←back to thread

65 points doener | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
anovikov ◴[] No.45345257[source]
Too little and too late. Draconian measures are necessary to push automakers into compliance and to push consumers to buy. It's expensive unless we want to sell out to China completely, but necessary and in the end, affordable.
replies(8): >>45345279 #>>45345423 #>>45345594 #>>45345617 #>>45345664 #>>45345827 #>>45346002 #>>45346289 #
pjc50 ◴[] No.45345617[source]
The carrot will be much more well received than the stick. Price cap chargers and make sure they're everywhere, including kerbside.

Convert public fleets. It's much more reasonable to mandate that local councils and public servant staff cars should be EV-only first; these tend to have short turnover periods of three to five years anyway. That forces the public bodies to actually address the details of adoption.

Not to mention buses and public works vehicles like refuse lorries. Expensive, but if the transition has to happen it has to happen.

But I think the momentum is there on its own:

> In August alone, 154,582 EVs were snapped up, accounting for 20% of all new car sales. Analysts note that a 20–25% share is enough to meet the EU’s emissions targets for 2025–2027 and Europe has just reached that milestone.

There's a self-reinforcing circle that as more people have EVs, they become more "normal", and the more car-centric policy caters to their needs. People who are irrationally scared speak to friends who own one or ride in EV taxis (actually, taxis are nearly always hybrids at the moment?)

replies(1): >>45345722 #
ioteg ◴[] No.45345722[source]
Nobody is "irrationally scared" of EVs. We are rationally scared that, once enough well-off people have switched to EVs, this market share will be used as an excuse to stop poor people from driving their petrol or diesel cars. ("Rationally" because this is already happening.)
replies(3): >>45345739 #>>45345877 #>>45345939 #
saubeidl ◴[] No.45345739[source]
Why would that be a bad thing?
replies(1): >>45345770 #
FirmwareBurner ◴[] No.45345770[source]
So fuck the poor people, according to you?
replies(3): >>45345825 #>>45345840 #>>45346001 #
saubeidl[dead post] ◴[] No.45345825[source]
[flagged]
potato3732842 ◴[] No.45345872[source]
This is all fine and well, but eventually once the peasants have taken enough fuckings on enough axis over enough people's pet issues they will realize the trend and you and all your buddies who think it's ok to just fuck people will lose your heads or get to share a hole or whatever. Maybe it'll be offset by productivity gains and take a few generations to get there but fucking the peasantry because the rulers know better, or whatever the argument is, isn't a sustainable way to run societies.
replies(1): >>45345980 #
saubeidl[dead post] ◴[] No.45345980[source]
[flagged]
1. ioteg ◴[] No.45346396{7}[source]
Most people where I live, even the poorest, can afford to own a car and almost all of them do. It’s regulations that are making car ownership impossible for those people. It’s the government that is a bourgeois enemy of the people.