EVs are a greenwashing scam. Mass transit is the only way that is sustainable for our population.
Edit: I will add mass transit plus better city planning to increase density. Cars in general require so much infrastructure not to mention what we will have to do to get ready for mass EVs.
EVs make a difference for anyone in an area with low density. I live in the country relatively close to population centres, but it’s impossible for me to ever imagine transit being even near me.
We will literally always have a need for small, individual vehicles of some kind for most the population. If we could reduce that to one car, then supplement with transit, where available, or carpooling? Then also make that car an EV instead of ICE? That’s a huge emissions reduction
EVs cut lifecycle emissions to about 45%. [UCS][ANL][MIT][IEA]
Public transit cuts lifecycle emissions to… about 45%. [IEA][AFDC][USDOT]
Neither is a magic bullet. Both get their asses kicked by bicyles. Both get better with increased passengers per vehicle. Both can be fueled with renewable energy for additional reduction. Both can be manufactured with renewable energy for additional reduction. Both take surprisingly equivalent amounts of steel, aluminum, and glass.
Public transit offers unique advantages from an urbanist perspective and the liveability of cities, but that’s objectively different from sustainability.
They are not a scam in general, though one could easily say that about Tesla. The reality is we need both EVs and mass transit. The mass transit infrastructure we need will take time, and EVs are a good stopgap. You are not going to have a good bus or train infrastructure tomorrow, but if you’re car shits the bed tomorrow you can get an EV. Plus there are always going to be a need for some people to have cars, and going electric is better even after manufacturing factors are taken into account. Think fleet vehicles and people that require a lot of tools and supplies for their job.
EVs are a greenwashing scam. Mass transit is the only way that is sustainable for our population.
Edit: I will add mass transit plus better city planning to increase density. Cars in general require so much infrastructure not to mention what we will have to do to get ready for mass EVs.
EVs make a difference for anyone in an area with low density. I live in the country relatively close to population centres, but it’s impossible for me to ever imagine transit being even near me.
We will literally always have a need for small, individual vehicles of some kind for most the population. If we could reduce that to one car, then supplement with transit, where available, or carpooling? Then also make that car an EV instead of ICE? That’s a huge emissions reduction
EVs cut lifecycle emissions to about 45%. [UCS][ANL][MIT][IEA]
Public transit cuts lifecycle emissions to… about 45%. [IEA][AFDC][USDOT]
Neither is a magic bullet. Both get their asses kicked by bicyles. Both get better with increased passengers per vehicle. Both can be fueled with renewable energy for additional reduction. Both can be manufactured with renewable energy for additional reduction. Both take surprisingly equivalent amounts of steel, aluminum, and glass.
Public transit offers unique advantages from an urbanist perspective and the liveability of cities, but that’s objectively different from sustainability.
They are not a scam in general, though one could easily say that about Tesla. The reality is we need both EVs and mass transit. The mass transit infrastructure we need will take time, and EVs are a good stopgap. You are not going to have a good bus or train infrastructure tomorrow, but if you’re car shits the bed tomorrow you can get an EV. Plus there are always going to be a need for some people to have cars, and going electric is better even after manufacturing factors are taken into account. Think fleet vehicles and people that require a lot of tools and supplies for their job.