Re:L.A. keeps building near freeways, even though living the...
by mason240 on Thursday March 02, 2017 @04:53PM
(#13778609)
>But the fine particles originating from the wear of tires, road surface and brakes will still remain with electric cars.
I've been curious what straws the anti-car people would grasp at once combustion engines are gone.
Re:L.A. keeps building near freeways, even though living the...
by nerfhammer on Thursday March 02, 2017 @04:33PM
(#13778442)
Also the electricity needed to charge them needs to come from somewhere – some of this will come from burning coal which has significant health risks.
Re:L.A. keeps building near freeways, even though living the...
by true_religion on Thursday March 02, 2017 @04:50PM
(#13778587)
True, but those risks can be isolated to an area 100 miles away from a major population mass. With fuel burning cars, the risks can't be shuffled outside of the city and the larger your city, the worse it gets.
Re:L.A. keeps building near freeways, even though living the...
by tankerdude on Thursday March 02, 2017 @05:31PM
(#13778904)
Yes, some is still coming from coal but the energy mix is changing.
Coal is now more expensive than natural gas, which is why the coal mines are now shutting down.
In addition, even natural gas is going to have to fight the renewable energy sources as the costs will continue to go down for them.
So I'd rather have the system's efficiencies improve in a few places instead of the tens of millions of cars that would have to be changed in the long run.
Electric cars don't emit chemicals, or the atmospheric fine particles born from the condensation "sticky" hydrocarbon chemicals from the car exhaust fumes.
But the fine particles originating from the wear of tires, road surface and brakes will still remain with electric cars. (The utilization of the electric motor in braking could reduce the fine particles originating from brake pad wear, though.)