I swear electric cars should fully replace petrol cars.

[Tiberius]

I swear electric cars should fully replace petrol cars. Now I know this isn't easily done.

But just for the sake of noise pollution.
I live right next to a road in a village, that for some reason is busier than the busiest road in a 200 000 population city.

If I imagine all of these cars would drive electric and make no noise at all, other than perhaps the wheels rolling on the concrete, then this place would be a charm.

Think about it. Its not only about nature and air pollution, but imagine the decrease in noise pollution. It would be a charm !!

[Groogo]

Electric vehicles are no where near where they will have to be to replace petroleum vehicles.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Postat inițial de Talby:

dude - EVs kill pedestrians now... need to keep up!

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/pedestrians-already-dying-record-levels-now-face-elon-musks-cybertruck-rcna128603

https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news/if-the-cybertruck-is-deadly-for-pedestrians-it-s-because-all-large-trucks-are/ar-AA1lookY

https://slate.com/technology/2023/12/cybertruck-safety-elon-musk-tesla-danger.html

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-cybertrucks-stiff-structure-sharp-design-raise-safety-concerns-experts-2023-12-08/

https://www.autosafety.org/pedestrians-already-dying-at-record-levels-now-face-elon-musks-cybertruck/

And not to mention - the billions of US tax $$ stolen for charging stations has yet to see even ONE built under the current klepto administration

That isn't what those articles say. Those are just about the safety concerns of the new cyber truck.

[xDDD]

If I imagine all of these cars would drive electric and make no noise at all, other than perhaps the wheels rolling on the concrete, then this place would be a charm.

Actually the"wheels rolling on concrete" is the majority of the noise pollution cars give off. Even if every vehicle on that road was an EV it would still be loud and you'd still probably complain.

Also every single vehicle being an EV is unfeasible.

[kilésengati]

Most noise polution from a normal modern car that isn't tinkered with in idiotic ways comes from friction. The heavier and larger the car, the more air resistance and tyre friction there is. Also this friction causes air polution, too, and more wear on road surfaces and surrounding buildings.

And for the forseeable future, a battery-electric vehicles will be much heavier than their ICE counterparts.

You know what could help: Giving people actual choice in mode of transport. Just driving along the road you can clearly tell who must drive because they have no other choice, but would rather take a shared taxi, bus or train.

But at the end, given the next breakthroughs in battery tech actually yield smaller, lighter, cheaper and longer lasting batteries, I would absolutely support going all-electric, but only if governments stop subsidising only new electric cars but not conversions, and - and this is most important for me - if sodium and halogen lightbulbs become the only legal vehicular and roadway lighting again.

[Talby]

Postat inițial de Kwasmaster:

Postat inițial de Talby:

dude - EVs kill pedestrians now... need to keep up!

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/pedestrians-already-dying-record-levels-now-face-elon-musks-cybertruck-rcna128603

https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news/if-the-cybertruck-is-deadly-for-pedestrians-it-s-because-all-large-trucks-are/ar-AA1lookY

https://slate.com/technology/2023/12/cybertruck-safety-elon-musk-tesla-danger.html

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-cybertrucks-stiff-structure-sharp-design-raise-safety-concerns-experts-2023-12-08/

https://www.autosafety.org/pedestrians-already-dying-at-record-levels-now-face-elon-musks-cybertruck/

Do you want me to share statistics on how many people non-electric cars kill ?

These cars are amazing, its just that the owners dont know how to use it.

good grief... they are referencing "survivability", here is a preview of your EV future:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6LahtrxVhg

[Talby]

oh my bad, your future is already here!!

https://nypost.com/2023/12/12/news/cops-searching-for-seattle-driver-who-mowed-down-pedestrians/

[volusat]

let them walk

[Kargor]

I swear electric cars should fully replace petrol cars.

That's the general idea in Europe. Not by trying to do it between one day and the next, but by not letting new fossile fuel cars into the market at some point, and then just letting the ones that exist die out naturally.

[xDDD]

I think the dumbest part is the idea that we should switch to all-EVs while simultaneously phasing out the majority of our electricity generation.
If you don't count nuclear as green (which most environmentalists don't for some reason) then about 80% of our electricity come from non-renewable sources. And another 7% from hydroelectric which is arguably bad for environments as well, though they are local ones and environmentalists don't seem to care about local environments/ecosystems.

So we are going to phase out 80-90% of our electricity generation and replace all of our cars with incredibly-power-hungry EVs at the same time? Nevermind the fact that we would probably use most if not all of the needed rare earth resources up to make EV batteries while doing so (to make batteries with finite lifespans).

[Liquid Inc]

Postat inițial de :D:

If you don't count nuclear as green (which most environmentalists don't for some reason)

Because it simply isn't.
It's one of the worst types of power generation because we have no way of using or disposing of the waste products. The more Nuclear power we use, the bigger the problem becomes.
We have whole facilities built underground just to store the waste products we have no other way of disposing of. Facilities that not only require power, but also security....

Nuclear Waste is still highly dangerous to life. Anyone telling you otherwise is either an idiot, or paid to be an idiot.

Postat inițial de :D:

And another 7% from hydroelectric which is arguably bad for environments as well, though they are local ones and environmentalists don't seem to care about local environments/ecosystems.

Yup, Hydroelectric requires building vast dams and destroying local rivers so, it's not a great choice either...

Postat inițial de :D:

So we are going to phase out 80-90% of our electricity generation and replace all of our cars with incredibly-power-hungry EVs at the same time? Nevermind the fact that we would probably use most if not all of the needed rare earth resources up to make EV batteries while doing so (to make batteries with finite lifespans).

And to add to this very valid point, we'd need to rip up every road in the world to lay bigger electricity cables to cope with the demand of all the EV's charging...

EV's need considerable advances in battery tech before they can replace petrol, and we are no where near that point yet.

[Haiku's Knife]

Electric cars have their own set of issues that others have already touched on, but it in reality, the better alternative is to become less car-dependent overall.

[De Hollandse Ezel]

OP :

you are wrong.

while you are correct in seeing cars as the main cause for noise polution :
city's are not loud, cars are loud.

most that nooise does not come from the engine.
it comes from the contact of the tires with the road.

and that noice gets worse if the car is heavier.
and guess what.. electric cars are 3x as heavy as their petrol. diesel or lpg counterparts.
(hydrogren driving cars sit somewhere in between.. as hydrogen is less energy dense.. they generally do have a larger and heavier tank.. but they don't need a much heavier battery like an electric car)

to reduce that noice.. there are 4 solutions

1- lighter cars.. that would mean, ban electric cars + ban large cars... like the idiotic size cars americans often drive. just say no cars that weigh more than 1000kg (which until 2000 was a normal weight for an european car..) or 1200kg (which was the normal weight for an european car, still is for any 5 door petrol driven coupe)
-> that would mean you would also ban most electric cars as making an electric car thats not the size of a 1 person driving pod under than weight or has a range till the end of the street at best, impossible.

2 - better pavement, there does excist noice reducing asphalt, and the underlayer under it can also be made from better noice absorbing material, finally soundscreens around the highway does help too, ofcourse all that cost money to place and maintain and only help so much.

3 - lower driving speeds, this however only works limited.. as percieved sound is logaritmic.
a car driving 10x as fast, only makes 2x as much noice.. the reverse is true too..
so reducing the highway speed from 130 to 80kmh.. and inside cities from 50 to 30..
whill only cause a few percent noice reduction

which makes solution 4 the best

4 - less cars
**by smarter infrastructure, like LESS roads, investments in public transport, cycling lanes, safer and better walking ways, and much less parking spaces, we can create denser city's. with shorter distances between a and b.
add to that more mixed use.. instead of zoning, and the distance between home and shopping and home and sport and home and work becomes much less to.
->
nobody should be forced of the road.. but if you want people to grab a bike or walk or take a tram, metro or tram, you have to make that viable distance wise and safety wise and conveniant wise.
-> if driving takes more time, effort and costs than those 3 options, people will take those other options and as a result there be less cars on the road.

for public transport to work a stop needs to be never more than 5 minutes from where you live and never more than 5 minutes from where you need to you.
and departurtes must be so often that you don't even need to plan it.. so somewhere between 6 and 12 times per hour.

for biking to work, you need seperated biking lanes, so you are not at risk of being hit by any car.. everywhere,
ideally you also want to priorititse bikelanes over carlanes.. often with cars needing to go trough tunnels or or over a viaduct.. and having to stop for a light.. while bikes can cross without stoplights and without much elevation as much as possible..
**

for walking, what you need are again seperated biking lanes, that are in no risk of being hit by a car.. place a plot of grass or row of trees between the walking lane and the road.. and an elevated walking lanes. so that any car that does crash crashes into that concrete barrrier or tree and NOT into the walking lane.
-> walking lanes and biking lanes can easely be placed side by side with only a small elevation difference, as they have the same need to be shielded from cars, and bikes are much less a hazzard to walkers.
->
for walking you also need much shorter distances.. there should be a supermarket within 5 or 10 minute walk wherever you live in a city. so you can walk there.
and per 20000 people there should be a mixed center like a "highstreet" thats fully pedestrianised.. with all kinds of shops.. a church(or other sortalike building) a pub or restautant.. and likely some activity center..

that way you barely will have to leave your area exept for to work and back commute.. and for many than commute can be done by bike, or train instead.

[MinionJoe]

Postat inițial de Kwasmaster:

Do you want me to share statistics on how many people non-electric cars kill ?

Per capita, it's much lower for petrol cars because more people step out in front of silent electric cars.

Which is why auto manufacturers are being required to install noise makers in EVs.

Which undermines your entire premise of "electric cars cut noise pollution".

So, the real question is: Do you want to collapse the power grid by forcing everyone to double or triple their electric usage? Or do we find more ways to make petrol cars even more efficient?

[De Hollandse Ezel]

oh and another argument AGAINST electric cars :
they are as stated 3 times heavier than normal cars.

that will not just mean they need 3x as much energy for the same speed
(which is bad if you say you want to save energy)
but it also means that if they have an accident (like hit a biker or walker) that impact will have 3x as much force.. which makes accidents 3x as deadly..

in usa one already sees this with those idiotic superheavy petrol cars (and the reason those should be banned)

but even here in netherlands with smaller cars the norm and well designed infrastructure we see rising trafficdeaths.. mostly due the rise of electic car use.. and the average car getting heavier as a result.

so if all drive electric and we don't want 3x as many traffic deaths..
-> we need 3x as fewer cars
OR
-> we need to 3x as low driving speed

[MinionJoe]

Postat inițial de De Hollandse Ezel:

-> we need to 3x as low driving speed

Kinetic energy is one half mass times velocity squared.

Which means we would have to lower the highway speed limit from 70 to 40.

Which does nothing to prevent inner-city pedestrian fatalities and hearing loss that the OP is so worried about.