The opposite - I was watching MKBHDs review of the solar roof - he was charging his Tesla model S ... using only the roof for 11 months out of 12!

That means - total energy independence. I can get a solar roof and no longer need "the government" ie, a bunch of criminals, to "help" me.

Strangely this is never on the news. Ever. Go figure.

Must be painful for you to drink water, drive on roads and have (semi-)breathable air each day. Such crooked things the government spreads..

It's very confusing how consent is super important everywhere but immediately put aside when it comes to government. Could we not do consent and government at the same time?

Possible but it would be highly inconvenient and people wouldn't like the consequences. At the very least we need referendums on all the big contentious issues.

"Consent of the governed" is the founding mythos (whether that rings true for you or not) of democracy.

Ah yes, that terrible tyranny of being connected to the grid and having to pay into the maintenance of it. How dare they? Fascist scum!

> It's one of those things where you need govt funded ev charging infrastructure.

The petroleum industry did just fine without government funding the building of gas stations. It took over 10 years from the introduction of the model T until gasoline outsold kerosene in this country. Not the best metric to compare against, just saying that these things take time.

The mainstreaming of EVs is coming. It's just taking more time than early adopters would like. Part of the problem is that many early adopters assumed that their EVs we're shiny and perfect like their Apple products, etc. So there's frustration that things aren't as glossy and simple as they'd like.

The market is working correctly. Demand for EVs isn't there. Give it time. Maybe a decade or two. And most cars will be EVs.

The elephant in the room is a gas station operates nothing like what is required for fast charging. Gas station is like 2 minutes of your time then the next customer pulls in after you. Chargers demand longer periods of time. More space is therefore required to charge the same number of cars fueled by a gas station.

But I don't want to fund EV charger infrastructure. I want better public transport and hydrogen/methanol fuel for those few cases a car is absolutely needed.

This. EVs are still cars. They still move ten times more mass than what is actually required to get Mr Boomer to his job and back. They're still extremely inefficient transport solutions for anything but vacations. They still cause trafic congestion just as bad as old cars do.

> hydrogen/methanol fuel for those few cases a car is absolutely needed.

Is this because you actively want cars to be less efficient/more expensive/more cumborsome to use and maintain?

Which is a valid viewpoint, but your comment could be read as suggesting that this is somehow greener or cheaper tor simpler than BEVs, which it isn't.

For example, I'm assuming that the "better public transport" you envision is electric, and battery electric wherever that makes sense (which is in quite a lot of places, even trams with overhead lines in busy cities can benefit from batteries).

I just meant they're refillable and fuel stations historically did fine without public funding. Conversion is pretty easy, if I'm not mistaken cars in Brazil are already prepared for methanol. Toyota recently made a hydrogen kit for AE86 that's almost like an LPG kit. A few years down the line and it'll just work. I'm not saying that there's no place for electric, I just don't want cars in cities. Whatever Netherlands are doing, I want that instead of financing and maintaining a charger network.

Wouldn’t it also make sense to have a government owned car company to go with this infrastructure? If private companies aren’t willing to aggressively change their fleets to EV this is where the government needs to step in. I’d see it as another version of public transportation.