• BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    As much as I hate cars, removing them is only possible inside cities. North America has a very large rural area(and population) that needs to be converted away from fossil fuels.

    • thisfro@slrpnk.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Maybe yes, but a large part of society at least in America and Europe live in cities or suburbs, where cars are just bs

    • zephyreks@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      North America has a large suburban population. The rural population is almost entirely dependent on fossil fuels for the near future because of infrastructure scarcity and the energy density of fossil fuels.

    • Kevin@l.1in1.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You are right, but many people use electric cars as an excuse to delay or cancel car-related regulations in cities To the sound of “Why should the city be car-free when electric cars are quiet and don’t emit fumes?!”, and that’s something we have to fight, because in the city there should be no (private) cars needed

          • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s a pretty shit argument. Humans are not ecologically viable for life to continue on planet earth at our current population, even if we remove all cars.

              • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yea no what? We are already setting population targets via immigration right now, the question is about what the target should be (and why) not whether or not to do it.

                • bulbasaur@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  To do what? Limit immigration so that poor ppl from countries we immiserated, exploited, and put in danger of climate collapse from our overconsumption can die? Sounds like nazi shit to me

              • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yes it is. We hunted multiple animals to extinction and poisoned vast stretches of land long before the industrial revolution, we didn’t need cars to be assholes to nature.

                • thisfro@slrpnk.netOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  True, but we could sustain a lot more people and also not bring animals to extinction and destroy the environment with the right policies. Blaming overpopulation is just facist propaganda.

    • minimar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I disagree, twitter won’t embed on the timeline, meaning you have to click the link to actually see the content, instead of just being able to expand the image. Images are much faster and easier.

      • itchy_lizard@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Your argument is basically “fuck blind people” and “I don’t care about citing my sources”.

        If you don’t want to link to Twitter, link to another twitter front-end, like nitter.net

        You can include an image of the content in the body of the post as well as link to the source, but you discredit yourself if you just post an image without a source. And you exclude people who can’t see images.

  • darkmugglet@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Sigh…I own an EV and I will tell you that my reasons for buying it are less environmental and more practical. Not having to go to a gas station (charge at home) or how I literally have way more power than I need or that it’s just fun to drive. You can shit on EVs, but in all reality they are a superior car if you don’t get hung up on the fuel. I want to be better about the environment, but honestly, my EV is hands down my all time favorite car (and it’s not a Tesla). So before you mock em, go test drive a few.

  • corm@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Oh shut up, ecars cause less environmental damage than normal cars by far. Yes they require lithium. The lithium required doesn’t get close to the damage of 300k miles worth of gas.

    “but power plants burn coal for that electricity”

    Not mine. I live in portland and have signed up for 100% renewable power. That’s a your-city problem. You should work on that.