• bedrooms@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    in an effort to slash pollution and reduce noise

    I think that summarizes it. Not effective for tackling climate crisis.

    • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Focusing on passenger cars never will be, as their co2 output is only around 15% of the total in the EU. Every little bit helps, sure, but even getting completely rid of cars wouldn’t be enough.

        • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Except that 15% isn’t nearly enough to even really make a dent into climate change as a whole, and there is no way in the near foreseeable future to get anywhere near “nobody uses cars or anything that causes co2 emissions to move around.”

          Even if everyone swapped to electric cars or alternative methods of transport asap, which would cause a huge spike in emissions from their manufacturing (~twice of an ICE car) and all the infrastructure work required to handle their charging and all the extra maintenance of roads required from having vehicles two to three times as heavy as most ICE cars run on them, let’s assume we’d get a reduction of 50% for personal transport - you’ve just spend an absurd amount of money and effort to reduce the overall emissions by 7.5%.
          If 7.5% reduction is the goal that would be much cheaper, easier and faster to carve out of the energy sector, which currently accounts for around 70% of total co2 because majority of it is still made using fossil fuels.

          We need to do it eventually, sure, and everyone who can afford to get an electric car should do so, but it’s like tackling plastic pollution by removing disposable straws and forks instead of concentrating on the massive amounts used by manufacturing sector - visible and gives everyone a nice fuzzy feeling they are doing something, while not actually achieving much. A good cause, but not the most pressing one by far.

          • ampersandrew@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            15% is a significant dent. It’s 15%! Even half of that is significant. And I’d sooner say we transition to encouraging just about any other kind of transit via our city and infrastructure design (efforts are ongoing, so it’s not like no progress has been made) rather than just encouraging everyone to switch to an electric vehicle, but there are all kinds of benefits to restricting vehicle traffic in city centers besides climate change too, probably helping them to sell this policy. It’s still a reduction that helps climate change, but it’s one of those ones like straws and plastic bags that are much easier to legislate even if it’s not the largest reduction that could be made. I guess I just disagree that anything other than the largest slices of the pie are worth putting any focus on, because if it was easy to reduce those large slices of the pie, we’d have done it. Even those large slices can probably be broken up into smaller slices, of which some may be easy to deal with.

          • upstream@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Principally agree. If we want to make a dent we need to be going into carbon capture mode - as most likely we’re already seeing cascading effects from the emissions already caused. Permafrost melting and releasing methane, the ocean warming up and holding less CO2.

            But the numbers you use are horrid.

            The average EV weighs maybe around 300 kg more than a comparable fossil car. Sure, the Hummer EV weighs a fuckton, but a regular Hummer ICE isn’t exactly a Lotus either.

            The other negative trend in weight is the SUV-ification of society, and if you swap a Civic for an iX you get double padding.

            Lifetime emissions cast a much bigger shadow than production emissions and most EV’s are climate positive one year in (average driving length, average electricity mix).

            All of that said; don’t buy an EV to save the planet. Buy an EV because it’s a better car and better for your wallet. Depending on a multitude of factors these may not hold true for you yet, and you should probably just keep driving what you drive.

            People focus way too much on the downsides of EV’s like charging infrastructure issues or waiting to charge.

            All vehicles have tradeoffs and just because you’re used to filling petrol doesn’t mean it’s a pleasant activity. I’ve spent way too much time freezing at the petrol pump in the winter.

            I actually did the math and found I’ve been spending way too much time at the petrol pumps. Driving electric I plug in at home. Takes a few seconds just like plugging in your phone.

            Going out for petrol takes ten minutes. Driving on trips my bladder is still the weakest link, but every now and then charging adds a few minutes here and there, sometimes more.

            Estimated net average time savings per year over the last four years is about 3-4 hours driving electric instead of ICE. That includes an hour less filling in freezing conditions.

            But I digress.

            TLDR; Climate is fucked, but EV’s can be good fun. Don’t feel obliged to buy one just yet, wait until it makes sense.

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

    Swedish city tries to reduce pollution and noise

    How does this help reducing noise? I think with modern cars, tires generate notably more noise than the engine unless the speed is below 30 km/h. I hear no difference between a petrol car and electric when they’re driving past me at 50-60 km/h.

    • Auzy@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Depends on the car. Unfortunately, you always have people who want their cars and motorbikes to be loud (small penis syndrome).

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

      They make make more noise while accelerating which I would presume would be something that happens often in a city center with lots of stops and starts.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    🤖 I’m a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:

    Click here to see the summary

    Stockholm has announced plans to become the first big capital city to ban petrol and diesel cars from its centre, in an effort to slash pollution and reduce noise.

    From 2025, 20 blocks of Stockholm’s inner city area, spanning its finance and main shopping districts, will be restricted to electric vehicle traffic only.

    Announcing the plan, Lars Stromgren, the city’s vice-mayor for transport, said: “Nowadays, the air in Stockholm causes babies to have lung conditions and the elderly to die prematurely.

    Paris, Athens and Madrid have only banned diesel cars, and London has a charging scheme that covers the most polluting combustion engines.

    “Many cities have implemented low-emission zones where high-emission cars are allowed to drive if they pay a charge,” Stromgren was quoted as saying by Air Quality News.

    “We have chosen an area where large numbers of cyclists and pedestrians are exposed to unhealthy air on a daily basis.


    Saved 62% of original text.

  • itsonlygeorge@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    There is a significant amount of particulate air pollution that comes from tires. Heavier electric cars make that somewhat worse.

    Step in the right direction, but really we need to ban cars.