Electric? Nah, at least not yet…….







EVs are not the goal of the push to EVs, reduced net carbon is the goal. That being said when considering whether it is the time for EVs as the thread title suggests their ability to perform their actual purpose is not off-topic but rather particularly relevant.
Superswiss had it exactly. EVs cannot themselves create a net carbon reduction even with a green grid; the percentage of output from vehicles of all kinds is too low compared to the total carbon output from all sources. This is the first big carbon lie, that EVs can have that effect. They can't.
If we're going to say yes to EVs, to say it's time, we're also saying yes to doing everything else we need to do along with EVs to actually accomplish the goal which was never EVs. That means mass transit, fewer trips, less meat, more insulation, renewable cooling and heating, making cities more walkable, etc. They are part of the conversation because they and EVs are one and the same, a means to reduced carbon.
That's why I said the whole rhythm of a day is different over there and not relatable to Americans in general. I wasn't saying "Yay Europe, boo American" I was trying to point out that what's being asked is not an easy sell in the US. Most people have no experience with that life and what they know about mass transit here is usually that it sucks and in most respects, in most places, they're not wrong. A car is much more convenient in the US.
I'd say it is time for EVs but not the way we're doing it now. We need a global strategy from power generation to plug and further still; we have to do all the hard things.
What's the hardest thing? Going to the moon consumed near 5% of the economy at the peak of the Apollo program; that amount is trivial compared to the cost of converting the US to a green grid. Do we increase revenue or take the money from existing programs? Kneecap SS maybe? Massive defense cuts? Pay an extra 5 % a year except for the wealthy who will be exempt from the tax? I'm not suggesting any of these but I am suggesting that saying yes to EVs and their purpose means making hard choices in a country full of entitled people who believe sacrifice is for someone else and coincidentally managed to take 43 years to get a nuclear reactor online.



You are refering several times to the fact that Europe is less "car centered" or that cars are less necessary than in the US, even though I think it's true, I also think it's inacurate if you look further in detail.
Most very large cities in France have very good public transport, it's true and it can be a delight but it stops too short a distance from the city centers. As for city to city, we have much more capability by train but I still think they are vastly under used and could be much better.
For example, I live 27km from my workplace which is quite close to the "inner city" (and I guess it's next door by US standards) and I have absolutely no possibility to use public transport to get to work and back. However a coworker is luckier and has a 1 hour city train ride to work although he is farther from work. As for someone who asks why I live there, it's because of housing prices. I have a good situation but I needed to get farther than I wished because of prices and availability closer to work.
Also, we are very car centric. Even if it is possible to go on vacation without using your car, most of us don't and prefer taking it with us. The biggest hint of our "need" for a car, is parking space in city centers: even the locals are often having trouble finding a spot to park when they don't have a dedicated spot, Paris being the biggest offender despite the very efficient "Metro" system (underground or tube I don't remember the proper name in english, sorry).
As for my vision of the electric car? I think we're far from having a good all around solution. Charging, even though it could be very fast in the future, may bring other nasty problems with power delivery, requiring special structures or putting an unacceptable strain on the existing one.
However, for short distances, city dwelling etc. electric cars are very attractive and I wish we had small city cars with a reasonnable range that you can go to work with, eventually travel a short trip, and charge back at home. My main issue with it is the price and second hand buying. I'm not comfortable buying second hand because battery technology is still "obscure" and an issue with it is a huge, maybe car ditching, bill.
Development of a green grid country wide seems like a big challenge and may require to decentralise energy production even further to avoid the need for massive electric lines going very long distances using large amount of copper. I'm not informed enough to speculate on that but my opinion is that there's much more than simply putting stations here and there. But the solution may come by itself with the petrol loby investing in changing part of their location to electric chargers without the government to have to intervene?
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
I guess it would make sense for me to have an electric vehicle. I drive 4 miles from my home to my office, often coming home for lunch. So, I probably put about 16 miles a day on my car, weekdays. That said, does it make sense for me to have an electric vehicle AND an ICE? From a purely economic standpoint, probably not. So, I’m back to square one and will, most likely, just stay with one ICE daily driver for now.
EVs are not the goal of the push to EVs, reduced net carbon is the goal. That being said when considering whether it is the time for EVs as the thread title suggests their ability to perform their actual purpose is not off-topic but rather particularly relevant.
Superswiss had it exactly. EVs cannot themselves create a net carbon reduction even with a green grid; the percentage of output from vehicles of all kinds is too low compared to the total carbon output from all sources. This is the first big carbon lie, that EVs can have that effect. They can't.
If we're going to say yes to EVs, to say it's time, we're also saying yes to doing everything else we need to do along with EVs to actually accomplish the goal which was never EVs. That means mass transit, fewer trips, less meat, more insulation, renewable cooling and heating, making cities more walkable, etc. They are part of the conversation because they and EVs are one and the same, a means to reduced carbon.
That's why I said the whole rhythm of a day is different over there and not relatable to Americans in general. I wasn't saying "Yay Europe, boo American" I was trying to point out that what's being asked is not an easy sell in the US. Most people have no experience with that life and what they know about mass transit here is usually that it sucks and in most respects, in most places, they're not wrong. A car is much more convenient in the US.
I'd say it is time for EVs but not the way we're doing it now. We need a global strategy from power generation to plug and further still; we have to do all the hard things.
What's the hardest thing? Going to the moon consumed near 5% of the economy at the peak of the Apollo program; that amount is trivial compared to the cost of converting the US to a green grid. Do we increase revenue or take the money from existing programs? Kneecap SS maybe? Massive defense cuts? Pay an extra 5 % a year except for the wealthy who will be exempt from the tax? I'm not suggesting any of these but I am suggesting that saying yes to EVs and their purpose means making hard choices in a country full of entitled people who believe sacrifice is for someone else and coincidentally managed to take 43 years to get a nuclear reactor online.
I can drive at least 450 miles on a tank of gas and fill up anywhere in 5 minutes. An EV…you know.
I’m not taking the bus and im not going to live in a city. I’m also not going to buy into the idea that an EV is going to save the planet. Last I checked most electricity comes from fossil fuels. And the batteries are very harmful to the environment.
A car is the ultimate expression of freedom, and in America more so than Europe or Asia we value our freedom.
And no offense to some of the others who’ve posted…we are driving our 100k+ cars with big powerful motors but want others to take the bus to save the world. It’s elitist.
Enjoy your indulgence, I know I will





Last edited by superswiss; Aug 1, 2023 at 11:39 AM.
As for me, I am seriously considering an EV next time. My only concern is travel, and I only really travel one place in my car and there are charging options. All other travel we take the family car which will remain ICE. For my day to day, an EV would be great.
America isn't Europe. This is a car based society, thats not going to change nor do Americans want it to change.








As for me, I am seriously considering an EV next time. My only concern is travel, and I only really travel one place in my car and there are charging options. All other travel we take the family car which will remain ICE. For my day to day, an EV would be great.
America isn't Europe. This is a car based society, thats not going to change nor do Americans want it to change.
There is a reason to find the middle-ground but politics have to stay off-topic.
I think the other thread was closed because it had become a free-for-all, in some cases without a tangential relationship to the thread topic, as it headed out toward however many pages it ended up being. I'm guilty myself; sometimes you should probably say nothing but that isn't as much fun.
You've got a lot wrapped up in the EV conversation because they're more than one of many choices. In years past, a question S class owners might have asked was whether they should they move over to the 7 series, A8, etc. Now you have ponder whether or when you want to go electric on their merits or because we're facing legislative mandates designed to propel wide-scale adoption. To me comparing EV/PHEV offerings most of us are driving now to EVs is no different from what it had been before when discussing the merits of the logical competition, other than now the competition is not all ICE, and EVs bring their carbon baggage with them to the conversation.
Again, I don't see it being off-topic discussing when it's time to move to EVs, it appears to me that it's a highly likely future we all face; want it or not, and some have already moved directly from this car to EVs. We are not looking into the future when we contemplate the question; it's here now.
Almost last: To be clear; For my part, I'm neither trying to evangelize EVs nor bash them. I'm only trying to point out there are immense hurdles to overcome should we continue to go toward green and EVs will not the beginning and end of it.
Last: As to driving less in the city; I think more people would do it if the infrastructure supported it. Not because they had to, because they wanted to do it. It's nice to be able to walk, take mass transit in some cases. No worries about parking, car damage while parked in some areas, you can have wine with dinner, etc. In Seattle I can take the bus into the downtown area faster than I can drive there, I don't have to find parking, pay for it. But like any American I think nothing of hopping in the car and driving 45 minutes to Costco. Because I can, Merica and all that. In my crystal ball I see cars sticking around for a good long time in some fashion.




There is a reason to find the middle-ground but politics have to stay off-topic.
We don't live where public transit is close by, Most Americans can't just walk down the street from their home to get on transit and then walk to their place of work.
Case in point. My office is a 12 minute drive from my home. I get into my car in my garage protected from the elements and get out of it in my garage at work, protected from the elements.
If I wanted to take transit to my office, I would need to walk 1/2 mile to a bus stop (which is way closer than it is for most people), take one bus, get off that bus and change busses, ride that bus, walk another half mile and the total transit time would be 1 hour 15 minutes. Why would I ever do that?!
And you can't just "build a train" because the whole area is developed and built and wasn't laid out for public transit. So You're never going to have a train that happens to be right next to my suburban home and has a stop right next to my slightly more urban suburban office.
Transit makes sense in european cities where the city was designed around the transit, but not in the US where everything has been designed for cars.
What I want and is coming is a car that can drive itself in traffic so I can work and that runs of electricity so I never have to get gas.
There is a reason to find the middle-ground but politics have to stay off-topic.




We don't live where public transit is close by, Most Americans can't just walk down the street from their home to get on transit and then walk to their place of work.
Case in point. My office is a 12 minute drive from my home. I get into my car in my garage protected from the elements and get out of it in my garage at work, protected from the elements.
If I wanted to take transit to my office, I would need to walk 1/2 mile to a bus stop (which is way closer than it is for most people), take one bus, get off that bus and change busses, ride that bus, walk another half mile and the total transit time would be 1 hour 15 minutes. Why would I ever do that?!
And you can't just "build a train" because the whole area is developed and built and wasn't laid out for public transit. So You're never going to have a train that happens to be right next to my suburban home and has a stop right next to my slightly more urban suburban office.
Transit makes sense in european cities where the city was designed around the transit, but not in the US where everything has been designed for cars.
What I want and is coming is a car that can drive itself in traffic so I can work and that runs of electricity so I never have to get gas.
On top of that, in Europe I can stop at the market on my way home, stop and get my kids from school, etc. The US isn't like that. I have to drive to entirely different places to go shopping, get my kids etc. So, being on transit just doesn't work for us.
If I lived in NYC, that you can do without a car but even DC where I live, the metro/subway design is not great and you have to use Ubers etc to get around without a car. I much prefer to drive into the city and park...




On top of that, in Europe I can stop at the market on my way home, stop and get my kids from school, etc. The US isn't like that. I have to drive to entirely different places to go shopping, get my kids etc. So, being on transit just doesn't work for us.
If I lived in NYC, that you can do without a car but even DC where I live, the metro/subway design is not great and you have to use Ubers etc to get around without a car. I much prefer to drive into the city and park...
As for commuting, we have to get smarter about that, too. Why do you think companies continue to have a tough time getting their employees back to the office? Because people got a taste of what live is like w/o a commute during the pandemic and many don't wanna go back to the status quo of wasting hours in traffic every day.
Last edited by superswiss; Aug 1, 2023 at 05:30 PM.
As for commuting, we have to get smarter about that, too. Why do you think companies continue to have a tough time getting their employees back to the office? Because people got a taste of what live is like w/o a commute during the pandemic and many don't wanna go back to the status quo of wasting hours in traffic every day.
You may as well be suggesting we all move to the moon. Nobody is abolishing R1 zoning lol. In America these things need to be voted into fruition and its just not going to happen.









