this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2024
142 points (82.9% liked)

Asklemmy

44149 readers
1400 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've seen a lot of posts here on Lemmy, specifically in the "fuck cars" communities as to how Electric Vehicles do pretty much nothing for the Climate, but I continue to see Climate activists everywhere try pushing so, so hard for Electric Vehicles.

Are they actually beneficial to the planet other than limiting exhaust, or is that it? or maybe exhaust is a way bigger problem?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 29 points 11 months ago (2 children)

In case you missed it, co2 is causing global warming, which has the ability to extinct mankind in the future. EV don't produce any co2. Some idiots will talk about indirect emissions, but the point is moot. You don't remove indirect emissions by removing EV, you remove them by cleaning power grid and logistic lines.

EV are a necessity on a short term basis. Developing public transports and alternative to cars are also a necessity.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago (2 children)

There are a TON of issues with EVs as a first line approach to emissions. Manufacturing emissions is a big one, admittedly that one will come down as infrastructure gets up to date with what we have already for vehicle manufacturing.

A much more important factor, however, is the fact that the individual's contribution to emissions is negligible. It doesn't really matter what we, as private citizens, do when corporations or billionaires produce so much carbon emissions. When Taylor Swift's JET ALONE produces more carbon annually than 1000 individuals driving their car daily, it doesn't matter one iota what kind of vehicle the average joe drives.

We need infrastructure, and we need governance. Pointing the finger at regular guys and saying you're the problem because you drive a combustion engine is folly at best.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

When Taylor Swift’s JET ALONE produces more carbon annually than 1000 individuals driving their car daily, it doesn’t matter one iota what kind of vehicle the average joe drives.

Amazingly, you're missing your own point. If it's not about individuals, well, even Taylor Swifts jet by itself is a rounding error when considered in the context of global emissions.

But more importantly, it seems like you are contradicting yourself in a pretty fundamental way. You are perfectly comfortable taking Taylor Swift's emissions and holding her responsible for those due to her belonging to a class, namely folding her into membership of "corporations/billionaires". So Taylor, insofar as she represents the collective actions of that class, gets moral responsibility.

But individual consumers are also contributing significant emissions when conceived of as a class, which is a way of conceptualizing individual actions that, by your own Taylor Swift example, you are perfectly comfortable doing.

It doesn't mean it's the only thing we should strive to change, but it definitely is one of them, because the global collective emissions of people using internal combustion engines is in fact a significant input into CO2 levels, and we can reason about these things at those scales if we choose to.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

I pointed out in another post that yes, please, do what you can as an individual. That means, when your car reaches its natural end, then yeah, go for an EV. The point I'm aiming for though is that if each and every person switched to EVs overnight, it's not going to have the impact we need it to to arrest the carbon emissions problems we have.

We have megacorps that don't have a reason to limit their production. We have countries seemingly actively working to make shit worse. EVs aren't a magic bullet, they're not something that we need to be quite so aggressively pursuing when there are other very real things that we can do to make an actual impact.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

We need to shit down billionaires planes indeed. But we also need to remove all cars that produce co2. Their emissions are significant. It means we won't survive if we don't remove them.

The problem you're touching is the one of whom will pay the price of the transition. And indeed it'd be better if rich people were paying.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I'm sorry, did you just handwave away indirect emissions? You do understand that the vast majority of our energy production still dumps large amounts of CO2 in the air?

What we need instead of EVs is well designed walkable cities with mixed use buildings where one no longer NEEDS a car.

If all you need for 95% of your travel is your legs or a bike, most people will actually just opt out of owning an expensive vehicle that they no longer need.

What we need is good a public transportation system in the form of busses for middle range and trains for long range transportation.

EVs is little more than a patch to keep the status quo on horribly designed cities.

In the Netherlands I could go everywhere (and did go everywhere) walking, or by bike. I sometimes used a train for longer distances but in the end I didn't need a car for anything.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You do realize how long and how much money it would take to actually redesign and construct our cities to be bike/walkable? We should definitely start but it will not be done in time. We NEED EVs in the mean time. Even then it only works for cities and the majority of America is spread too far for it to work. I'm not riding my bike 20 miles to and from work when it's -20 outside.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

EVs are less than a drop in the bucket. Yes, please, for the love of God develop them and adopt them as much as possible, but the reality is that the carbon emissions problem is one where our impact as private citizens is as close to nil as it can be.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

is one where our impact as private citizens is as close to nil as it can be

Individual choices aggregate into large scale consequences, and individual choices do matter at scale.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago

No, they didn’t and you pretty much just said the exact same thing they did with more words.