[AmuroRay]

Originally Posted by RM7

No, because people are always going to buy new stuff. Sure, that plays part of it, but the idea that repairing a 15 year old vehicle (which ends up often turning into never ending issues and never-quite-right repairs) being more efficient is again a non-starter. People are going to buy new stuff.

No.

[dfox]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

If we really cared about the environment we would be pushing right to repair laws and offering a tax credit for car repairs and things like that to keep cars on the road longer. But it's never been about the environment, it's always been about money, and it probably always will, with all things.

It's not this or that, it can and has to be, both.

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by RM7

Not constantly, which is the issue with ICE fuel. Upgrading grids is not necessarily tied to EVs either, increased consumption from AI, bitminers, industry, increased population, etc. These all share some responsibility, but the EVs are not constantly trucking fuel to points like that. In fact, if we are talking coal, it's most often delivered by rail, far more efficient than roads. But alas, you are the one that brought or kept prolonging the idea that EVs are far heavier than ICE and causing all this road damage. That was the point being discussed.

I mean, I don't think we can claim eco friendly high ground if you're calling for coal power plants, lol.

That said, EVs ARE heavier, with maybe the notable except of Tesla? I still find it disingenuous to say they're "as heavy as some.of the heaviest luxury cars that are larger than them", when they're cheap trash inside, but I'll give you that some Teslas may be lighter than some others. Cybertruck is 6800 pounds so not it, as that's way heavier than a f150 or other 1500, but that's besides the point. The whole point was that if we're gonna bitch about trucks being heavy and causing wear, than heavy ass EVs with their instant torque delivery have to be considered too.

EVe and repairing vehicles to keep them on the road long term are incompatible. Battery degradation is just a fact. So the car with 300 miles of range in a perfect world on day 1, how much is it gonna have at 20 years old? 150? 200? Maybe that's enough for people and they'll keep driving them, but one has to think that there's not going to be a large overlap of people wanting a cheap car who also can charge at home routinely and never need to go over a limited range. And the reality of these cars is, they're barriers that include a car, not the other way around. Just like any battery powered tool, when your battery pack craps out, you're better off just buying a new tool and getting a battery with it instead of buying just a replacement battery (though to be fair, Milwaukee runs some crazy deals on some of the M18 batteries from time to time, but rack rate for those batteries is BRUTAL).

Anyways, there's absolutely applications for EVs. I think all buses should be EVs, and every bigger bus stop should have a little charger that juices it up for 1-2 minutes. That's a really practical application for them. School buses also make a lot of sense to be EVs IMO. But there's a lot of applications where EVs make no sense at all, and reality is, despite what some regulators want, we will most likely always need a mixture of combustion and non combustion vehicles. That's why things like biodiesel and synthetic gasoline and all that kinda stuff is critical too, it can't be all EVs, no matter how much corrupt ass investment into EVs the regulators have made.

[M5Rick]

In Poland, Germany and other E European countries trolley buses run on rails without any problems with overhead cables powering but putting a tyred lithium battery EV bus on the road is fraught with problems from the word go, even more so with colder weather.