- cross-posted to:
- hackernews@derp.foo
- technology@lemmit.online
- cross-posted to:
- hackernews@derp.foo
- technology@lemmit.online
White House threatens to veto anti-EV bill just passed by US House::The bill would prevent the EPA from enforcing tougher new pollution standards.
But if these cars charge their batteries by burning more gas then whats the point of having EV at all?
Power plants are more efficient at getting usable energy than your car’s engine in general. There are some transmission losses, etc that favor the car, but on the balance, for the fossil fuels you burn, you’ll get more car-miles if you burn them in a power plant, than in the car itself. And some of your electricity comes from wind, water, nuclear, and other clean sources, which makes electric cars even bigger winners in terms of using less fossil fuels.
Sure, I’d rather have electrified non-battery public transit than any kind of cars, but EVs are still an improvement over ICEs.
I think I didn’t make my point clear. I am of course pro EV cars because of all the benefit you mentioned.
I am questioning the idea of a hybrid car that can only be charged by pumping more petrol. might as well buy a normal car and leave the batteries to the true EV car that truly need them
Hybrids are still generally more fuel efficient than equivalent non hybrids especially in non highway conditions. And you have plugin hybrids which are effectively EVs with the peace of mind that on those handful of trips that do exceed your range you can get there just fine.
Don’t forget that you’re toting essentially two cars in a single platform, both gas and ev. The big advantage EVs and hybrids have is regeneration, a good chunk of the energy normally lost as ambient heat in brake pads gets pumped back into the batteries.
But there’s all the added weight and complexity accompanying that. The Prius appears quite reliable, so far. But I’d rather just use my bicycle or motorcycle.
They don’t just charge by burning gas. The main time you burn up a lot of fuel is when accelerating from a stop and climbing a hill. That’s when something like a prius will use the electric motor and battery, then just use its gas motor to cruise at a steady speed on a flat roadway. The battery will charge itself when hitting the brake or taking your foot off the accelerator and slowing down or going down a hill.
It’s why the prius is popular. It’s a 75 pound battery but helps provide adequate acceleration and gets 50mpg by having a small and fuel efficient gas engine.
Ya that make sense. But then their positive effect on climate is minimal. Hopefully no one would think they are half helping the planet by buying a hybrid
Full evs will fill a landfill in 15 years time and need an entire new car to be built to replace it. New 1500 lbs of lithium and Cobalt and nickel battery as well to be mined.
You want to help the environment you’d be doing far more by installing solar on your roof and buying an ice vehicle than you would be by buying an EV with today’s battery tech in it. How “green” they are is only skin deep right now. That will change later when more electricity is from renewable sources and batteries in EV’s improve beyond what they’re at using heavy li po chemistry. But that’s later. Not now.
Doesn’t that applies to any car? or you mean because many EV companies make it difficult to repair their product using a 3ed party? That’s why we need a “right to repair bill”, there is nothing fundamental in EV cars that make them non-serviceable.
I agree that EVs are not as green as one might think and I am also hopefully that things will change in the future. however that doesn’t mean we stick with ordinary cars for now. If no body buy EV, the companies would simply shut down and there won’t be “future” to talk about.
It like solar panel they used to have terrible efficiency and lot of gas emission producing them and people were wondering if they really are any greener but had people stopped buying them back then, we wouldn’t have better versions today.