What type of EV? Because people have a habit of conflating the battery powered EV with EVs in general.
Hypx
joined 1 year ago
I suspect there is something more to this than just that. After all, the car in question did this:
Earlier this month, a Cruise robotaxi notably ran over a pedestrian who had been hit by another vehicle driven by a human. The pedestrian became pinned under a tire of the Cruise vehicle after it came to a stop — and then was pulled for about 20 feet (six meters) as the car attempted to move off the road.
It seems like there are unsolvable safety problems going on.
A big chunk of the green movement is totally complicit with this type of behavior. For many of them, it is just about fundraising, not serious action against climate change.
For starters, ICE cars have not been banned nearly anywhere. For seconds, hydrogen is not unworkable. That is pure BEV propaganda.
The future will almost certainly be hydrogen cars. They are also EVs BTW. BEV fanatics are just bullshitting about this fact here. In reality, BEVs are not a sustainable idea and are doomed.
Battery cell technology will change over time. Into fuel cells.
Battery electric cars predate internal combustion. It is emphatically not the way to go. In fact, it is just a fad driven by subsidies and desire to appear green. It will die off once the subsidies go away and people realize that paying vastly more for an inferior type of car is not a smart decision.
It's worth noting that those same group of guys thought it will have zero role to play just a few years ago. Now it's "limited roles." Who knows want the next report will say. And it's dominated by Tories and other conservatives. I even recognize some of them as critics of hydrogen. It is definitely not a real science paper or an impartial report.
Hydrogen is going to play a massive role, regardless of what some elderly people think. Factually speaking, there's very few alternatives to hydrogen in the first place. If not hydrogen, it would have to be something like ammonia or e-fuels. None of which are dramatically superior. As a result, by saying that it doesn't work, you're coming close to admitting defeat on climate change.
It's the battery with the lowest amount of raw material needs. Quite literally turning water into an energy storage system.
Most of these studies are written by conservatives, or occasionally by wealthy liberal elites with significant conflicts of interest. No one should believe in them.
Put it this way: Wind and solar are terribly inefficient. Why did they catch on despite those problems? Because cost is very low. The criticisms are usually just old people making up stories to rationalize why their outdated investments are still viable.
You must have a very narrow understanding of what is happening. Germany has dramatically shifted towards pro-hydrogen: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-10-18/germany-to-fast-track-hydrogen-grid-in-cleaner-energy-transit
That's pretty much made-up. Hydrogen is not a big deal to handle. The "it's a GHG" argument seems to come from some special interest group funded by the fossil fuel industry. It's actually pretty suspect of a claim, and it was never a particularly big effect even if it is real.
You have nothing to say on this subject anymore. You've already revealed yourself and there's nothing left to talk about. You are just a BEV fanatic and you don't care if that ends up sabotaging the fight against climate change.
You seem to be stuck in the year 2015, back when these arguments actually sound original. Today, it's just outdated bullshit from a Fascist.
Pretty much everyone on the left have switched to supporting hydrogen. Joe Biden being a recent example. Much of the European political landscape have done this same. Just a handful of seriously out-of-touch social media type are still promoting this BEV monopoly idea.
There will come a day when people will realize that even tech companies aren't worth that much.