up is funny way to put it. Tesla hasn’t made a new car in a decade and the whole lineup is for my 80-year old Dad. I have 2014 Tesla S, my neighbour 2025, same car. Tesla X is from a decade ago, Tesla 3 is basically Toyota Corolla and Y is basically Model 3 that was pumped up a bit to look like a “crossover”
  - sMarsIntruder 9mo ago
    Wow. This comment makes me wonder if really earth is flat.
    - bdangubic 9mo ago
      when I bought my Tesla S there was a lot of head injuries from people turning around to see this new amazing cars. now, not only are sales tanking but the cars look so old and dated that my first assumption when I see say Model Y is “gotta be someone’s grandma” when was the last time you saw a Tesla and went “oh cool car!”? been awhile, right? Now ask the same question for BMW, Benz…
SloppyDrive 9mo ago
Post crash connectivity (as well as complex video classification) are part of the ncap standards now. And with the way we are moving to centralized one system architectures, the device that does video processing can be the same soc that does smart infotainment. Smart connectivity essentially comes "for free" if the manufacturer wants to hit 5 safety stars, so its not going away, and will come to ICE cars as they modernize the vehicle architectures.
- 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 9mo ago
  I hate that. If I live in the country, my car spies on me. If I live in the city everyone spies on me. One value I agree with the libertarians on is, I just want to be left alone.
- mixmastamyk 9mo ago
  Connect and infotainment must be firewalled from the engine computer for security reasons. It’s not like two raspberry pis are that expensive.
  - SloppyDrive 9mo ago
    Not remotely true; Look up "one chip" designs. Yes, there are some security threats, but solving them is more valuable than trying to design a car around true firewalls.
    - mixmastamyk 9mo ago
      You must have missed the news about cars being hacked, while in movement no less. That some have tried to save money while risking lives is not an endorsement or evidence of a solved problem.
pilingual 9mo ago
Slate, or pull the cellular connection: http://techno-fandom.org/~hobbit/cars/ev/offnet.html http://techno-fandom.org/~hobbit/cars/ev/offnet.html
conk 9mo ago
Just get a used one that’s a decade old. The cell providers will all move on past 3g/4g etc and the cars won’t be able to connect. Plus I’m sure no one is paying to keep a cell connection going for a decade old EV.
mnot 9mo ago
We just bought a Cupra Tavascan; turns out VW Group Australia decided to forgo connected car features for EVs (or at least the ones we looked at). Win.
- girvo 9mo ago
  Cupra Born in aus, same thing here haha Though it means connected charging via API stuff doesn’t work. Not that it’s mattered to me!
girvo 9mo ago
Amusingly my Cupra Born in Australia is a “dumb” EV, because Cupra/VW didn’t put a SIM in the car in this country. It’s quite lovely really, though it means I have to go to Cupra for a firmware update.
rgmerk 9mo ago
Not happening any time soon, sorry. Car manufacturers want that sweet sweet subscription revenue.
RobGR 9mo ago
I have hopes that the Slate vehicle will turn out to be a dumb EV, but I'm cynical enough that I want to wait til it hits the market and someone does a tear-down. https://www.slate.auto/ https://www.slate.auto/

MBCook 9mo ago

The number of ICE cars I get stuck behind from time to time that just REEK is amazing. I’m in a decently well off area too. Some putting off soot clouds, white smoke, nothing visible but clearly not doing complete combustion. Sometimes I wonder if half the cylinders are even working. I’ve heard one car like that is the equivalent of a surprisingly large number of modern ICE cars is in good shape. I love EVs. I’ve had one for 5 years now, and I’m glad they help. But I think the “are new EVs worse than new ICE” discussions so often miss a fact. The pollution from ICE isn’t just from very modern well tuned vehicles, things vary wildly. But all EVs use the same power supply (assuming local grid only), so no individual vehicles put off 10x the pollution per kWh.

tonymet 9mo ago
tragically, because of efficiency standards, modern engines are known to burn oil . Otherwise you may be smelling cars who have had the cats stolen.
- seanmcdirmid 9mo ago
  A lot of old cars also since new cars are so expensive.
  - MBCook 9mo ago
    I think expense is basically the problem. Cost to replace the catalytic converter, cost for new exhaust pipes, cost to diagnose ignition timing problems. Whatever. If the car drives and you don’t have the money I can completely understand why someone wouldn’t get the problem fixed. Even if it means they’re burning a 1/3 of their fuel, that’s still less in the short term than the $1500 it may cost to fix it. It’s insanely rare I get the sense that the person is running really dirty on purpose. I don’t know what a realistic fairway to fix it is. They’re probably isn’t one. I don’t think fines would work, it would probably just make things worse. Seems like the kind of thing where a little government group to find the worst 0.1% of cars on the road and just get them back to reasonable levels would be a huge help. But that’s not how we do things.

kemiller 9mo ago

Even if you power a typical EV from 100% coal, it pencils out as about equivalent to a late model Prius. And any improvements in the energy mix take it further.

cosmic_cheese 9mo ago
I don't think many people really understand how awful automobile-scale internal combustion engines are at efficiency. The only reason they work at all is thanks to the absurd energy density of the fuels they burn.
- heresie-dabord 9mo ago
  8.9 kWh / litre of petrol [1] But more than 60% of that is lost as heat. The inefficiency increases in colder temperatures. [1] _ https://natural-resources.canada.ca/energy-efficiency/transportation-energy-efficiency/personal-vehicles/understanding-tables https://natural-resources.canada.ca/energy-efficiency/transp...

omoikane 9mo ago

The surprising part to me is that there are now enough EVs to make a measurable difference, since I kept thinking they are still relatively rare. The linked study has this piece of data: From 2019 to 2023, ZEVs increased from 2.0% (559943 of 28237734) to 5.1% (1460818 of 28498496). So 1 out of 20 cars in California is an EV.

justaboutanyone 9mo ago
It really feels like more than 1 in 20 driving around the 101/280
- omoikane 9mo ago
  Probably because Santa Clara County has more EV sales compared to its neighbors, according to this map: https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/zero-emission-vehicle-and-infrastructure-statistics-collection/new-zev https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/zero-e...
  - ZeroGravitas 9mo ago
    And newer cars get driven more than old cars on average so 1/20 cars being EVs will do more than 1/20th of the miles.
ninalanyon 9mo ago
Between 1 in 4 and 1 in 3 in Norway.
- ccozan 9mo ago
  Germany maybe 1 in 5 to 1 in 7 ( at least in the south ). I drive mostly the commuter schedule and I am amazed how many are driving the EVs. Truth is: for commuting up to 100kms, the EVs are wastly cheaper long run ( you have to factor everything ! )

groundzeros2015 9mo ago

> No surprises. What about all the resources and people used to develop the cars?

chaostheory 9mo ago
It’s probably still more net efficient in the long run. Besides, the main advantage EVs bring isn’t being more environmentally friendly. The main advantage is that it allows a nation to have more flexibility with its energy sources. i.e. an EV can run on anything that can generate electricity like coal or natural gas, while ICE cars mostly only run on gasoline.
dymk 9mo ago
Six months break even and then it’s more carbon friendly than an ICE for the rest of its working lifetime
- groundzeros2015 9mo ago
  Tesla has used more than 40 billion of capital
  - vel0city 9mo ago
    They've made almost 9 million cars overall, with a lot of those made in the last several years. Spreading it over the cars they've made so far, 40,000 / 9 = 4,444.44. Doesn't seem that crazy. I'm not seeing your point.
    - groundzeros2015 9mo ago
      That 40 billion is investment money, not the cost of goods sold. I’m saying its not obvious at all that environmental cost is recouped.
      - vel0city 9mo ago
        That's 9 million (and probably many more unless Tesla disappears tomorrow) far cleaner cars on the road, offsetting what would have probably been ICE sales. I'm no Tesla-stan but spending $40B over a decade to inject massive amounts of change in an entrenched industry to move forward in efficiency and emissions sounds like a pretty good investment to me.

chaostheory 9mo ago

> Some people argue the source of electricty can be contested against because that involves fossil fuel burning again I would argue that this provides us the possibility of energy flexibility, which is a good thing given the current global geopolitical situation

psychoslave 9mo ago

That's framing the topic completely out of the issue with global impacts of humanity on ecosystemic sustainability, including biodiversity. Less commut and more collective transportation is going to be far more significant in term of global impact, whatever the engine type.

yen223 9mo ago
You can do both! Better trains and more EVs replacing gas cars can be done simultaneously!
- spwa4 9mo ago
  You forget the most important aspect of policy: it can't cost a single dime, and everyone must lie about that. Read the first sentence of the article: "When California neighborhoods increased their number of zero-emissions vehicles" Obviously neighborhoods/cities/states didn't increase anything. It was just rich people living there buying fancy cars. Of course, this needs to be described as a great accomplishment of local government. And nowhere in the article is the obvious solution even suggested: advancing electric car technology so they're cheaper than ICE cars. And I don't mean charging extra tax while cutting public transport to make sure poor people don't go anywhere anymore, I mean fixing the technology so everyone has transport, for less money.
  - tpm 9mo ago
    > obvious solution Shouldn't the obvious solution be based on observable reality? Which is that there is no technology in sight that will make EVs cheaper to build than ICEs. Otherwise you are praying for a miracle, and that's not a sound policy.
    - spwa4 9mo ago
      Technological advance can be modeled like anything else. Everything about plug-in EVs is cheaper than ICE cars, except the battery. So you can model exactly what you need to get the same as you're currently seeing with solar panels. You can calculate at exactly what point they'll take over aviation and so on. I mean, this isn't even a very hard thing to model.

dyauspitr 9mo ago

We are about 2-3x battery capacity to never look back at ICE vehicles ever again. That or 5 min to 80% charge times with current capacity.

neogodless 9mo ago
The current generation of Lucid, BMW, etc. are 400+ mile vehicles. You think we need 800-1200 mile batteries? As for charge speed, the twice a year someone needs more than 400 miles isn't as significant in real world EV usage... I plug in on a dopey 1.3kW (~115V, ~12A) outlet and my car is at 80% charge in the morning. For commuting, a 5pm to 7am charge is ample for most people living ordinary lives.
- dyauspitr 9mo ago
  Based on my firsthand experience, cold weather (big one) or hauling/towing significantly reduces that 400 mile range (sometimes by 50%+). Yes to comfortably get 400-500 miles per charge in the worst case scenario it needs to be atleast 2x.
  - neogodless 9mo ago
    If you're saying 100% only EVs with no use cases whatsoever for gasoline, then I suppose so. I don't think that's a smart goal, though. More like, more people should understand how EVs can easily work for them, and then try to shoehorn gas-powered vehicles into the few niche they need to be in. How often does someone need a 400 mile range again? Towing? When is the last time you towed something 400 miles? The most I ever towed was... using a rental truck and a rental trailer when I moved. (Anecdotes are not data!) But why in a rational purchasing decision would I need an 800 mile EV battery for a car just because sometimes it's cold out?
    - dyauspitr 9mo ago
      It depends on your lifestyle. I haul my RV around sometimes two weekends a month. In my F-150 lightning I get around 100 miles between charges which is pretty dismal. I’m assuming you live in a city or in Europe. Where I live people regularly haul RVs, boats etc. I also frequently drive long distances and even in the best case scenario 2.5 hours of driving followed by 40 minutes of charging is a pain. These aren’t unusual driving patterns where I live.

SecretDreams 9mo ago

Even if the fossil fuel argument at the source was/is valid, it's infinitely more efficient to do it at the source than in a car. You can extract far more energy and do better to mitigate byproducts.

tetha 9mo ago
Also, an EV is as green as the grid. Hamburgs public transportation is heavily investing into electrical busses, because a bus is expected to function for 10 - 15 years. Meaning, a diesel bus built today will be as polluting in 2035 as it is today, though they are also looking at alternatives there. But an electrical bus will become cleaner and cleaner over time.

deleted 9mo ago

[deleted]

unglaublich 9mo ago

Even if the electricity source would burn similar fuel, just the fact that you don't pullote right in the middle of population centers makes a huge difference. In reality, it's not only that, but _also_ that they use cleaner methods of energy production.

fuckyah 9mo ago
[dead]
kakacik 9mo ago
This is only the issue if you are a city dweller and want to spend your whole life there. For rural folks this is actually best possible situation. The pollution always goes somewhere, and its not like we have large swaths of useless places that we can pollute without consequences.
- unglaublich 9mo ago
  Huh, no. Pollution close to humans is bad for both city and rural people. > The pollution always goes somewhere, "The solution to pollution is dilution". We want the concentration of pollution low, so the health effects are low too, and we can give natural processes the time to decay/oxidize/etc the pollutants. > not like we have large swaths of useless places We do... we mostly care about the lower ~100 meters of atmosphere because that's where people live. That's less than 1% of the total atmosphere. This means we can distribute pollution over a volume a 100x larger than that that is important for us. And then I'm not even counting the vast amount of the planet that's uninhabited / non-land. Also, smokestacks are designed to not directly pollute the air close to people, see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnYdt4T76mk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnYdt4T76mk

DyslexicAtheist 9mo ago

> I hope ICE cars completely become a thing of the past in the next couple of decades to come. for this to happen the EVs depreciation needs to drastically improve compared to ICE. I don't see this. On top of this EVs tend to push ideas from Software/Tech companies, such as recurring revenues (because the underlying technology lends itself to it better). Personally I'm unsure that this will be accepted by all consumers as much as is needed. After all the automotive marketing has since Ford insisted that driving was about "freedom". So some pivot needs to happen in the messaging. Suppose decades is a lot of time to change it. Personally I think EVs are nonsense, and a better utopia would be making sure public transport is abundant, high-quality and free.

cbeach 9mo ago
Public transport will never recreate the freedom of car ownership. It’s a collectivist dream not rooted in reality.
- jodrellblank 9mo ago
  Rarely in everyday life situations do I feel as claustrophobic as being in a car in traffic in a typical road. Can’t change direction (one lane no junctions), can’t change speed (vehicles in front and behind), can’t stop (flow of traffic), can’t break concentration (driving), can’t change body position (car cabin is tiny, seats and hand/feet controls are fixed, no space to stand), can’t look away for more than a moment (responsibility of driving). And the only places to go are on the predetermined road, from a car park, to a car park, following a lot of strict prescribed rules about how. This meme of “freedom” is brainwashing and marketing (which has been picked up as an identity thing by the right wing recently). There’s nothing free about having to use a $20,000 vehicle to buy bread because no other options are available.
  - B1FIDO 9mo ago
    I do not own a vehicle, and most of my life I've depended on public transit. Lately, I take Waymos or I ride scooters, or use public transit as usual. Sometimes, for special errands, I rent a car. For example, I intended to move across town last year, so I rented a car for 3-4 days. It was the most excruciating pain I could have. I chose a little Mitsubishi Mirage, and firstly, it was the middle of July in the Sonoran Desert, and the A/C hardly worked, so I was sweating, and the car would heat up real good in parking lots. No sun shades, dark upholstery. Also, the USB connection was flaky, so sometimes my phone didn't charge, and whether or not, it was directly exposed to the Sun and overheating. By the second day, my legs hurt a lot. I had spent an unexpected amount of time on my feet and walking around, despite the vehicle. Do you know how big parking lots are these days?! I tried sitting down at every opportunity. I have a running gag/dispute at my bank to see whether they will allow me to "sit down" at the "ADA/Disabled" teller window. Driving home at night on the last night, my leg cramped up really bad. I was in such pain, I nearly pulled over because it was my accelerator/brake leg and I was going to lose control of the car. Thankfully I was able to hold it together, and returned the car the next day, but boy I did not want such a vehicle ever again. And it was not a stick-shift; it was an automatic transmission. Next time I'm going to be really sure that the USB and A/C work. And that my legs are super-comfortable and has cruise control.

memen 9mo ago

Is that true? EV have much higher emissions of micro plastics and pfas (or variations thereof) due to increased tier degradation. EVs are typically way heavier than similar ICE due to the batteries and combined with the higher torques, tires wear faster.

cbeach 9mo ago
I have a heavy and high performance EV (Tesla Model S) and I have replaced my tires twice in the last six years. So it’s about the same as an ICE vehicle in that regard. One thing that differs is brake wear. My car is ten years old and still on its original brake pads and discs. The regen braking is amazing for avoiding mechanical braking. So that means less particle emission from brakes, compared to ICE.
- itsprobablyok 9mo ago
  >"I have a heavy and high performance EV (Tesla Model S) and I have replaced my tires twice in the last six years. So it’s about the same as an ICE vehicle in that regard." Well no, it's not "the same". We have things like physics to tell us that more torque and more weight means more tire wear, despite your anecdote. There are even studies on this. They also have a greater impact on road wear. EVs have many advantages over ICEs. I don't understand why people have to lie and say they are worse nowhere. https://www.jdpower.com/business/press-releases/2024-us-original-equipment-tire-customer-satisfaction-study https://www.jdpower.com/business/press-releases/2024-us-orig...
  - Tostino 9mo ago
    They were saying "the same" in context of how often you have to replace the tires. Now, EV tires are often a slightly different compound (and more expensive) to deal with the higher weight and torque. I don't know how that plays into the particle emissions from those tires though.
raverbashing 9mo ago
It is amazing the amount of bs and grasping at straws that the oil company will push to keep their amazing polluting stuff going on No I'm sure fracking and pipelines and all the crap the oil industry needs just to exist does not have any pfas or micro plastics

otabdeveloper4 9mo ago

The pollution and grime that cars produce comes from tires rubbing off, not exhaust. (The exhaust pollution is mostly invisible.) Electric cars are heavier and produce more tire grime.

jordanbeiber 9mo ago

Even if we still make a mess I think centralization of the mess is better than distributing it - what I mean is that polluting cities where millions sleep, eat, drink and breathe will probably be worse, net effect, than containing energy pollution to select places. Running EVs in densely populated regions is probably a lot better for the population on the whole even if the net pollution would stay the same, IMO. Still no EV is even better, but we’ve created a world where transport is often required so, one step at a time I guess.

SideburnsOfDoom 9mo ago

> Some people argue the source of electricty can be contested against because that involves fossil fuel burning again FYI, if you want to search for this, it is called "The long tailpipe" theory (1) or "long tailpipe fallacy". 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_tailpipe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_tailpipe And it is a fallacy for obvious reasons, including a) electricity generation is more flexible, and rapidly shifting to solar and other non-polluting sources. b) Moving pollution away from people is better. Cars are inherently around people, streets, residences etc. c) One centralised plant with no weight restrictions is easier to control for emissions and efficiency than many thousands of mobile, weight-constrained power plants. d) Wikipedia: "The extraction and refining of carbon based fuels and its distribution is in itself an energy intensive industry contributing to CO2 emissions."

ErroneousBosh 9mo ago

We're still burning massive amounts of fossil fuels as waste products from refining oil to make plastics and chemical feedstocks. A huge amount of that is propane that just gets flared off. We could have been running cars on that for decades, but getting people to make their dirty polluting inefficient old petrol cars run on fuel that emits carbon dioxide and water with no HC, CO, SOx, NOx, or particulates was nowhere near as profitable as selling them lots of debt to buy cleaner greener diesels. And we're burning the fuel they'd run on anyway.

paulryanrogers 9mo ago
Compressed propane is explosive, more so than liquid gasoline or batteries. Though batteries do burn hot and are hard to extinguish.
- ErroneousBosh 9mo ago
  Actually it's considerably less explosive than petrol and far safer in a crash. If a petrol-fuelled car goes on fire, the fuel tank will explode. The tanks are usually thin plastic and will split open in an accident, spilling fuel everywhere. By contrast, the LPG tanks are pretty much indestructible and if you remove a tank from a car that's been on fire (a lot of taxis are LPG-powered and seem to go on fire late at night for some reason, especially if they're parked in the wrong part of town) you'll find the tank is still about as full as it was before the car got burnt.
  - paulryanrogers 9mo ago
    Is that really true? Liquid gasoline does evaporate pretty quickly, yet doesn't need special metal tanks. Isn't propane sold and kept in pressurized tanks? As I understand it, gasoline tanks on cars are unlikely to explode unless they are nearly empty.
    - ErroneousBosh 9mo ago
      The petrol in the tank will boil quickly and blow the tank apart, especially if it's already a bit melty. You won't get enough pressure for a proper "BLEVE" because the leaky plastic bucket won't hold enough pressure to stop it beginning to boil, but it'll throw burning fuel all over. An automotive LPG tank is a bit different to the kind of thing you'd run your barbecue off with a "multivalve" that's got a float to shut off the filling port when it's full and act as a level gauge (similar to a petrol tank) and a pipe to pick liquid up from the bottom. You get "four hole" tanks with a vapour tap that you can use a normal regulator in, which is handy for things like motorhomes - same tank runs the engine and the cooker :-) They're only pressurised to about 8 bar, low enough that you can use plastic pipe to connect them to the vapouriser at the engine. It's kind of nylon tubing with braid over and a PVC outer jacket, and it handles liquid propane at tank pressure. If there's an overpressure because it gets really hot (like, car is on fire hot) it'll burp out a bit of gas which will cause a puff of flame but you're talking about something like a deodorant can on a bonfire (and don't tell me you've never done that). Quite honestly, I'm more wary around the 15 bar air suspension tank and lines. That's where pressurised gases start to get a bit spicy.

IngvarLynn 9mo ago

I'm all for EVs, but half of PM10 pollution is independent of engine type as it comes from brake and tire wear: http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC89231/jrc89231-online%20final%20version%202.pdf http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JR... So direct environment impact is still huge for EVs and calling them ZEV is literally a scam.

testing22321 9mo ago
You mean we can do something today that will reduce PM10 pollution by half?! That’s fantastic news!
- 1over137 9mo ago
  >You mean we can do something today that will reduce PM10 pollution by half?! We could. We could massively fund public transit and massively reduce private car ownership. But we won't, because then capitalists will make less money.
  - testing22321 9mo ago
    What do you mean? Plenty of countries are doing all of that and more.
SideburnsOfDoom 9mo ago
Yes, that's why regenerative braking, which only EVs have, is so useful.
paulryanrogers 9mo ago
Don't EVs use resistive breaking to recharge their batteries? I would hope that reduces particle emissions. Though I suppose that EVs and hybrids are heavier than similar gas powered counterparts, so tire wear is worse. At least until EVs can be made lighter.
catketch 9mo ago
scam is a bit of hyperbole. also, ZEV has always explicitly referenced tailpipe emissions, which is also why there's been the odd sounding "partial zero emissions vehicle" category. It's certainly valid to be concerned about additional sources of fine particles, but eliminating engine emissions is not something to be dismissed as a scam. Further, particle emission from brake dust is mitigated in EV's that use regen braking. One of my ev's can go days without phycical brake usage, and another uses the brake pads so infrequently it has an automatic mode to touch the discs occasionally just to keep them from building up rust. tire particles --- different compounds can effect that, but will always be a side effect of tires on vehicles.

spooky_action 9mo ago

Aren't fossil fuel plants much more efficient than ICEs for emissions per unit energy extracted?

Loudergood 9mo ago
Yes, a coal powered EV will be cleaner than the same vehicle burning gasoline under the hood.

rainsford 9mo ago

Even if the source of electricity used to charge an EV is mostly generated by fossil fuels, EVs are still probably more energy efficient because gas powered cars are not particularly efficient at turning gasoline into useful energy compared to the efficiency of larger scale power plants. Also as you point out, non-fossil fuel energy is becoming a larger part of the grid over time, so an EV you buy today will become cleaner over time, while the fossil fuel reliance of a gas car purchased today will never improve. Honestly the biggest blocker for EVs from my perspective is charging infrastructure. Public fast charging sites are too uncommon compared to gas stations and a less than ideal solution to use for all of your charging needs and lots of people live in housing where installing a charger at home is difficult or impossible. Eventually both of those will change, but it will lag significantly behind the quality of the vehicles themselves. The interesting thing to me is that even for people who can't charge at home, EVs and charging infrastructure have reached the tipping point where they're at least viable. They're less convenient in such situations than a gas powered car and so will be limited to people who are extra motivated for one reason or another. But the EV world is over the "possible" hurdle so the "practical" threshold seems inevitable.