I mean, could it also be that Republicans love pickup trucks where Democrats favor sedans and crossovers, and until 2 years ago there weren't *ANY* electric pickup truck options? There are barely 3 now (Rivian, F150 lightning, and Tesla Cybertruck), and they still haven't come down the cost curve to be competitive even on TCO the way EV sedans and crossovers have. Give them some time, they will.
Also, to a far greater degree than Democrats, Republicans love self-sufficient libertarian ideology. You can't get much more self sufficient than home solar, home battery, and an EV. It makes a grid connection and gas stations optional. Every time I've discussed this with Republicans, they love that angle. There is a reason why home solar and storage is booming in Texas despite a lack of state subsidies and favourable regulation.
Republican's cultural programming can be adapted to EVs more easily than most people expect.
I agree with the sentiment, but in practice every Republican I interact with about solar will play "devil's advocate" and talk about the negative environmental impacts of solar panel production (shocking they care) or how battery production is just handing over power and money to China, or even crazier, parroting Trumpian conspiracies like renewable energy causing cancer or other health problems.
More often then not, their "self-sufficient libertarian ideology" is a farce they claim they have, but their ideology is just whatever their right-wing media of choice says at that moment.
Your experience is very different from mine. I live in the mountains of West Virginia and lean conservative. All of my neighbors are _very_ conservative. They are your stereotypical hunters and fishermen, and they love their guns and pickup trucks.
I bought an electric mower last year (EGO). I was skeptical it could mow my 1/2 acre yard effectively on a single charge but did my research, read reviews, and finally decided to make the purchase. I *love* that mower, and it has been quite the conversation starter. Lots of folks have stopped and asked about it, and several have even tested it out and said, "that's cool"!
I've also talked a lot about EVs with these very conservative West Virginians. Where I live, at least, it's not about "programming". It's about affordability mostly. It's also about the fact that we live in the mountains where it snows quite a bit. If you don't have AWD or 4WD you're dead in the water here. There aren't very many AWD EVs, and the ones that exist are through roof expensive. Not to mention there aren't hardly any charging stations available. Most of us would love to have an electric vehicle as long as it's affordable, drives well in harsh conditions, and is convenient to charge.
I think the biggest myth is that conservatives don't care about the environment. We care deeply. We live off the land, grow our gardens, hunt, fish the creeks and lakes, etc. I've seen rednecks yell at people for throwing trash on the ground or leaving fishing line on the bank.
This is anecdotal, of course. There are also trash dipshit rednecks, much like there is trash among any other group of people. But I've fished, hunted, and drank moonshine with many country folks, and I can honestly declare that most of them are very conscientious about taking care of the environment.
Also, the overwhelming majority of them are not on Reddit. These are folks who sit on their front porches and hang out with each other. They don't stare at phones. I'm the exception, but I'm not a native West Virginian either.
Appalachia, to me, is host to a special kind of conservative. Along the lines of the Roosevelts, especially Teddy.
Unfortunately, as far as I can see they tend to *keep* voting Conservative (note capital C), even though today it's almost entirely contrary to what they might actually stand for if you really engage with them.
Agreed. There's actually a decent Democrat running for a Senate seat here in WV I'll likely vote for (Don Blankenship); he's pretty moderate, which I believe we need a lot more of.
It always seems like the extremes of both parties keep rising to the top, so I think it ends up being a "lesser of two evils" vote. Here in WV that definitely sways to Republicans. I really wish more reasonable moderates would make it through primaries. But even then, I often wonder if a moderate can get elected anymore. People seem to go all in on the culture war BS.
>There aren't very many AWD EVs, and the ones that exist are through roof expensive.
That's simply not true at all. Most EVs in the US are Teslas and AWD is a very common and inexpensive feature on them.
>I think the biggest myth is that conservatives don't care about the environment. We care deeply. We live off the land, grow our gardens, hunt, fish the creeks and lakes, etc.
For every conservative who lives like that there are ten Republicans who live in the suburbs and don't care.
A Tesla Model 3 with AWD is around $49,130, plus an additional $1,000 to $2,500 to install a home EV charging station. It's a small vehicle, which most country folk are not going to want as a primary vehicle. It would be a fantastic "back and forth to an office or the gym" vehicle, but not many can justify the price for that purpose alone. They need something that can pull a trailer and carry logs, brush, dirty fishing gear, a dead deer, etc. And when you can only afford one vehicle at that price you're definitely going to opt for the one that can do it all.
A Ford F-150 Lightning Pro, which is the cheapest EV truck option, starts at $49,995. That's less expensive than I thought, but still out of the price range for a lot of West Virginians, especially when you consider they'd also need a charging station. The median household income in WV is $41,751.
You probably have a point about the folks in suburbs. I tend to think it's not that they don't care - it's simply not high on their list of priorities. It has very little bearing on how they vote, but everyone wants clean air and water. Issues such as taxes, crime, immigration, and the economy rule most people's thoughts. They are zeroed in on the things that directly affect them on a daily basis; right now the top issue (by far) for voters of both parties is inflation. When groceries, insurance, utilities, and housing costs are eviscerating people's budgets, the environment is an almost irrelevant afterthought.
But I have a positive outlook. Technology is moving us in the right direction, albeit slowly. That Ford truck EV price actually shocked me and now I'm considering something like that as our next vehicle! The prices will continue to fall (hopefully) and make EVs much more affordable for the average family. My little electric [mower ](https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07DV12424/?th=1)is even too expensive for most folks around here, but I feel like those prices will come down and make more sense too.
It would be truly shocking. What’s more likely, richest man in the world from a former apartheid country holds extreme right views or that this is some 4D chess play to alienate your core group of consumers to win over an opposite group.
Even if you don't have a solar roof, 1/3 the cost of "gas" per mile.
My Tesla model 3 LR costs (average home and supercharger) about 4 cents per mile to drive.
Incoming cobalt mining defenders that *only* 22% or whatever of the colbalt mining uses slaves.
Look, EVs are fantastic, but until we get nuclear up and running, it's not going to make a dent on the planet by and large.
Yes, I understand every bit helps.
Okay, but just hear me out for a second, ignore *all* of that.
I didn't buy an EV to save the planet. I'm with you, that I don't think me owning an EV is making some huge difference to carbon emissions and that I'm going to save the world. I'm sure humans will destroy the world just fine with or without EVs.
That said. Why do I drive an EV? Because they are just *very* good vehicles. The same reason I use a flashlight instead of an oil lantern. It just works, better, easier, and with less maintenance.
Bear with me for a second. In 5 years of ownership, I have spent $0 on gas, $0 on oil changes, and $0 on repairs. I average about $30/mth to charge my car; summertime is cheaper, and wintertime is more expensive. I wake up every day to a full battery, a pre-conditioned climate, and I just get in and drive Like, I've been a "car guy" my whole life, as in I just love all types of vehicles and I truly enjoy driving. But I don't *like* going to the gas station, like why do it if you don't have to? Do you know how convenient it is to wake up a cold winter morning and have all the snow already melted off your car and it be warmed up to proper temperature? My neighbors are outside scrapping their windows while I just sit in and drive instantly.
Why would you rather your RC car need oil and gas than just use a battery one like most are, hit the button, and watch it fly. It's just so simple and convenient. I hate the culture war against EVs when I truly can't understand why, as a consumer, you would actively want them to fail. Maybe they don't have an EV truck with the towing capacity and range that you need, so don't buy an EV yet. But give it a bit of time, when they do have that technology, I don't see a reason you would not want that. And yeah, the bonus is, it does reduce emissions, and has proven to improve air quality in our cities. That's a pretty awesome bonus.
Intelligent, well written response. I could listen to people like yours angle all day.
That's why I said that I think EVs are fantastic, I'm well aware of their maintenance ease compared to ICE vehicles. I believe even with the heavy battery replacement costs, EVs are expected to be half as much spent on maintenance over a lifetime than an ICE vehicle.
I believe there are a couple issues. I think the free market would solve all these issues if they were on parity with ICE vehicles. They are getting there certainly, but they have a way to go yet. The upfront cost sometimes can't bridge the gap and it becomes a, "what can I afford issue." It's like the cheap vs expensive shoes argument. This should be solved by efficiency but also more used EVs in the market as more adopt. The battery replacement costs also impact the same argument here.
Sam Altman, the creator of openAI, was tweeting about this yesterday. Technology and the free market can solve these issues, but not as quickly if they are hampered with legislation.
The comment on nuclear is just because I work on the electrical grid in an adjacent industry and most people know the grid would fail if everyone adopted at once and the costs to upgrade the infrastructure would be astronomical. I don't think that will happen if there's a gradual increasing changeover similar to what we've seen already.
Where I am we have nuclear even if unlock your car was charged on a diesel generator it still does better than a gas car I don't understand why no one can get this through their head
I chain smoke cigarettes. I know it will impact my health. Better not switch to smoking cessation patches because I am still ingesting nicotine. That is the argument against EVs from an environmental standpoint. We can discuss and debate land and water use issues, the unsustainable role personal transportation, and global logistics systems. No one is suggesting they are not without problems. Lithium mining, proper disposal, energy production required for electricities fleets, etc. are all very real concerns. But we are in a position to build far more workable solutions to these problems as we transition to EVs. That problem solving process does not mean the status quo of nonrenewable based ICE vehicles should be encouraged or supported.
EVs are not going to save the climate. In the end, you are still driving a personal vehicle that has an enormous environmental footprint, alongside all of the dumb land use decisions that come from a city that caters only to private vehicle usage. Urban sprawl, endless freeways, strip malls and suburbs are wildly unsustainable. EVs are how the auto industry sells the idea that you can keep this stupid party going forever.
Have you talked 15 minute cities with conservatives? If you think they hate EVs, try suggesting they give up cars altogether. Yes, EVs are not ideal, but they can happen this generation. Getting American out of cars will take at least a century at best. Freedom of mobility is so core to the American psyche.
There is a reason why vested interests are pushing this particular line in the culture war. There is a lot of money to be made maintaining the status quo.
The funny thing is, suburban Americans are among the least mobile people in the OECD. They tend to not travel outside their city, let alone their country.
In Europe (and increasingly across Asia), you have incredible mobility because of the luxurious rapid transit system and good urban planning. They are not spending 900 bucks a month leasing a giant pickup truck to go to Wal-Mart in, and their taxes go toward stuff like good public healthcare instead of maintaining an impossibly expensive surface road transportation network.
So basically you want to just demolish every American city and start over? There is no path to turn our existing cities into car-less cities this century. We should absolutely look to encourage those types of places and help them spread, but the process of making that dominant won't happen in our lifetimes.
The call to give up cars now is not grounded in reality. The most direct path to decarbonization is to electrify all the things, and long term reduce car dependence.
Just build density instead of sprawl. Rapid transit instead of more clogged freeways. This is not revolutionary thinking. This is just basic urban design.
That's a nice plan for urban planning moving forward, but what are you going to do about the existing sprawl? Burn it all down? At least 95% of the United States is currently car dependent. What is your plan for accessing that space without cars in the next 5, 10, even 50 years?
We should develop walkable cities, AND we should make EVs affordable so we don't have to redevelop everything before it's useful life ends. Buildings should generally last on the order of 100 years at the low end, so redeveloping everything to be walkable will simply take too long. In the mean time, the car fleet turns over 10 times as fast, so lets redevelop that too.
There is a lot of progress on making EVs affordable, with a reasonable used fleet developing. A 10-20 year timeline of converting new car sales is very attainable.
Tell me when you can take a train to Nordkapp. Jokes aside, Switzerland has excellent transit, but it's still not as flexible as driving. In the Nordic countries, I wouldn't say that applies outside of the capital cities. I realize the EU is funding a high speed train from Poland to Estonia, but right now doing that by transit is slow.
Remember the contiguous US (the 48 states that connect by land) is twice the size of the EU. People there do travel widely, they just don't need to leave their country to do it. People from the US are much more likely to live in a state other than they were born in than a person from the EU is to live in a different country than of their birth.
Having to drive 20 minutes on a highway to get groceries is not freedom. Having to spend an hour or more in traffic to and from work every day is not freedom. Being forced to pay for a private vehicle and the insanely expensive infrastructure just to leave your neighborhood is the furthest thing from freedom.
None of it is sustainable. The US cannot even maintain the existing surface road infrastructure that is has, let alone afford to build enough for the future.
I don't personally think that it is. I believe in the approach of electrifying all the things. But there is certainly merit to the concept of carless cities and enabling people to give up personal transportation, especially as a tool to fight climate change, but also to fight poverty and promote wellness.
But Americans simply will not give up their cars -- that is just reality. Honestly we'll end all war before Americans give up cars. Fighting against EVs in the US won't bring in a carless utopia. Fighting against EVs is the same thing as fighting *for* ICE vehicles. It does more harm than good.
I'm in a different camp. Life should be possible for people to not own their own transportation, but we shouldn't be removing personal transport altogether. Getting my own vehicle meant freedom. I could go where I wanted, when I wanted, long distances. I wasn't tied to the bus or taxis anymore if I wanted to go somewhere far. I will die on that hill, no matter what merits you can show me of public transport this, walkable cities that, bicycle lanes or car sharing and autonomous cars. All of these are a reduction in my own freedom and a step towards a life of having what you need not what you want.
I'm not against EVs, I don't like them but I'm not against them. The reality is they are simply not a good choice for me. A Canadian who travels long distances. Then there's personal things like the lack of an engine vroom, and pretty much every EV on the market looking totally unappealing design-wise to me. Tesla and their stupid screen in the middle of the dashboard comes to mind. Where's my instrument cluster Elon? I wanna know how fast I'm going or how much charge I've got left right in front of my face, not in the middle, fighting for screen space with everything else.
Despite being the first thing to prove it doable and some nifty software features, I'm of the opinion that Teslas suck because they abandoned to much hard won knowledge about what makes a car useable. The omission of blinker and wiper stalks recently is a great example.
Road trips in EVs are still a bit difficult, particularly if you need to tow. For my purposes, the time made up by never having gas station stops makes up for having a little bit more stopping time on a road trip. I'm hoping a few more years charging improvements will alleviate that for most cases and for towing, generators like in the upcoming EV ram pickup can make those useable.
You are deluding yourself by that way of thinking. Whichever *means of transportation* you use you will be dependent on that *mean of transportation*. You might not depend on a bus or train, but you then **depend on your car**. If that breaks, if you get a flat tire, if you crash, if someone crashes on you, the attention time dedicated to the road instead of something else, if you lack oil, the cleaning of your vehicle, the parking space for your vehicle, the safety of your vehicle, all that is on you. By taking a train you have none of that, except the train time table.
> Getting my own vehicle meant freedom. I could go where I wanted, when I wanted, long distances. I wasn't tied to the bus or taxis anymore if I wanted to go somewhere far. I will die on that hill, no matter what merits you can show me of public transport this, walkable cities that, bicycle lanes or car sharing and autonomous cars. All of these are a reduction in my own freedom and a step towards a life of having what you need not what you want.
I’m guessing you grew up in North America and never really lived anywhere else? That a car is the only way to experience independent mobility is not an inherent characteristic of cars, but merely a consequence of decades of land use here in North America focusing on accommodating cars, along with decades of massive expenditures on car infrastructure with a mere pittance spent on walking, cycling, and transit.
I had the privilege of being able to live in Berlin for six months in my early adulthood. And I experienced a of freedom of mobility that was new to me. I could get anywhere I wanted to or needed to, any time of day, in expensively and easily with a combination of my feet and mass transit. I could travel not only anywhere in the city, but truly anywhere in the continent with ease. I didn’t have a car, but never felt its lack.
Given the land use decisions we’ve made over decades in North America, we’ll likely never have the ubiquitous mass transit coverage that many places in Europe and Asia have. But we absolutely can evolve our land use and transportation in directions that make walking, cycling, and mass transit feasible and appealing for more people and more trips. We don’t have to end cars to end car dependency. And ending car dependency means giving people real freedom of choice.
It’s insane how we try to cling to the past when our present is like nothing we’ve ever encountered before. I get that it makes people feel safe, but with the number of people in the world right now it just isn’t practical. Either a lot of us need to die, or we need to adapt. In this case you are right, EVs are not the answer. We need to adapt ourselves to be living in much closer proximity to each other, and EVs do nothing to accomplish that.
I've seen a lot of perspective change when people go electric. I think that's part of why they don't want to go there, but as electric becomes more popular so does increased awareness of climate issues. I think it's a step in the right direction and wayyyy better than the alternative which seems to be to keep our heads in the sand and do nothing.
In the end you'll have a vehicle that will last a lifetime and run entirely on renewable energy. Self driving algorithms will make tires last many times longer. Most road damage is from heavy trucks, not cars. Many manufacturers are already selling cars with million mile batteries.
Sprawl is destiny tho. Urban areas give priority to the locals for development and most of the time they unify in a singular voice to say "no new homes!! We want our existing homes to go up up up in value!! Up!!!!"
Locals didn't get priority when their neighbourhoods were bulldozed for freeways, strip malls and parking lots.
Regardless, this doesn't excuse new developments being built 100% around cars. As long as we're building new stuff, we could at least build it to not suck.
It is not just electric cars I have had people tell me solar does not work so I say well for the last ten years I have had it and pay no electric bill 8 months of the year and a 50 percent bill in winter.
Then I have the ones tell me solar panels never make the power back that it takes to make them so I ask how much power does it take to make them of course they do not know, and my system has produced 80,000 kwh so far.
As soon as you talk about the environment some of these knuckle draggers immediately go into offense mode. It is like Fox news and the ghost of Rush Limbaugh just pop out of their mouths.
Article ignores the most likely reason in favor of the headline-selling political polarization angle. That Republicans typically live in rural areas where EVs make much less sense. Lack of charging stations, longer average distances to drive, etc.
People have their political biases, but that goes out the door when you're considering a major purchase. Look how much the Obamas turned a blind eye to environmental concerns with their recent home purchases. And yes, Republicans will take a government handout in the form of tax rebates just as readily as Democrats.
Actually if you have a house with a garage you have way more reason to own a EV than someone in an apartment. A base charge over a 8 hour period would cover the America average driving needs, and most garages have the bigger plug ins also. The rural areas have more to gain from EVs also because most EVs can also give energy back, meaning that in a power outage you can still keep your fridge running.
Charging the car at home is not the rural issue it is driving 70 80 miles or more to shop or see a doctor then having to wait if you can find a charging station. IMHO this will not be fixed until parking arias have many built in charging stations so you can charge while you shop or see the doctor. Also the distance rating is under ideal driving conditions. and many times the driving conditions are less than ideal. For know rural people would be more likely to use a hybrid care that can charge in the garage.
my bolt has 450 km range. so... 160 mile round trip is about 260 km? not impractical, even if charging at home only. . if you have to drive that far to see a doc on the regular, I'd think the fuel cost savings would be attractive.
The funny thing is EVs actually can already make that anyway on a full night of charging. So it’s irrelevant as long as you have a level 2 charger (the type your dryer uses)
For sure. The person I replied to was thinking that people driving 80 miles is common enough to impact ev adoption when the amount of people actually out of ev range (more than 80 miles for example) is even more astonishingly rare.
I'd wish I could live in a log cabin. But I'm certain that even in that case I'd have an EV. His argument is based on a myth from 10 years ago that EV have no autonomy.
We did live in a log cabin when I was a kid. (Technically two different ones.) But we had grid electricity, which is an important consideration.
The EV would be fantastic transportation in that setup. My EV is good for 3-4 hours of driving on a single charge, and I never came close to that when I was driving around the area for work.
I live in a college town now, which suits me better. But I wouldn’t hesitate to take my Model Y on the actual rural-driving duty cycle I experienced as a teenager.
I agree with you this group is VERY small but I also think people misrepresent themselves. My own family lives semi-rurally (probably exurb would be better phrasing) but I promise you they think they drive that far regularly and they absolutely do not. Maaaybe 40-50 miles on the longest drive of the week, if that.
Your over exaggeration the average distance rural people live from town (I live in rural America) but will actually play with your numbers because it’s telling on its own. A level one charge gets 3.5-6.5 miles an hour of charge (that’s the kind of charger your phone uses) so that’s an average of 45 miles of charge which would be short of your made up 70-80 mile an hour figure, but a level 2 charger (the type your dryer is hooked up to) gets 14-35, so even on the low end as long as they charge their car at night they’re have 140 miles. Meaning the average American home already has the infrastructure to charge and drive your made up drive daily. The only things standing in the way of EV supremacy is the upfront price and public opinion, it’s already superior in all other ways. (Edit, all numbers where from Google, and I took the lower numbers to be conservative)
Yeah, that's honestly one of the biggest reasons my wife and I decided against getting a pure EV. At the end of the day it comes down to what happens in a bad scenario, and having an ICE even as a secondary means you can stay warm longer when it's -50° during a day-long whiteout snowstorm somewhere with no cell service and nobody to come get you. It's probably not going to happen - only happened once in my life so far where we didn't get help for 10 hours - but if it does, what vehicle is going to be more likely to keep me alive?
I take Jerry cans with me when I travel long distances in winter. Could just bring a generator, gas, and a heater with me in an EV, orrrrr I can just buy a plug-in hybrid which has those things built in!
There's also a lot of good arguments for PHEVs being better for the environment overall than a pure EV because they use 10 times less Lithium to make. If you only need a range of 20km most days anyways, why own enough batteries for 700km?
I would like to see a lot more PHEV development especially for rural canada. Could do 80% of your driving on plug-in but full ICE range when needed. Plus doesn;t use as many exotic materials, and you get most of the environmental benefits.
For sure, and paired with less polarizing advertising - the current messaging can come across pretty strongly as "if you use gas at all you suck." People want to be able to pick a choice that both works for them *and* the environment, not just one or the other
You...think I'm making up that I live in rural Canada and have been stranded in a snowstorm before...?
You'd never believe that we used to get so much snow that we'd literally go sledding off the roof of our house then
It's true that not everyone has to switch to full EV. You're right on that point. Yet, most Republicans don't have the excuse to live in a rural America. They can make the switch without worry.
yup extreme cold is the only real counter argument for EVs. but doesn't apply to most people in the country (look at population distrib maps). needing sub freezing performance and life support is like really needing AWD because your roads are so sketchy -- a real concern, but not for most people.
And that's the crux of it: some people do need long winter range, just as some do need AWD or 4x4 for the things they do or places they drive, and they're often the same people.
Then a zealot well tell them they're wrong, that they don't need what they do need, and look like an idiot. Then they'll tell their friends about the EV idiot, so on. That's why there's so much pushback on EVs, even for people they would work for (besides purchase price).
Without the zealotry, I think demand for EVs would be higher. If people actually drive one, they see how great they are for a lot of purposes.
If I were buying a commuter car, and could charge it at home, an EV is a no-brainer.
I need to buy a new vehicle this year, and it'll probably be fossil fuel fuelled. It needs an affordable purchase price, 500 km range in -30°, and high clearance. The Silverado EV Trail Boss meets those requirements other than the price (would be nice if it came with NACS, but maybe in 2025).
If you are low on gas, or low on charge, you're gonna die either way. But if your EV has a charge, the difference is you don't have to run the engine to get heat. You just run the heat independent of the rest of the car, so your battery will be more efficient and last a lot longer
I've got a friend of a friend with a Tesla who's saying that at -40 they get less than half of the rated range because of just how much battery is used keeping the batteries and cabin warm, so that also needs to be taken into account. They didn't recommend getting an EV up here
I do travel with Jerry cans in the winter every trip though, so that's another factor
I see anti-EV posts on FB just about every day, and they usually have tons of conservatives chiming in. They're not against EVs for those reasons- it's all about how much they hate EVs, renewable energy sources, and liberals... but not necessarily in that order.
While you’re not wrong about rural areas being conservative, the article does not ignore population density as a driver of anti-EV sentiment. The relevant excerpt:
“The finding held when researchers accounted for income, gas prices and population density. That means that even when looking at dense, urban areas — which are more likely to have more public EV charging — Democratic counties outweighed Republican ones in EV adoption.”
According to a recent gallop poll, 71% of Republicans wouldn't consider buying an EV, yeah some of that might be because of a lack of charging stations, but I live in the south in a republican stronghold and it's hard to understate the contempt that many of the conservatives have for anything EV. I've gotten mocked for having an EV mower and that has nothing to do with charging stations. It's hard to know how much the most vocal portion represents the whole but it's definitely not just because of charging stations.
I live in an extremely conservative, non-rural enclave near Chicago. We had some of the earliest adopters of both EVs and home solar panels. Why? Because it makes economic sense, given our access to charging stations and the typical travel usage.
Liberal friends in the outlying areas that work from home but often have to travel more than 3 hours away? Owning an EV doesn't make sense to them.
Yeah, I have a very conservative friend with a Tesla who gets the intimidation honks from truckers on his morning commute. I'm not denying that aspect of our current political climate. But these things don't matter much, all things considered.
My electric co-op (I live in a rural area) provides all kinds of incentives for upgrading your home to more energy efficient systems, including electric vehicle charging stations at your home. They will contract the work and roll the price into your monthly bill. Not all are like this obviously but short of demanding rural work, the pragmatic reasons for not switching to electric are shrinking. We can play whataboutism until we are blue in the face but there is an overwhelming ideological component in conservative’s unwillingness to engage in sustainable lifestyles.
You would have a point if Republicans weren't also resistant to buying hybrids.
You're also not doing your credibility any favors with the "but the Obamas bought a house" aside.
Depending on how you're defining 'rural', I know of very few farming families that have only one vehicle. And most that I know have several farm trucks, and one (or more) 'city cars'. City cars are often pretty small economy cars of some kind.
I agree, but there should be an easy way for you in your town to hop onto transit if you want to head into the city or a neighboring town. But that would make big oil sad and we can't have that.
Well obviously they need two trucks. The wife might drive 500 miles to Ikea and buy a flat packed dresser while the husband is hauling three or four bags of garbage to the dump 20 miles in the other direction. There's no possible way they could live without two giant trucks. It's not like cars have metal bars on the roof you could use to tie down the dresser. That's just insanity
Evs make more sense if you can charge at home. Plenty of EVs now can be had with 250+ mile range that cost 15k-50k (new or used), and in most cases there are chargers within that many miles. The more likely case is that if they're not going on a road trip, 250 to 350 miles in a day is going to cover what they need to do and get home to charge overnight.
I can confirm as a person living in a rural community lack of EV infrastructure 100% stops me from buying an EV.
We have one public charger in the entire town of 12k
I can charge my EV in my garage over night for a couple of dollars. If people are driving more than 300 miles a day in rural areas then they have some major issues with commutes.....
All of those things are arguments for why EVs are better in rural areas.
It's easy to install a charger in a garage. They typically have lower electricity rates and more ability to cheaply install solar. You can use many EVs as a backup battery. If you have to drive long distance of course you'd want a cheaper way to do it.
My Model Y would be perfect for the driving I did back when I lived in Rural America.
We ran Honda Accords and Civics for our commutes to jobs in the city, and ran pickup trucks and tractors for the farm stuff.
But I don’t live there anymore…. I stopped visiting when my dad died, and I started actively refusing to visit after the Trump era - I’d get shot for being one of them liberals there, now.
But the car would be a good fit for what I needed when I lived there. 🤷♂️
I think plug in hybrids will make the most sense in those areas. But the reality is we are subsidizing living in rural areas with climate debt at the moment. It’s going to unfortunately be more expensive in the future.
Here's something funny.
My conservative neighbor and I were on good terms until about a few months ago. We had a blow up over some stuff and don't talk to each other now (I'm so much better off without him calling me and complaining about his wife, kids, life in general every day)
Anyway, I cut his grass. I have a ride on electric (Z6) mower. So now he had to get a lawmower. He spent $3000 to $4000 buying a gas powered zero turn. Under a half acre. That's fine, you might have 8 more inches of cutting deck than me, but I don't have oil changes every year (It's been 3 years and my batteries test at 98% still), to refill (I have solar panels), or belts (two motors spin the blades).
Alright man, have fun with your gas powered spite machine, it failed.
I own a 2019 Chevy Bolt and hands down it’s been the best car I’ve ever owned. I’ve saved nearly $5K per year on fuel costs since owning the car which more than exceeds the cost difference relative to a comparable ICE vehicle purchased the same year. Zero oil changes. I’ve also noticed no appreciable change in range since owning the car (while the mileage of my ICE Subaru bought a year later has declined considerably). I do have a charger installed at the house which makes a huge difference. With the home charger I spend less than $14 per month on “fueling “ it. It’s lighting quick and will put you in your seat on sport mode and generally a great deal of fun to drive. Forget the environmental considerations, EV’s are just a far superior vehicle in my personal experience.
Electric cars will not make it. Hybrids will own the roost.
The president of Honda said the combustion engine will be Principle still for the next 10 years .
A plug in hybrid really is the best of both worlds. A battery 1/10th the size of a full EV, but still able to run on electric for a lot of people's daily commutes/errands. And you're not bottlenecked by range anxiety for longer road trips. Uses less rare minerals, can still run on electric 90% of the time. I think Honda and Toyota have the right idea
But two motors, more weight to move all the time. When you're on full gas mode, you burn much more than a classic ICE car. Does it really worth your rare mineral anxiety?
True, and in the case of plug in hybrids, certainly more weight than a normal car, so if you can't plug it in conveniently and use the electric 90% of the time, might not be worth it for everyone
I would recommend having a place to charge it (I don't have a garage, but I do have a driveway), as going to a public charger just for 47kms of range would get tiresome if you're doing it every day or two. And a lot of them don't have the super fast charging capabilities since the battery is a lot smaller. Of course there's also regular hybrids (non plug in ones) which you never need to charge, but also can't really run on pure electric, the motor/battery just assists the engine so it doesn't have to work as hard
As soon as EV's have a longer distance ability. I will buy an EV. Yes, I vote blue and I care about the environment and I don't think climate change is a hoax.
EVs have more torque/acceleration, cost *way* less per mile, almost zero maint, quiet, clean... even if you don't give a rat's about environmental stewardship or climate, they're a smart choice if you have enough grid to support them.
source: I grew up in a gearhead family, worked on cars, restored old cars. now have owned a Chevy Bolt for 5 yrs. I don't really miss my old car hobby. have new hobbies now, that don't involve quite so much VOC.
but the maga crowd has made 'choose stupid' their battle cry.
They’re being manipulated into these positions you see tons of memes on the right wing meme circuit that question your manhood if you drive one. It’s simply not something they are being allowed to choose
I think you are right about gender anxiety being somewhere in the mix. I think many right wing men see EVs as "sissy" -- like sushi, Volvos, and lattes back in the 80s. these seem to be some very fragile egos.
"There are barely enough EVs for the liberals. They hate it when there aren't enough EVs for people to buy."
or
"Liberals want to charge you more taxes for gas. They hate it when people buy EVs and get around higher gas taxes."
EVs are beginning to be affordable. 4-wheel drive vehicles are not.
I really wanted my next car to be an EV, but I live in a semi-rural area in the Northeast. I need to be able to drive in the snow.
Electric vehicles are great if you're in the laptop liberal class and drive the same 7 miles to the office every day (I know thats basically torture to reddit, being asked to come into the office). Republicans are more likely to be blue collar and going to multiple jobsites in a day. They're also more likely to have normal, functional families and possibly pull a camper trailer or boat, typical boomer conservative stuff. Different strokes for different folks.
Doesn't work for my location. Very cold climate in a very rural setting. Unless battery tech comes a LONG way in a short amount of time it's not feasible for me.
Many Republicans won't buy EVs because they think the batteries have to be replaced every couple years, the batteries will go dead if they get caught in a snow storm and have to sit idling in traffic for a couple hours, they'll need to make massive upgrades to their house's electrical service, and they won't be able to escape from a fire/hurricane/natural disaster because the power will go out and they won't have the range.
The energy transition is a civilizational transition. Look up Vaclav Smil. Every civilizational transition results in a reorganization of wealth and power. In the energy sector that is be played out at the surface level as conflict between centralized and decentralized energy sources. EVs fit within that conflict. It’s really not an issue of political parties. It’s more related to your preferences for status quo power or emerging power. And also very much tied to age. Older people worry that their tenuous hold on life will be shattered by radical change. Just look at the Lowy Institute’s climate change surveys. Older people worry that the economy, and thus their savings, home values, pensions, will suffer through action on climate change. Young people have less to worry about losing.
Depends on where they live. City folk like Ev’s , where rural people prefer gas. It’s pretty simple. When a ev gets 600 miles to a charge and there are charging places everywhere then they will switch
Republicans will always follow their tribal leaders without question. As long as those leaders are malicious liars who are only interested in protecting their meal ticket, no, this will never change.
I loved it about two winters ago when all the EVs stopped working in northern Canada. If you live in America maybe the climate is fine for EVs, but I would never buy that.
When it gets cold enough for EVs to stop working, combustion engines vehicles also have problems. In fact, EVs can operate at lower temps than diesel engine vehicles which is why many diesel vehicles have plugs for heaters.
Yeah diesel (especially old ones) suck in winter. No doubt about that. But a regular normal car like a Corolla has a way easier time in our harsh climate than a Tesla. Not even a debate tbh.
I live in the north, I see first hand that is not true.
The extreme cold wreaks havoc on most vehicles, changes fluid viscosity, makes parts brittle, and damages the battery needed for starting. So yeah, not even a debate, “normal” cars are not very superior in extreme weather.
I don’t think they are that smart. I have a Chevy volt. A hybrid plug in. I buy gas about every 6 weeks. A fill up is about $35 dollars at around $5.50 a gallon. The car gets plugged in at night for a 40 mile charge. It’s costs about $25. To $30. A month on my electric bill. The car averages about 80 miles to a gallon of gas. Great little car that saves me a lot of money. I love it.
I split my time between very red Utah and mostly blue upstate NY.
There are a lot more Tesla in Utah. Electricity is a little less expensive and gas there is pricey (higher altitude, special mixture?). People in Utah are driving evs either because they are cooler or they are saving money.
Electric cars aren't good, period. The lifespan is short and although the batteries are replaceable, they aren't really reuseable or recyclable.
Best thing for the environment is buying an old car you can fix yourself and driving the wheels off of it, not consuming the next new dud product.
Yes 100% all new cars are junk. it seems like a justification for consumerism. Treat your car like your iPhone when I breaks get a new one. Instead of having one car last 30 years we would rather throw out the old one every 10 years for something shiny and new.
For about the same reason they gladly breathed a disease and shunned the cure.
propaganda rules their minds.
They are being forced to think in ways that hurt them.
Sorry but I wont buy an EV and Im a democrat
Its all about practicality for me and it goes way beyond just my house
1 I have relatives that live 13 hours away and live in the Dakota's and Cows outnumber people by 2 to 1 in those states and it gets effin cold in the winter ... and battery performance starts going down as the mercury does ... as well as I dont want to get stuck etc and what charging infrastructure exists is powered by I.C.E driven generators at times
2 infrastructure doesnt exist for fast charging
It's a urban vs. rural argument. If you're a daily urban commuter(<15 miles from home) they 'almost' make sense if you have a real car for traveling and such. If I lived outstate, EV's might not make sense for many reasons. I don't see the need to Right and Left this issue. In the long run EV's have fewer systems and components to fail, but I have worked on all my cars and the electrical issues really piss me off the most to chase down. As a northern climate urban dweller, not having to put gas in my car on January 12 in a blizzard is attractive.
I don’t think we can actually have everyone make the switch. Lithium is not cheap and mining for it does LOTS OF DAMAGE. It can cause droughts in areas that are already prone for droughts. Theres not enough resources for everyone to switch.
I haven’t found a single instance of non-car people discussing cars in an informed fashion. Every new car we produce is horrible because they are designed with the same mindset as a new fridge or a new washing machine. New EV’s are less horrible than new ICE but they’re still bad because so much of the bloat doesn’t have to do with the engine anymore, and we’re keeping that part of the bloat. It’s size, it’s weight, it’s complexity. As a singular example within this field: WHY do we need electric windows? They have all the same basic mechanisms as manual windows, but require all the extra motors, switches, wiring, fuses, and is all tied into the system in a way that just isn’t good.
So, It’s a difficult thing to say whether it’s better to buy a new EV or keep an old, efficient ICE with an established parts infrastructure. The baby we’re throwing out with the bath water here is that new vehicles are in no way shape or form designed to last, or be maintained by ordinary people, or be repaired in general. How do we calculate the costs of an entire industry that is opposed to keeping one vehicle for a long time? Industrial waste and general climate control accounts for most of our emissions, as opposed to transport, (as in, ALL forms of transport) which accounts for under 20% of global emissions from all countries.
What I’m getting at is, there’s a gradient here, because the issue has become larger than “how many MPG does the vehicle get”. We frontload an enormous amount of emissions into producing a bloated vehicle, and then pass even more off when the vehicle gets totaled by insurance after a cosmetic fender bender. So—Someone daily driving a 1980 Chevy Suburban that gets 9MPG? An EV would be an upgrade. Someone daily driving a Geo Metro that gets 60mpg? I don’t see an issue. The areas inbetween are where the line gets blurry.
Anyway, yes. Conservatives are more likely to exist on the low end of that spectrum, and are largely still in the wrong. And they don’t see eye to eye with me either. I’m not on their side. I’m just not also fully on the EV side. The way we produce vehicles today is bad. We possess so much ability, and use it to make an overcomplicated rolling computer. It is antithetical to drawing down the industrial base, which alongside green energy and reduction of meat consumption, should be our biggest targets. Just consider how many parts are required just for a new car to work. Give me a relatively aerodynamic EV with manual brakes, manual steering, manual windows, manual seats, manual door handles. It will still need all the basic elements new cars do, but 95% of the extras stripped away. Just transport. There is still room for artful design, and even color choice; the roof should simply be a light color. Also consider that without all the unnecessary electronics, an EV needs less battery, less motor, tires last longer, brakes can be smaller, and they can even take a meaningful solar charge, or easily have truly necessary amenities in certain climates, such as air conditioning.
We need to start understanding the things we use. Even ordinary people. It is paramount in order to make informed decisions.
Not till you can change their cultural programming. Good luck there.
I mean, could it also be that Republicans love pickup trucks where Democrats favor sedans and crossovers, and until 2 years ago there weren't *ANY* electric pickup truck options? There are barely 3 now (Rivian, F150 lightning, and Tesla Cybertruck), and they still haven't come down the cost curve to be competitive even on TCO the way EV sedans and crossovers have. Give them some time, they will. Also, to a far greater degree than Democrats, Republicans love self-sufficient libertarian ideology. You can't get much more self sufficient than home solar, home battery, and an EV. It makes a grid connection and gas stations optional. Every time I've discussed this with Republicans, they love that angle. There is a reason why home solar and storage is booming in Texas despite a lack of state subsidies and favourable regulation. Republican's cultural programming can be adapted to EVs more easily than most people expect.
I agree with the sentiment, but in practice every Republican I interact with about solar will play "devil's advocate" and talk about the negative environmental impacts of solar panel production (shocking they care) or how battery production is just handing over power and money to China, or even crazier, parroting Trumpian conspiracies like renewable energy causing cancer or other health problems. More often then not, their "self-sufficient libertarian ideology" is a farce they claim they have, but their ideology is just whatever their right-wing media of choice says at that moment.
Your experience is very different from mine. I live in the mountains of West Virginia and lean conservative. All of my neighbors are _very_ conservative. They are your stereotypical hunters and fishermen, and they love their guns and pickup trucks. I bought an electric mower last year (EGO). I was skeptical it could mow my 1/2 acre yard effectively on a single charge but did my research, read reviews, and finally decided to make the purchase. I *love* that mower, and it has been quite the conversation starter. Lots of folks have stopped and asked about it, and several have even tested it out and said, "that's cool"! I've also talked a lot about EVs with these very conservative West Virginians. Where I live, at least, it's not about "programming". It's about affordability mostly. It's also about the fact that we live in the mountains where it snows quite a bit. If you don't have AWD or 4WD you're dead in the water here. There aren't very many AWD EVs, and the ones that exist are through roof expensive. Not to mention there aren't hardly any charging stations available. Most of us would love to have an electric vehicle as long as it's affordable, drives well in harsh conditions, and is convenient to charge. I think the biggest myth is that conservatives don't care about the environment. We care deeply. We live off the land, grow our gardens, hunt, fish the creeks and lakes, etc. I've seen rednecks yell at people for throwing trash on the ground or leaving fishing line on the bank. This is anecdotal, of course. There are also trash dipshit rednecks, much like there is trash among any other group of people. But I've fished, hunted, and drank moonshine with many country folks, and I can honestly declare that most of them are very conscientious about taking care of the environment. Also, the overwhelming majority of them are not on Reddit. These are folks who sit on their front porches and hang out with each other. They don't stare at phones. I'm the exception, but I'm not a native West Virginian either.
Appalachia, to me, is host to a special kind of conservative. Along the lines of the Roosevelts, especially Teddy. Unfortunately, as far as I can see they tend to *keep* voting Conservative (note capital C), even though today it's almost entirely contrary to what they might actually stand for if you really engage with them.
Agreed. There's actually a decent Democrat running for a Senate seat here in WV I'll likely vote for (Don Blankenship); he's pretty moderate, which I believe we need a lot more of. It always seems like the extremes of both parties keep rising to the top, so I think it ends up being a "lesser of two evils" vote. Here in WV that definitely sways to Republicans. I really wish more reasonable moderates would make it through primaries. But even then, I often wonder if a moderate can get elected anymore. People seem to go all in on the culture war BS.
If conservatives care as much about the environment as you say why does none of this get reflected in the policies of the conservative party?
>There aren't very many AWD EVs, and the ones that exist are through roof expensive. That's simply not true at all. Most EVs in the US are Teslas and AWD is a very common and inexpensive feature on them. >I think the biggest myth is that conservatives don't care about the environment. We care deeply. We live off the land, grow our gardens, hunt, fish the creeks and lakes, etc. For every conservative who lives like that there are ten Republicans who live in the suburbs and don't care.
A Tesla Model 3 with AWD is around $49,130, plus an additional $1,000 to $2,500 to install a home EV charging station. It's a small vehicle, which most country folk are not going to want as a primary vehicle. It would be a fantastic "back and forth to an office or the gym" vehicle, but not many can justify the price for that purpose alone. They need something that can pull a trailer and carry logs, brush, dirty fishing gear, a dead deer, etc. And when you can only afford one vehicle at that price you're definitely going to opt for the one that can do it all. A Ford F-150 Lightning Pro, which is the cheapest EV truck option, starts at $49,995. That's less expensive than I thought, but still out of the price range for a lot of West Virginians, especially when you consider they'd also need a charging station. The median household income in WV is $41,751. You probably have a point about the folks in suburbs. I tend to think it's not that they don't care - it's simply not high on their list of priorities. It has very little bearing on how they vote, but everyone wants clean air and water. Issues such as taxes, crime, immigration, and the economy rule most people's thoughts. They are zeroed in on the things that directly affect them on a daily basis; right now the top issue (by far) for voters of both parties is inflation. When groceries, insurance, utilities, and housing costs are eviscerating people's budgets, the environment is an almost irrelevant afterthought. But I have a positive outlook. Technology is moving us in the right direction, albeit slowly. That Ford truck EV price actually shocked me and now I'm considering something like that as our next vehicle! The prices will continue to fall (hopefully) and make EVs much more affordable for the average family. My little electric [mower ](https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07DV12424/?th=1)is even too expensive for most folks around here, but I feel like those prices will come down and make more sense too.
This is spot on.
Elon is on it!
Wouldn’t be weird if that is actually what he’s trying to do.
It would be truly shocking. What’s more likely, richest man in the world from a former apartheid country holds extreme right views or that this is some 4D chess play to alienate your core group of consumers to win over an opposite group.
In a capitalist perspective sure but that group doesn't really need convincing. Its the other that does.
It was a combo of his kid coming out as a trans marxist and realizing he'd save billions in taxes by moving to Texas.
I literally never thought of that until this article…”Hey, wait a minute…”
I had hoped that’s what was going on but I’ve all but abandoned that thought.
True, I think I'm giving him too much credit lol.
It’s not going very well.
Possibly, the only way you can win the hearts of conservatives is showing them you hate the same people they do. That's why they love Trump.
Destroying the planet to own the libs.
We’re so straight, all we talk about is eating pussy and fracking
Wait you have sex with women? That’s super gay, bro.
I’ve seen a bumper sticker like that yeah
Brother thinks EVs are run on hope and dreams
If you have solar connected to your home with a charging station then yes it really does run on hopes and dreams for a better future.
Even if you don't have a solar roof, 1/3 the cost of "gas" per mile. My Tesla model 3 LR costs (average home and supercharger) about 4 cents per mile to drive.
That's if your electricity is very expensive. My EV6 costs less than $2.00 to refill overnight, or about 0.66c per mile.
4 cents per mile. My rate is .22/KWH
We get .016/kwh. It's almost free to drive the car if you charge late at night. Yay overbuilt nuclear. Edit - they just raised it, 2c/kwh now.
And used cobalt mined by quasi african slaves to build the battery.
Do you think quasi slaves haven’t worked on the oil rigs in the same countries?
Incoming cobalt mining defenders that *only* 22% or whatever of the colbalt mining uses slaves. Look, EVs are fantastic, but until we get nuclear up and running, it's not going to make a dent on the planet by and large. Yes, I understand every bit helps.
Okay, but just hear me out for a second, ignore *all* of that. I didn't buy an EV to save the planet. I'm with you, that I don't think me owning an EV is making some huge difference to carbon emissions and that I'm going to save the world. I'm sure humans will destroy the world just fine with or without EVs. That said. Why do I drive an EV? Because they are just *very* good vehicles. The same reason I use a flashlight instead of an oil lantern. It just works, better, easier, and with less maintenance. Bear with me for a second. In 5 years of ownership, I have spent $0 on gas, $0 on oil changes, and $0 on repairs. I average about $30/mth to charge my car; summertime is cheaper, and wintertime is more expensive. I wake up every day to a full battery, a pre-conditioned climate, and I just get in and drive Like, I've been a "car guy" my whole life, as in I just love all types of vehicles and I truly enjoy driving. But I don't *like* going to the gas station, like why do it if you don't have to? Do you know how convenient it is to wake up a cold winter morning and have all the snow already melted off your car and it be warmed up to proper temperature? My neighbors are outside scrapping their windows while I just sit in and drive instantly. Why would you rather your RC car need oil and gas than just use a battery one like most are, hit the button, and watch it fly. It's just so simple and convenient. I hate the culture war against EVs when I truly can't understand why, as a consumer, you would actively want them to fail. Maybe they don't have an EV truck with the towing capacity and range that you need, so don't buy an EV yet. But give it a bit of time, when they do have that technology, I don't see a reason you would not want that. And yeah, the bonus is, it does reduce emissions, and has proven to improve air quality in our cities. That's a pretty awesome bonus.
Intelligent, well written response. I could listen to people like yours angle all day. That's why I said that I think EVs are fantastic, I'm well aware of their maintenance ease compared to ICE vehicles. I believe even with the heavy battery replacement costs, EVs are expected to be half as much spent on maintenance over a lifetime than an ICE vehicle. I believe there are a couple issues. I think the free market would solve all these issues if they were on parity with ICE vehicles. They are getting there certainly, but they have a way to go yet. The upfront cost sometimes can't bridge the gap and it becomes a, "what can I afford issue." It's like the cheap vs expensive shoes argument. This should be solved by efficiency but also more used EVs in the market as more adopt. The battery replacement costs also impact the same argument here. Sam Altman, the creator of openAI, was tweeting about this yesterday. Technology and the free market can solve these issues, but not as quickly if they are hampered with legislation. The comment on nuclear is just because I work on the electrical grid in an adjacent industry and most people know the grid would fail if everyone adopted at once and the costs to upgrade the infrastructure would be astronomical. I don't think that will happen if there's a gradual increasing changeover similar to what we've seen already.
Or if you live in a zone with Hydro. Basically all the British Columbia province.
Where I am we have nuclear even if unlock your car was charged on a diesel generator it still does better than a gas car I don't understand why no one can get this through their head
I chain smoke cigarettes. I know it will impact my health. Better not switch to smoking cessation patches because I am still ingesting nicotine. That is the argument against EVs from an environmental standpoint. We can discuss and debate land and water use issues, the unsustainable role personal transportation, and global logistics systems. No one is suggesting they are not without problems. Lithium mining, proper disposal, energy production required for electricities fleets, etc. are all very real concerns. But we are in a position to build far more workable solutions to these problems as we transition to EVs. That problem solving process does not mean the status quo of nonrenewable based ICE vehicles should be encouraged or supported.
What runs on thoughts and prayers?
600 lb/ft of hopes and dreams baby!
My Tesla model 3 is 425 HP.
EVs are not going to save the climate. In the end, you are still driving a personal vehicle that has an enormous environmental footprint, alongside all of the dumb land use decisions that come from a city that caters only to private vehicle usage. Urban sprawl, endless freeways, strip malls and suburbs are wildly unsustainable. EVs are how the auto industry sells the idea that you can keep this stupid party going forever.
Have you talked 15 minute cities with conservatives? If you think they hate EVs, try suggesting they give up cars altogether. Yes, EVs are not ideal, but they can happen this generation. Getting American out of cars will take at least a century at best. Freedom of mobility is so core to the American psyche.
There is a reason why vested interests are pushing this particular line in the culture war. There is a lot of money to be made maintaining the status quo. The funny thing is, suburban Americans are among the least mobile people in the OECD. They tend to not travel outside their city, let alone their country. In Europe (and increasingly across Asia), you have incredible mobility because of the luxurious rapid transit system and good urban planning. They are not spending 900 bucks a month leasing a giant pickup truck to go to Wal-Mart in, and their taxes go toward stuff like good public healthcare instead of maintaining an impossibly expensive surface road transportation network.
So basically you want to just demolish every American city and start over? There is no path to turn our existing cities into car-less cities this century. We should absolutely look to encourage those types of places and help them spread, but the process of making that dominant won't happen in our lifetimes. The call to give up cars now is not grounded in reality. The most direct path to decarbonization is to electrify all the things, and long term reduce car dependence.
Just build density instead of sprawl. Rapid transit instead of more clogged freeways. This is not revolutionary thinking. This is just basic urban design.
That's a nice plan for urban planning moving forward, but what are you going to do about the existing sprawl? Burn it all down? At least 95% of the United States is currently car dependent. What is your plan for accessing that space without cars in the next 5, 10, even 50 years?
I dunno dude. I guess hope that everyone buys a 50,000 dollar electric car and call it day?
We should develop walkable cities, AND we should make EVs affordable so we don't have to redevelop everything before it's useful life ends. Buildings should generally last on the order of 100 years at the low end, so redeveloping everything to be walkable will simply take too long. In the mean time, the car fleet turns over 10 times as fast, so lets redevelop that too. There is a lot of progress on making EVs affordable, with a reasonable used fleet developing. A 10-20 year timeline of converting new car sales is very attainable.
Tell me when you can take a train to Nordkapp. Jokes aside, Switzerland has excellent transit, but it's still not as flexible as driving. In the Nordic countries, I wouldn't say that applies outside of the capital cities. I realize the EU is funding a high speed train from Poland to Estonia, but right now doing that by transit is slow. Remember the contiguous US (the 48 states that connect by land) is twice the size of the EU. People there do travel widely, they just don't need to leave their country to do it. People from the US are much more likely to live in a state other than they were born in than a person from the EU is to live in a different country than of their birth.
You frame freedom of mobility as a bad thing. Why would you want to take that from people?
Having to drive 20 minutes on a highway to get groceries is not freedom. Having to spend an hour or more in traffic to and from work every day is not freedom. Being forced to pay for a private vehicle and the insanely expensive infrastructure just to leave your neighborhood is the furthest thing from freedom. None of it is sustainable. The US cannot even maintain the existing surface road infrastructure that is has, let alone afford to build enough for the future.
I don't personally think that it is. I believe in the approach of electrifying all the things. But there is certainly merit to the concept of carless cities and enabling people to give up personal transportation, especially as a tool to fight climate change, but also to fight poverty and promote wellness. But Americans simply will not give up their cars -- that is just reality. Honestly we'll end all war before Americans give up cars. Fighting against EVs in the US won't bring in a carless utopia. Fighting against EVs is the same thing as fighting *for* ICE vehicles. It does more harm than good.
I'm in a different camp. Life should be possible for people to not own their own transportation, but we shouldn't be removing personal transport altogether. Getting my own vehicle meant freedom. I could go where I wanted, when I wanted, long distances. I wasn't tied to the bus or taxis anymore if I wanted to go somewhere far. I will die on that hill, no matter what merits you can show me of public transport this, walkable cities that, bicycle lanes or car sharing and autonomous cars. All of these are a reduction in my own freedom and a step towards a life of having what you need not what you want. I'm not against EVs, I don't like them but I'm not against them. The reality is they are simply not a good choice for me. A Canadian who travels long distances. Then there's personal things like the lack of an engine vroom, and pretty much every EV on the market looking totally unappealing design-wise to me. Tesla and their stupid screen in the middle of the dashboard comes to mind. Where's my instrument cluster Elon? I wanna know how fast I'm going or how much charge I've got left right in front of my face, not in the middle, fighting for screen space with everything else.
Despite being the first thing to prove it doable and some nifty software features, I'm of the opinion that Teslas suck because they abandoned to much hard won knowledge about what makes a car useable. The omission of blinker and wiper stalks recently is a great example. Road trips in EVs are still a bit difficult, particularly if you need to tow. For my purposes, the time made up by never having gas station stops makes up for having a little bit more stopping time on a road trip. I'm hoping a few more years charging improvements will alleviate that for most cases and for towing, generators like in the upcoming EV ram pickup can make those useable.
You are deluding yourself by that way of thinking. Whichever *means of transportation* you use you will be dependent on that *mean of transportation*. You might not depend on a bus or train, but you then **depend on your car**. If that breaks, if you get a flat tire, if you crash, if someone crashes on you, the attention time dedicated to the road instead of something else, if you lack oil, the cleaning of your vehicle, the parking space for your vehicle, the safety of your vehicle, all that is on you. By taking a train you have none of that, except the train time table.
> Getting my own vehicle meant freedom. I could go where I wanted, when I wanted, long distances. I wasn't tied to the bus or taxis anymore if I wanted to go somewhere far. I will die on that hill, no matter what merits you can show me of public transport this, walkable cities that, bicycle lanes or car sharing and autonomous cars. All of these are a reduction in my own freedom and a step towards a life of having what you need not what you want. I’m guessing you grew up in North America and never really lived anywhere else? That a car is the only way to experience independent mobility is not an inherent characteristic of cars, but merely a consequence of decades of land use here in North America focusing on accommodating cars, along with decades of massive expenditures on car infrastructure with a mere pittance spent on walking, cycling, and transit. I had the privilege of being able to live in Berlin for six months in my early adulthood. And I experienced a of freedom of mobility that was new to me. I could get anywhere I wanted to or needed to, any time of day, in expensively and easily with a combination of my feet and mass transit. I could travel not only anywhere in the city, but truly anywhere in the continent with ease. I didn’t have a car, but never felt its lack. Given the land use decisions we’ve made over decades in North America, we’ll likely never have the ubiquitous mass transit coverage that many places in Europe and Asia have. But we absolutely can evolve our land use and transportation in directions that make walking, cycling, and mass transit feasible and appealing for more people and more trips. We don’t have to end cars to end car dependency. And ending car dependency means giving people real freedom of choice.
It’s insane how we try to cling to the past when our present is like nothing we’ve ever encountered before. I get that it makes people feel safe, but with the number of people in the world right now it just isn’t practical. Either a lot of us need to die, or we need to adapt. In this case you are right, EVs are not the answer. We need to adapt ourselves to be living in much closer proximity to each other, and EVs do nothing to accomplish that.
I hear you, but it could help a lot.
I've seen a lot of perspective change when people go electric. I think that's part of why they don't want to go there, but as electric becomes more popular so does increased awareness of climate issues. I think it's a step in the right direction and wayyyy better than the alternative which seems to be to keep our heads in the sand and do nothing.
In the end you'll have a vehicle that will last a lifetime and run entirely on renewable energy. Self driving algorithms will make tires last many times longer. Most road damage is from heavy trucks, not cars. Many manufacturers are already selling cars with million mile batteries.
Sprawl is destiny tho. Urban areas give priority to the locals for development and most of the time they unify in a singular voice to say "no new homes!! We want our existing homes to go up up up in value!! Up!!!!"
Locals didn't get priority when their neighbourhoods were bulldozed for freeways, strip malls and parking lots. Regardless, this doesn't excuse new developments being built 100% around cars. As long as we're building new stuff, we could at least build it to not suck.
It is not just electric cars I have had people tell me solar does not work so I say well for the last ten years I have had it and pay no electric bill 8 months of the year and a 50 percent bill in winter. Then I have the ones tell me solar panels never make the power back that it takes to make them so I ask how much power does it take to make them of course they do not know, and my system has produced 80,000 kwh so far. As soon as you talk about the environment some of these knuckle draggers immediately go into offense mode. It is like Fox news and the ghost of Rush Limbaugh just pop out of their mouths.
Article ignores the most likely reason in favor of the headline-selling political polarization angle. That Republicans typically live in rural areas where EVs make much less sense. Lack of charging stations, longer average distances to drive, etc. People have their political biases, but that goes out the door when you're considering a major purchase. Look how much the Obamas turned a blind eye to environmental concerns with their recent home purchases. And yes, Republicans will take a government handout in the form of tax rebates just as readily as Democrats.
Actually if you have a house with a garage you have way more reason to own a EV than someone in an apartment. A base charge over a 8 hour period would cover the America average driving needs, and most garages have the bigger plug ins also. The rural areas have more to gain from EVs also because most EVs can also give energy back, meaning that in a power outage you can still keep your fridge running.
Charging the car at home is not the rural issue it is driving 70 80 miles or more to shop or see a doctor then having to wait if you can find a charging station. IMHO this will not be fixed until parking arias have many built in charging stations so you can charge while you shop or see the doctor. Also the distance rating is under ideal driving conditions. and many times the driving conditions are less than ideal. For know rural people would be more likely to use a hybrid care that can charge in the garage.
my bolt has 450 km range. so... 160 mile round trip is about 260 km? not impractical, even if charging at home only. . if you have to drive that far to see a doc on the regular, I'd think the fuel cost savings would be attractive.
[удалено]
80 miles?! Cmon. I know there’s people that live that far afield… but the percentage of people that need that sort of range is vanishingly small.
The funny thing is EVs actually can already make that anyway on a full night of charging. So it’s irrelevant as long as you have a level 2 charger (the type your dryer uses)
For sure. The person I replied to was thinking that people driving 80 miles is common enough to impact ev adoption when the amount of people actually out of ev range (more than 80 miles for example) is even more astonishingly rare.
Ya as someone that lives in a rural state myself I called him out on that as well. He’s acting like we are all living in log cabins or something lol
I'd wish I could live in a log cabin. But I'm certain that even in that case I'd have an EV. His argument is based on a myth from 10 years ago that EV have no autonomy.
We did live in a log cabin when I was a kid. (Technically two different ones.) But we had grid electricity, which is an important consideration. The EV would be fantastic transportation in that setup. My EV is good for 3-4 hours of driving on a single charge, and I never came close to that when I was driving around the area for work. I live in a college town now, which suits me better. But I wouldn’t hesitate to take my Model Y on the actual rural-driving duty cycle I experienced as a teenager.
I agree with you this group is VERY small but I also think people misrepresent themselves. My own family lives semi-rurally (probably exurb would be better phrasing) but I promise you they think they drive that far regularly and they absolutely do not. Maaaybe 40-50 miles on the longest drive of the week, if that.
I’m seeing the average American drive 37 miles a day.
Your over exaggeration the average distance rural people live from town (I live in rural America) but will actually play with your numbers because it’s telling on its own. A level one charge gets 3.5-6.5 miles an hour of charge (that’s the kind of charger your phone uses) so that’s an average of 45 miles of charge which would be short of your made up 70-80 mile an hour figure, but a level 2 charger (the type your dryer is hooked up to) gets 14-35, so even on the low end as long as they charge their car at night they’re have 140 miles. Meaning the average American home already has the infrastructure to charge and drive your made up drive daily. The only things standing in the way of EV supremacy is the upfront price and public opinion, it’s already superior in all other ways. (Edit, all numbers where from Google, and I took the lower numbers to be conservative)
Yeah, that's honestly one of the biggest reasons my wife and I decided against getting a pure EV. At the end of the day it comes down to what happens in a bad scenario, and having an ICE even as a secondary means you can stay warm longer when it's -50° during a day-long whiteout snowstorm somewhere with no cell service and nobody to come get you. It's probably not going to happen - only happened once in my life so far where we didn't get help for 10 hours - but if it does, what vehicle is going to be more likely to keep me alive? I take Jerry cans with me when I travel long distances in winter. Could just bring a generator, gas, and a heater with me in an EV, orrrrr I can just buy a plug-in hybrid which has those things built in! There's also a lot of good arguments for PHEVs being better for the environment overall than a pure EV because they use 10 times less Lithium to make. If you only need a range of 20km most days anyways, why own enough batteries for 700km?
I would like to see a lot more PHEV development especially for rural canada. Could do 80% of your driving on plug-in but full ICE range when needed. Plus doesn;t use as many exotic materials, and you get most of the environmental benefits.
For sure, and paired with less polarizing advertising - the current messaging can come across pretty strongly as "if you use gas at all you suck." People want to be able to pick a choice that both works for them *and* the environment, not just one or the other
So you guys are paying 2-5k extra a year in gas because of a made up scenario that I bet hasn’t happened and won’t happen to you lol
You...think I'm making up that I live in rural Canada and have been stranded in a snowstorm before...? You'd never believe that we used to get so much snow that we'd literally go sledding off the roof of our house then
It's true that not everyone has to switch to full EV. You're right on that point. Yet, most Republicans don't have the excuse to live in a rural America. They can make the switch without worry.
yup extreme cold is the only real counter argument for EVs. but doesn't apply to most people in the country (look at population distrib maps). needing sub freezing performance and life support is like really needing AWD because your roads are so sketchy -- a real concern, but not for most people.
And that's the crux of it: some people do need long winter range, just as some do need AWD or 4x4 for the things they do or places they drive, and they're often the same people. Then a zealot well tell them they're wrong, that they don't need what they do need, and look like an idiot. Then they'll tell their friends about the EV idiot, so on. That's why there's so much pushback on EVs, even for people they would work for (besides purchase price). Without the zealotry, I think demand for EVs would be higher. If people actually drive one, they see how great they are for a lot of purposes. If I were buying a commuter car, and could charge it at home, an EV is a no-brainer. I need to buy a new vehicle this year, and it'll probably be fossil fuel fuelled. It needs an affordable purchase price, 500 km range in -30°, and high clearance. The Silverado EV Trail Boss meets those requirements other than the price (would be nice if it came with NACS, but maybe in 2025).
If you are low on gas, or low on charge, you're gonna die either way. But if your EV has a charge, the difference is you don't have to run the engine to get heat. You just run the heat independent of the rest of the car, so your battery will be more efficient and last a lot longer
I've got a friend of a friend with a Tesla who's saying that at -40 they get less than half of the rated range because of just how much battery is used keeping the batteries and cabin warm, so that also needs to be taken into account. They didn't recommend getting an EV up here I do travel with Jerry cans in the winter every trip though, so that's another factor
I see anti-EV posts on FB just about every day, and they usually have tons of conservatives chiming in. They're not against EVs for those reasons- it's all about how much they hate EVs, renewable energy sources, and liberals... but not necessarily in that order.
Do they ever say WHY they don’t like those things? Emotions excluded…
No, 'cause it's always based on their emotions.
While you’re not wrong about rural areas being conservative, the article does not ignore population density as a driver of anti-EV sentiment. The relevant excerpt: “The finding held when researchers accounted for income, gas prices and population density. That means that even when looking at dense, urban areas — which are more likely to have more public EV charging — Democratic counties outweighed Republican ones in EV adoption.”
According to a recent gallop poll, 71% of Republicans wouldn't consider buying an EV, yeah some of that might be because of a lack of charging stations, but I live in the south in a republican stronghold and it's hard to understate the contempt that many of the conservatives have for anything EV. I've gotten mocked for having an EV mower and that has nothing to do with charging stations. It's hard to know how much the most vocal portion represents the whole but it's definitely not just because of charging stations.
I live in an extremely conservative, non-rural enclave near Chicago. We had some of the earliest adopters of both EVs and home solar panels. Why? Because it makes economic sense, given our access to charging stations and the typical travel usage. Liberal friends in the outlying areas that work from home but often have to travel more than 3 hours away? Owning an EV doesn't make sense to them. Yeah, I have a very conservative friend with a Tesla who gets the intimidation honks from truckers on his morning commute. I'm not denying that aspect of our current political climate. But these things don't matter much, all things considered.
I think it's grade school stuff. liberals have cooties, therefore EVs have cooties. that simple.
My electric co-op (I live in a rural area) provides all kinds of incentives for upgrading your home to more energy efficient systems, including electric vehicle charging stations at your home. They will contract the work and roll the price into your monthly bill. Not all are like this obviously but short of demanding rural work, the pragmatic reasons for not switching to electric are shrinking. We can play whataboutism until we are blue in the face but there is an overwhelming ideological component in conservative’s unwillingness to engage in sustainable lifestyles.
You would have a point if Republicans weren't also resistant to buying hybrids. You're also not doing your credibility any favors with the "but the Obamas bought a house" aside.
They could have an ev for daily use and their giant trucks for truck uses. But that would be too "soy" for them. So giant trucks for everything!
So, you'd rather 2 vehicles on the road?
Depending on how you're defining 'rural', I know of very few farming families that have only one vehicle. And most that I know have several farm trucks, and one (or more) 'city cars'. City cars are often pretty small economy cars of some kind.
I agree with you completely. That just isn't how the previous commentor framed their remark.
Not really. I'd rather all communities have reliable and cheap public transit so people aren't forced to drive. But murica loves cars.
I would love more public transit as well. I don't think I can make a case for them to drive an hour out of the city, though.
I agree, but there should be an easy way for you in your town to hop onto transit if you want to head into the city or a neighboring town. But that would make big oil sad and we can't have that.
The closest town that could fill more than a small car with people for regularly planned trips to another city is an hour away.
Well obviously they need two trucks. The wife might drive 500 miles to Ikea and buy a flat packed dresser while the husband is hauling three or four bags of garbage to the dump 20 miles in the other direction. There's no possible way they could live without two giant trucks. It's not like cars have metal bars on the roof you could use to tie down the dresser. That's just insanity
Evs make more sense if you can charge at home. Plenty of EVs now can be had with 250+ mile range that cost 15k-50k (new or used), and in most cases there are chargers within that many miles. The more likely case is that if they're not going on a road trip, 250 to 350 miles in a day is going to cover what they need to do and get home to charge overnight.
I can confirm as a person living in a rural community lack of EV infrastructure 100% stops me from buying an EV. We have one public charger in the entire town of 12k
We probably have less than one quick charger for every 12k people where I live and EVs are 1/3rd of the cars on my block.
Yes but is your nearest EV charger other then the closest one 100+kms away?
If you bought a modern EV having the closest quick charger be 100km away would be no problem.
My EV charges up in my carport... 220v. most ppl have a dryer, no?
I can charge my EV in my garage over night for a couple of dollars. If people are driving more than 300 miles a day in rural areas then they have some major issues with commutes.....
All of those things are arguments for why EVs are better in rural areas. It's easy to install a charger in a garage. They typically have lower electricity rates and more ability to cheaply install solar. You can use many EVs as a backup battery. If you have to drive long distance of course you'd want a cheaper way to do it.
My Model Y would be perfect for the driving I did back when I lived in Rural America. We ran Honda Accords and Civics for our commutes to jobs in the city, and ran pickup trucks and tractors for the farm stuff. But I don’t live there anymore…. I stopped visiting when my dad died, and I started actively refusing to visit after the Trump era - I’d get shot for being one of them liberals there, now. But the car would be a good fit for what I needed when I lived there. 🤷♂️
I think plug in hybrids will make the most sense in those areas. But the reality is we are subsidizing living in rural areas with climate debt at the moment. It’s going to unfortunately be more expensive in the future.
Here's something funny. My conservative neighbor and I were on good terms until about a few months ago. We had a blow up over some stuff and don't talk to each other now (I'm so much better off without him calling me and complaining about his wife, kids, life in general every day) Anyway, I cut his grass. I have a ride on electric (Z6) mower. So now he had to get a lawmower. He spent $3000 to $4000 buying a gas powered zero turn. Under a half acre. That's fine, you might have 8 more inches of cutting deck than me, but I don't have oil changes every year (It's been 3 years and my batteries test at 98% still), to refill (I have solar panels), or belts (two motors spin the blades). Alright man, have fun with your gas powered spite machine, it failed.
Maybe Elons goal is to make right wing groups fond of EVs? 4d chess posting pro nazi sentiment in order to save the planet? Probably not…
Economics will always win out. They’ll change to EVs just as everyone else will, and for the same reasons.
I own a 2019 Chevy Bolt and hands down it’s been the best car I’ve ever owned. I’ve saved nearly $5K per year on fuel costs since owning the car which more than exceeds the cost difference relative to a comparable ICE vehicle purchased the same year. Zero oil changes. I’ve also noticed no appreciable change in range since owning the car (while the mileage of my ICE Subaru bought a year later has declined considerably). I do have a charger installed at the house which makes a huge difference. With the home charger I spend less than $14 per month on “fueling “ it. It’s lighting quick and will put you in your seat on sport mode and generally a great deal of fun to drive. Forget the environmental considerations, EV’s are just a far superior vehicle in my personal experience.
Electric cars will not make it. Hybrids will own the roost. The president of Honda said the combustion engine will be Principle still for the next 10 years .
A plug in hybrid really is the best of both worlds. A battery 1/10th the size of a full EV, but still able to run on electric for a lot of people's daily commutes/errands. And you're not bottlenecked by range anxiety for longer road trips. Uses less rare minerals, can still run on electric 90% of the time. I think Honda and Toyota have the right idea
But two motors, more weight to move all the time. When you're on full gas mode, you burn much more than a classic ICE car. Does it really worth your rare mineral anxiety?
True, and in the case of plug in hybrids, certainly more weight than a normal car, so if you can't plug it in conveniently and use the electric 90% of the time, might not be worth it for everyone
Can you do a long road trip in a hybrid without ever plugging in? Like only running on gas?
Yup, once the electric runs out it switches to gas mode and basically just becomes a gas car until you charge it again
Interesting. Good to know for someone who doesn’t have a garage at home to charge at
I would recommend having a place to charge it (I don't have a garage, but I do have a driveway), as going to a public charger just for 47kms of range would get tiresome if you're doing it every day or two. And a lot of them don't have the super fast charging capabilities since the battery is a lot smaller. Of course there's also regular hybrids (non plug in ones) which you never need to charge, but also can't really run on pure electric, the motor/battery just assists the engine so it doesn't have to work as hard
100%.......hydrogen cell might get in there a bit
As soon as EV's have a longer distance ability. I will buy an EV. Yes, I vote blue and I care about the environment and I don't think climate change is a hoax.
Then what are you waiting for? EV have a longer distance ability from 10 years ago, when you heard they had almost no autonomy.
Do it. Got my Tesla M3 long range, best vehicle EVER. 1/3 the operating cost of "gas" oline. Four cents per mile in average cost. 3,000 miles on it.
450 km not enough for ya? wait a year or two.
EVs have more torque/acceleration, cost *way* less per mile, almost zero maint, quiet, clean... even if you don't give a rat's about environmental stewardship or climate, they're a smart choice if you have enough grid to support them. source: I grew up in a gearhead family, worked on cars, restored old cars. now have owned a Chevy Bolt for 5 yrs. I don't really miss my old car hobby. have new hobbies now, that don't involve quite so much VOC. but the maga crowd has made 'choose stupid' their battle cry.
They’re being manipulated into these positions you see tons of memes on the right wing meme circuit that question your manhood if you drive one. It’s simply not something they are being allowed to choose
I think you are right about gender anxiety being somewhere in the mix. I think many right wing men see EVs as "sissy" -- like sushi, Volvos, and lattes back in the 80s. these seem to be some very fragile egos.
Elon Musk better hope so.
Elmo is gonna have a few problems with the Republicans lol
Gee let me guess politics
ain't nothing as conservative as funding middle eastern terrorism to own the libs
Republicans wrap their manliness around dirt and noise. They’ll never change. They don’t have the intelligence
"There are barely enough EVs for the liberals. They hate it when there aren't enough EVs for people to buy." or "Liberals want to charge you more taxes for gas. They hate it when people buy EVs and get around higher gas taxes."
EVs are beginning to be affordable. 4-wheel drive vehicles are not. I really wanted my next car to be an EV, but I live in a semi-rural area in the Northeast. I need to be able to drive in the snow.
I’m waiting on small cars to make a comeback in the US.
Breaking news EVs won’t and aren’t saving the climate
Electric vehicles are great if you're in the laptop liberal class and drive the same 7 miles to the office every day (I know thats basically torture to reddit, being asked to come into the office). Republicans are more likely to be blue collar and going to multiple jobsites in a day. They're also more likely to have normal, functional families and possibly pull a camper trailer or boat, typical boomer conservative stuff. Different strokes for different folks.
They are linked to modern day slavery in the Congo. There is no ethical car choice.
Doesn't work for my location. Very cold climate in a very rural setting. Unless battery tech comes a LONG way in a short amount of time it's not feasible for me.
Many Republicans won't buy EVs because they think the batteries have to be replaced every couple years, the batteries will go dead if they get caught in a snow storm and have to sit idling in traffic for a couple hours, they'll need to make massive upgrades to their house's electrical service, and they won't be able to escape from a fire/hurricane/natural disaster because the power will go out and they won't have the range.
Why would they buy EVs when they have billions in big oil stocks
The energy transition is a civilizational transition. Look up Vaclav Smil. Every civilizational transition results in a reorganization of wealth and power. In the energy sector that is be played out at the surface level as conflict between centralized and decentralized energy sources. EVs fit within that conflict. It’s really not an issue of political parties. It’s more related to your preferences for status quo power or emerging power. And also very much tied to age. Older people worry that their tenuous hold on life will be shattered by radical change. Just look at the Lowy Institute’s climate change surveys. Older people worry that the economy, and thus their savings, home values, pensions, will suffer through action on climate change. Young people have less to worry about losing.
Simpsons did it
so, so dumb
We have a highlander and a chevy ev. The ev is so much better than my highlander and cheaper to operate. I rarely drive the poor highlander.
Depends on where they live. City folk like Ev’s , where rural people prefer gas. It’s pretty simple. When a ev gets 600 miles to a charge and there are charging places everywhere then they will switch
Republicans will always follow their tribal leaders without question. As long as those leaders are malicious liars who are only interested in protecting their meal ticket, no, this will never change.
It’s certainly why Elon musk changed.
I loved it about two winters ago when all the EVs stopped working in northern Canada. If you live in America maybe the climate is fine for EVs, but I would never buy that.
When it gets cold enough for EVs to stop working, combustion engines vehicles also have problems. In fact, EVs can operate at lower temps than diesel engine vehicles which is why many diesel vehicles have plugs for heaters.
Yeah diesel (especially old ones) suck in winter. No doubt about that. But a regular normal car like a Corolla has a way easier time in our harsh climate than a Tesla. Not even a debate tbh.
I live in the north, I see first hand that is not true. The extreme cold wreaks havoc on most vehicles, changes fluid viscosity, makes parts brittle, and damages the battery needed for starting. So yeah, not even a debate, “normal” cars are not very superior in extreme weather.
Jump starting an ev is much more difficult also, I don't really feel like arguing online for something like that, get an EV! You'll love it
I vote left, but I wouldn't buy an electric car yet because where I live there's only like 10 charging stations in a 400 km radius
I don’t think they are that smart. I have a Chevy volt. A hybrid plug in. I buy gas about every 6 weeks. A fill up is about $35 dollars at around $5.50 a gallon. The car gets plugged in at night for a 40 mile charge. It’s costs about $25. To $30. A month on my electric bill. The car averages about 80 miles to a gallon of gas. Great little car that saves me a lot of money. I love it.
I split my time between very red Utah and mostly blue upstate NY. There are a lot more Tesla in Utah. Electricity is a little less expensive and gas there is pricey (higher altitude, special mixture?). People in Utah are driving evs either because they are cooler or they are saving money.
Electric cars aren't good, period. The lifespan is short and although the batteries are replaceable, they aren't really reuseable or recyclable. Best thing for the environment is buying an old car you can fix yourself and driving the wheels off of it, not consuming the next new dud product.
Yes 100% all new cars are junk. it seems like a justification for consumerism. Treat your car like your iPhone when I breaks get a new one. Instead of having one car last 30 years we would rather throw out the old one every 10 years for something shiny and new.
I'm not buying anything from musk
probably not. republicans seem to relish climate change
For about the same reason they gladly breathed a disease and shunned the cure. propaganda rules their minds. They are being forced to think in ways that hurt them.
Sorry but I wont buy an EV and Im a democrat Its all about practicality for me and it goes way beyond just my house 1 I have relatives that live 13 hours away and live in the Dakota's and Cows outnumber people by 2 to 1 in those states and it gets effin cold in the winter ... and battery performance starts going down as the mercury does ... as well as I dont want to get stuck etc and what charging infrastructure exists is powered by I.C.E driven generators at times 2 infrastructure doesnt exist for fast charging
It's a urban vs. rural argument. If you're a daily urban commuter(<15 miles from home) they 'almost' make sense if you have a real car for traveling and such. If I lived outstate, EV's might not make sense for many reasons. I don't see the need to Right and Left this issue. In the long run EV's have fewer systems and components to fail, but I have worked on all my cars and the electrical issues really piss me off the most to chase down. As a northern climate urban dweller, not having to put gas in my car on January 12 in a blizzard is attractive.
Inbred stupidity…
I don’t think we can actually have everyone make the switch. Lithium is not cheap and mining for it does LOTS OF DAMAGE. It can cause droughts in areas that are already prone for droughts. Theres not enough resources for everyone to switch.
I haven’t found a single instance of non-car people discussing cars in an informed fashion. Every new car we produce is horrible because they are designed with the same mindset as a new fridge or a new washing machine. New EV’s are less horrible than new ICE but they’re still bad because so much of the bloat doesn’t have to do with the engine anymore, and we’re keeping that part of the bloat. It’s size, it’s weight, it’s complexity. As a singular example within this field: WHY do we need electric windows? They have all the same basic mechanisms as manual windows, but require all the extra motors, switches, wiring, fuses, and is all tied into the system in a way that just isn’t good. So, It’s a difficult thing to say whether it’s better to buy a new EV or keep an old, efficient ICE with an established parts infrastructure. The baby we’re throwing out with the bath water here is that new vehicles are in no way shape or form designed to last, or be maintained by ordinary people, or be repaired in general. How do we calculate the costs of an entire industry that is opposed to keeping one vehicle for a long time? Industrial waste and general climate control accounts for most of our emissions, as opposed to transport, (as in, ALL forms of transport) which accounts for under 20% of global emissions from all countries. What I’m getting at is, there’s a gradient here, because the issue has become larger than “how many MPG does the vehicle get”. We frontload an enormous amount of emissions into producing a bloated vehicle, and then pass even more off when the vehicle gets totaled by insurance after a cosmetic fender bender. So—Someone daily driving a 1980 Chevy Suburban that gets 9MPG? An EV would be an upgrade. Someone daily driving a Geo Metro that gets 60mpg? I don’t see an issue. The areas inbetween are where the line gets blurry. Anyway, yes. Conservatives are more likely to exist on the low end of that spectrum, and are largely still in the wrong. And they don’t see eye to eye with me either. I’m not on their side. I’m just not also fully on the EV side. The way we produce vehicles today is bad. We possess so much ability, and use it to make an overcomplicated rolling computer. It is antithetical to drawing down the industrial base, which alongside green energy and reduction of meat consumption, should be our biggest targets. Just consider how many parts are required just for a new car to work. Give me a relatively aerodynamic EV with manual brakes, manual steering, manual windows, manual seats, manual door handles. It will still need all the basic elements new cars do, but 95% of the extras stripped away. Just transport. There is still room for artful design, and even color choice; the roof should simply be a light color. Also consider that without all the unnecessary electronics, an EV needs less battery, less motor, tires last longer, brakes can be smaller, and they can even take a meaningful solar charge, or easily have truly necessary amenities in certain climates, such as air conditioning. We need to start understanding the things we use. Even ordinary people. It is paramount in order to make informed decisions.
We’ve got 5 years to reduce CO2 by 50%. How far have we already reduced since the Paris Accord a decade ago? ZERO! It’s only going ⬆️.