Re:Carbon dioxide now more than 50% higher than pre-industri...
by tzs on Monday June 06, 2022 @09:19AM
(#31640080)
That's a silly argument because the world is not now or foreseeably facing a problem with global massing, global speeding, or global torquing.
Re:Carbon dioxide now more than 50% higher than pre-industri...
by TurningCanadian on Monday June 06, 2022 @09:44AM
(#31640337)
The size of the car does correlate with its likelihood to hit pedestrians.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2022/03/17/suvs-pickups...
Re:Carbon dioxide now more than 50% higher than pre-industri...
by trgn on Monday June 06, 2022 @09:24AM
(#31640129)
> People simply refuse to sacrifice anything.
This is because of two things: (1) fetishization of size, weight, speed. This is modernism, a monomaniacal obsession with measurements, a very infantile mindset. (2) self-preservation; People are more inclined to buy bigger vehicles when they are surrounded by oversized death machines anyway.
It's a textbook tragedy of the commons. This can never resolve positively in a bottom-up manner. It's a local maximum that will require top down intervention, or some serious soul searching.
Re:Carbon dioxide now more than 50% higher than pre-industri...
by bombcar on Monday June 06, 2022 @10:14AM
(#31640765)
Also the larger vehicles are taxed lower so there’s perverse incentives on all sides.
A scaled tax based on vehicle weight compared to number of seats or something would make the smaller cars more attractive.
Great example. Let's see. Compared to the previous model it is: bigger, heavier (like 150% the weight), faster, more powerful, more torque.
More, more, more.
Increased efficiency of internal combustion engines has not led to decreased fossil fuel usage. It has led to bigger and more powerful vehicles and increased fossil fuel usage. There is no reason at all to believe electric vehicles will be any different. People simply refuse to sacrifice anything.