• shastaxc@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    EVs also help with the brake disc “dust” since a lot of the braking is “regenerative breaking” done by the electric motor and does not use the brake pads at all. They require less maintenance, and have fewer parts in them, so fewer manufacturing materials. With very few exceptions, they are also smaller vehicles with more safety features which should result in fewer pedestrian casualties.

    Obviously having no vehicles at all would be even better at solving these issues, but that’s not practical for our current reality. Maybe in 100 years.

    I will say that “autopilot” features should absolutely be outlawed and cause nothing but trouble to everyone.

    • ElHexo [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Brake dust is bad but tire dust is the real issue

      Emissions Analytics has found that adding 1,000 pounds to a midsize vehicle increased tire wear by about 20 percent, and also that Tesla’s Model Y generated 26 percent more tire pollution than a similar Kia hybrid. EVs’ more aggressive torque, which translates into faster acceleration, is another factor that creates more tire particulate mile for mile compared to similar internal combustion engine cars.

    • saigot@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I will say that “autopilot” features should absolutely be outlawed and cause nothing but trouble to everyone

      Autopilot is a pretty broad category. I like the autopilot on my car, which is nothing like elon musks self driving bullshit. It only turns on on supported highways and uses lidar instead of machine vision. All it does is maintain a following distance and follow the curve of the road. On Long drives it stops your foot and arms being fatigued and frees up a lot more mental space to look out for road hazards, it has a camera in the wheel that makes sure you have your eyes pointed at the road. I don’t see any risks for this sort of simple autopilot but it does have a lot of upside.

      I’d definitely rather ride the train if it didn’t cost 200 dollars and come once a day, but until it gets better(and I’ve been writing a lot of letters to my officials) my self driving ev is the best alternative.

    • SolarMech@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      100 years is ambitious only if you want to remove all of the cars. There are plenty of milestones that can be attained fairly quickly :

      • Smaller cars. Less energy, materials, etc. Safer for other road users (you don’t get hit on your vital organs, better vision for the driver and everyone else since pedestrians can easily see over the car).
      • Less car use is available now, if we just empower the alternatives (make bike usage safe, make public transport good enough)
      • No more cars in cities. Bikes + trains mostly do the job, you can rent a car if you leave the city, or park it at the outskirts.
      • Even smaller cities used to be liveable without a car. This could be brought back, but that’s probably a tough hill to climb.
    • 7bicycles [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Which market is it that is producing smaller EVs? They’re all just regular cars turned EV, which means they’re heavier and you can’t feature-rich your way out of physics as per pedestrian safety