politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
You just charge at a supercharger once in a while, or plug in to an L2 that are all over the place. You don't have a gas station in your appartment either.
Sure, but gas station availability is still significantly different than charger availability. And I don't have to wait an hour at the gas station. False equivalency.
You don't have to wait an hour. False premise.
Can I supply the entire range of the EV in 10 minutes?
If you buy a new Hyundai, pretty close.
When it changes from pretty close to yes, then it won't be a false equivalency and I'd probably be in the market.
Edit: anyone disagreeing, can you explain how a technology that asks some population to change their behavior is expected to succeed? The EV asks its buyers to change their habits. It asks you to take the hit for the climate -- while simultaneously using technologies like modern batteries which are straight up bad for the climate.
Asking these things to be at parity with gas (as in, can I fill my electric car with power with the same speed as a gas car) is not a lofty goal. It is the baseline goal for any other technology. EV tech will remain outside of the norm until those issues are addressed. The intentions don't matter.
First, you're moving goalposts. That already makes you seem like you're arguing in bad faith. You can't start with "an EV would have me wait for an hour just to be charged" and when people call you out on your bs be like "oh yeah, which EV charges in 10 minutes??" That's not what you said first. And when you're told that there are models that do charge in about 10 minutes, you're just like "well about is not enough". Just charge 10 minutes and leave the charger at 75 % then, if that 10-minute-mark is so important to you.
Second, charging embeds well into everyday tasks. Groceries? Car charges. Movies? Car charges. Restaurant? Car charges. Etc etc. Sure, 11 kW won't fully charge your car while you're shopping, but they don't have to. Just add some km while you're at it. I have friends and colleagues that don't own houses and still drive EVs and they say that there are more charging opportunities than they need, so they don't even always charge their car. If your commute requires you to charge more often, just charge before your first break and maybe ask your employer if there's a plug somewhere that you could use.
Only if none of that works and you're talking about a really long commute, you need to take detours to fast charge your car. Tbf, I never met anyone who had this issue, but yes, if you're that person, you'll have to adapt that convenient EV charging scheme I described above to... behave just like you did with your old combustion car. Yes, it'll take slightly longer to charge your car than to fill it. Just grab a coffee while you look for a supermarket that provides L2 charging so you can avoid it next time. I've certainly had my wait times at gas stations during rush hour or holidays, but that's seemingly not an issue.
That's just nonsense. EVs are so much better than ICEs in so many regards, worst case charge times and front up prices are the only things left for people to complain about. They're cheaper over their lifetime, their acceleration values (that car enthusiasts were comparing for decades to determine the awesomeness of a car) are beyond anything combustion engines can provide, they are quiet, etc etc. This weird idea that none of this counts if you have to spend half an hour to charge because you seemingly can't be arsed to charge it while you're doing something else is just ridiculous.
You know what, so far it doesn't. So far, it's an offer you may or may not take. But eventually, yes, people will have to change their habits. As they did before. When the ozone layer started falling apart in the 70s, the world sat together and prohibited the usage of CFCs in the 80s, with some countries taking more or less time to turn this into their local laws. But yes, people then had to change their habits as CFC alternatives sometimes worked differently. Look at who complained the loudest then and maybe still complains about it today and ask yourself if you really want to be perceived like one of those folks.
I'll just assume that you actually don't know what's worse for the climate. I mean, yes, we should reduce car dependency as a whole and use more bikes and public transport, but an EV is so much better for the climate than an ICE, it's not even close. Even if you charge it with electricity straight from a coal plant, it's just so much more efficient that eventually, it'll have been the better option for the planet, but assuming you just take the energy mix that's available where you live, it'll be fast to offset the worse climate footprint from battery production.
For a comparison that also mentions battery production: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tc-6GHdCmgI
The more evs, the more the infrastructure will adapt
100% true, but it's still a chicken and egg problem
How often do you need to travel the entire range your car allows?
If you do need to drop everything and drive across country in an EV, you should be stopping at service stations to do short fast charge sessions anyway, as with modern fast chargers and battery tech you will typically go from something like 30% SoC to say 70% in only a few minutes. This saves a lot of time on longer trips.
If you are driving an EV by depleting the battery completely and then charging it back to 100% every time, you are doing it wrong.
Many supermarkets and gyms have a charging station. You charge your car while you shop or exercise.