YouTube’s Loaded With EV Disinformation::When it comes to articles on a website like CleanTechnica, there are two kinds of articles. First, there are the … [continued]

  • Wogi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    Some of the criticism is perfectly valid, frankly. I’m hyped for EVs but there’s a lot of work to be done before they’re really competitive. Glossing over glaring issues isn’t doing anyone any favors.

    Aging wheels did a great video on the charging station problem. He drove a Polaris and a Tesla on the same route and demonstrated really well how unreliable charging stations are, unless you have a Tesla. This guy loves electric cars and has been reluctant to actually recommend any.

    That problem is going to be addressed as American manufacturers adopt Tesla as a standard, but that won’t happen for two model years at least.

    And in the long run, they won’t address climate change in any meaningful way either. We’ve just exchanged one resource disaster for another, and there’s far less rare earth minerals than there is oil. And we’ll still need oil. The only way we’re doing that is by massively overhauling every city and going away from any individualized transportation larger than a bike.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Pretty much all of the arguments against EVs from the right are solvable. There are arguments against them that are also unique from the left, but I’ve seen too many leftists adopt some of the bullshit arguments from the right.

      Charging does need to improve. Believe me, I drove a Mini EV from Madison to Chicago once, and it was a nightmare to find two working stations along the way. But this is solvable with time. At least, it is when you’re presenting it honestly, and not “haha EVs suck ROOOOLLL COOAAAALLLL!”

      They’re a huge facet to fixing climate change. Mining issues are not part of climate change. Burning petroleum is.

      The problems with lithium mining do exist (and in ways that are less hypocritical for the left to point out than the right), but it’s also not permanent. There’s an interesting string technique that, assuming it can be scaled up, can use far less land and open up more reserves (that being the amount of lithium that can be economically mined, which people often mistake for the amount of lithium actually there). Even if it doesn’t, oceanic methods of extraction are being ramped up already, and there’s more lithium available there then we’d have a use for.

      All that’s even assuming we stay on lithium batteries, or that we won’t reduce the amount of lithium per kwh.

      Now, there’s another set of arguments–the kind conservatives would never touch–which get into how cars are bad for society regardless of what they run on. They take up tons of space just sitting there, they enable urban sprawl, they hit pedestrians and animals, and are all around an inefficient way to move your moist meat flesh around. These are why I did an e-bike conversion recently and am looking to heavily reduce my car reliance.

      But we’re stuck with them to a certain extent. There are decisions literally set in concrete about where people live and where they work. Even with the most radical government imaginable, we could not rip our cities up and lay new concrete without releasing so much CO2 that we might as well drive ICE cars for an additional decade.

      Getting rid of cars is not on the table, at least not in any reasonable timeframe. That said, what can we do to get American cities from <5% bike commuters to 25%? That alone would be massive.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Now, there’s another set of arguments–the kind conservatives would never touch–which get into how cars are bad for society regardless of what they run on. They take up tons of space just sitting there, they enable urban sprawl, they hit pedestrians and animals, and are all around an inefficient way to move your moist meat flesh around. These are way I did an e-bike conversion recently and am looking to heavily reduce my car reliance.

        As far as I’m concerned, this is the only valid argument against electric cars (and combustion ones, of course) – but boy, is it a doozy!

    • CaptPretentious@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Something I don’t think is really talked about in tandem but should be is the “tech” side of things. There’s a massive race to go as proprietary as possible none of this crap is easily serviceable by people. The tech that they put in most of these cars is cheap garbage. I don’t want some tablet with what is probably a fork of Android controlling my vehicle. First I know support for it is going to go out the window and I don’t want to have to think about software security for my damn car.

      Then you have these companies that are putting features that are in the car behind subscriptions because the car can now support subscription model. I don’t want always online DRM for the DLC for my goddamn car.

      • Wogi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Half the stations he stopped at with the polestar didn’t work properly. That’s not slant, it’s bad stations.

        • HaoBianTai@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          This thread and Lemmy as a whole is filled with EV zealots. Don’t bother. I’m a fan of the tech but mention anything slightly critical of the state of EVs today or the viability or sustainability of the current EV strategy from a country or auto maker and you get flooded with downvotes and called an oil shill.

          Even this article is a bit slanted. CNBC running a story about EV stock piling up is not anti-EV propaganda. It’s a literal fact, not to mention CNBC’s cable programming has been shilling Tesla and luxury EV makers for years.

    • Rookeh@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Unlike oil, rare earth minerals can be recycled to a degree. What is today your car battery may end up in 10+ years as someone’s house battery, or a power bank or other low-load energy store. The raw materials can eventually be recovered to an extent as well.

      A resource disaster is inevitable either way as nobody wants to give up the convenience that we have become accustomed to. Encouraging affluent economies to adopt EVs is pure damage limitation at this point, our biosphere is already fucked from over a century of waste emissions, the least we can do is try and find solutions that don’t involve burning fossilized plant matter for every car journey.

    • reddig33@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Newsflash — Tesla is opening its stations to all EVs. Guess that solves the “unless you have a Tesla” problem.