“But tires”
Ban all vehicles over 5000lbs to start without a specialized license and extremely heavy fees to have them. EVs are dropping in weight daily, ICE vehicles have been increasing in weight to dodge policies. One is a means to an end, the other is a means to profit.
Profit for few vs humanity’s existance… which should we choose?
This is a bad argument. Your conclusion happens to be factual, but it doesn’t follow from the premises.
Being in an enclosed space with an internal combustion engine will kill you because of the CO buildup, and no, that doesn’t happen in the open air. CO does oxidise to CO2 eventually, so it doesn’t just keep building up in the atmosphere.
The main harm caused by burning fossil fuels is the CO2, which is wreaking havoc on the climate and will kill billions - but not by poisoning them.
Why would it not be considered poisoning? It is a substance that is effectively killing people.
Yeah the enclosed space thing is about carbon monoxide though. Just find it to be easier for people to understand when people believe the earth is thriving because “there are more people now than ever.” Not caring that everything is dying around us.
No, that’s not poisoning.
If you get killed by a tsunami, that’s not water poisoning for fuck’s sake.
Fits the definition of poisoning.
Medical dictionary: Definition Poisoning occurs when any substance interferes with normal body functions after it is swallowed, inhaled, injected, or absorbed.
So if you drown, it would be, if you get crushed, I would say it doesn’t fall into poison
Good to know we’re not operating in reality. Don’t feed the trolls, people.
You’re living in a false reality apparently my friend. That’s just the definition of a word. Maybe find a different term.
Jesus Christ, the mental gymnastics and goal post moving.
Drowning is not water poisoning, and if you can’t figure out why, that’s no one’s problem but your own.
It is also common knowledge that taking a bath with a running lamp will kill you, why do you think that has absolutely no impact in people’s buying lamps?
A car running in a small enclosed space is very different from a car running in the open in the same way that a lamp running underwater is very different from a lamp running in air.
That being said I do believe we should strive to have personal vehicles and public transportation be converted to EVs as soon as possible, because the issues with running ICEs vehicles in the open (which are different from running them indoors)
deleted by creator
I had a friend who went down the right wing rabbit hole and he said that the earth is so big we can’t affect the environment that way.
Blew my mind. Trump supporter now as well.
Usually people like this start with the conclusion, and then search only for things that reinforce that (and ignore anything that conflicts). So, chances are, he wanted to believe that for whatever reason, so he sought reinforcement for that stupid idea. And found it.
Because most people are completely scientifically illiterate and do not understand the analogy you’re making because they don’t know what “atmosphere” is.
Reminds me of those threads “do you think you’re smarter than most people” of course anyone who responds either calls themselves a dumbass or agrees. But it’s always a biased question, because if you are sentient enough to understand the question you ARE smarter than most people.
im gonna hazard a really basic proposition.
The volume of the earths atmosphere is perhaps, just a little bit bigger than the volume of approximately 1 billion garages.
If you’re going to shitpost about science, at least be accurate about it. Nobody thinks they “aren’t bad” that’s literally a fallacious argument to even propose. Sure, toxic chemicals are bad for you, but there are FDA defined limits for how much of them is considered to be safe on an annual basis.
also, “banning” larger heavier vehicles is based.
So how much carbon monoxide turning into CO2 and building up in the atmosphere and causing the earths temperature to slowly rise and threaten the ecosystems of the majority of earth does the FDA define as okay?
Cars don’t typically produce carbon monoxide. It’s special circumstances caused by the garage that caused the carbon monoxide
this is definitely a good point.
restricted or incomplete combustion has really negative side effects. Notably, more pollution.
Isn’t the main purpose of the catalytic converter to minimize the CO (and other chemicals) being exhausted? Those illegal to take off vehicles things on every car…
It is supposed to be CO2 and water though that comes out of it… but it doesn’t work out so clean as the air going in isn’t just oxygen
That is what they’re supposed to do.
But you’re talking about an operating environment way outside of what they were designed for.ICE cars suck.
But cars aren’t driving around the road and spewing out CO in such concentration that’d they’d give someone CO poisoning.Pick a different example about why ICE cars clearly suck.
The CO becomes CO2 in the atmosphere as well eventually. I understand what you mean, which is why I was going to originally delete the post, but some people said leave it, so I did. Really it is just saying if exhaust is so obviously known to be bad in one situation, why is it so hard to understand that it can be bad in other ways. (Trapping in heat really)
I kinda get what you mean, in that sense. “It’s bad here so why can’t you believe it’s bad there?”
But the dangers they pose are so different in nature that it’s inviting criticism; lots of things are dangerous in specific circumstances but fine normally.
Anyways, you’re taking the criticism better than I’m able to lol
It was a drunken post on New Year’s Eve… If I know anything in life it’s that alcohol does not make sound choices lol. I suppose I’m just glad I didn’t text an ex. Motivation not to drink as much haha
cats are supposed to burn off the remaining unburnt fuel in the exhaust, as ICEs don’t have perfect combustion most of the time. Which helps to reduce the negative aspects. Not the CO2 though, obviously.
of course, this only works if you get significantly complete combustion within the engine itself, otherwise the cat simply can’t overcome it, it’s only supposed to do the last 5-10% or whatever, of emissions.
im gonna hazard a little guess, and say they don’t define this, because this would be like the FDA having recommended estimates for how many hurricanes you can consume within approximately a year, as that would be a rather silly statistic. They probably don’t do that one.
Little known fun fact, the FDA is actually short hand for “food and drug administration” if you’re concerned about like, global warming you should ask someone else like NASA. Which handles things related to the atmosphere. There would also be NOAA, which more directly handles the atmosphere, that’s kind of it’s job, you should probably ask them.
The FDA requires me to eat 4 hurricanes a year, with a side of has browns, haha
(I think it’s the CDC that does regulations on carbon monoxide though)
im guessing OSHA probably has a few also. Most definitely some health agency, though i wouldn’t be surprised if the FDA did have something pertaining to carbon monoxide, more generically. They have a lot of weird ones.
EPA I assume as well. Lots of letter factories out there
A very, very rough estimate is that the atmosphere is 6,000,000,000,000,000 times larger than a typical garage (or over 6 orders of magnitude more than OP’s claim), based on a typical one-car garage being 100 cubic meters and The atmosphere being 6e9 cubic kilometers.
wow incomprehensibly large number, exactly what my shitpost predicted!
I’m not here to diss EVs or praise ICE vehicles, but I want to simply directly answer your question. There’s one simple mantra that is applicable to a lot of things in life…the dose makes the poison. Not odd to see people extrapolate to that your scenario.
In one, although the quantity is greater, you’re “diluting” the gas into the humongous atmosphere. In the other, you’re taking the gas straight up undiluted.
deleted by creator
They’re saying a 300sqft garage is going to fill up with carbon monoxide long before the planet does because the volume of space is drastically different. It’s why they tell you to spray paint in well ventilated areas versus huffing it out of a bag.
Look, I hate ICE cars too.
But this is whack. Putting a running car into a garage is dangerous because the free oxygen becomes depleted and it starts producing carbon monoxide as a result. This isn’t a problem when you’re driving around outdoors.
The reason the a running ICE car in a garage is dangerous is completely different than why ICE cars are bad for the environment.
Like, shit on ICE cars all you want, I’ll support it. But this is embarrassingly bad science. This is the kind of shit I’d have made up in grade 7 trying to an edgy eco-aware statement.
There’s this thing called “Alert Distance”, it’s the distance at which animals perceive and begin to react to a threat.
I’ll use it as an analogue for humans’ perceptions of threat.
Say a squirrel knows a cat is a threat, and may react to it when the cat is 15 feet away, whether that reaction is turning to face the threat, making a warning call, or running away.
Now put 50 cats hiding in the bushes and surrounding area around the squirrel. Can’t see ‘em, so it isn’t a problem, even though the squirrel knows cats are a bad thing. The alert distance hasn’t been triggered. The squirrels in the surrounding neighborhood are disappearing, eaten by cats, but our squirrel isn’t thinking too hard about this. More acorns for me!
Put a car in the garage and you can smell the exhaust. Your eyes probably water from the fumes. You know this is potentially lethal, so you do something about it. Shut off the car, leave the garage, open the garage door, whatever. Your alert distance has been triggered. The threat is right in front of you.
Now, as you say, drive that car outside with millions of other vehicles and systems consuming fossil fuels. No real smell or issues for most of us. The alert is only being triggered by what we read (if we bother to read anything that accurately portrays the threat) and maybe a rare bad storm or cluster of hot days that won’t negatively affect the vast majority of people. Negatively = inconvenience.
I don’t know if squirrels lie to themselves about how close a cat threat might be, but humans excel at lying to each other and to themselves for a crapload of reasons. So the fact is that the threat is invisible to many, ignored by most, and actively and willfully obfuscated by a shitload more. So the figurative alert distance doesn’t even exist at all for the vast majority of humans. It’s not going to kill you now, next week, or even next year.
Even when the world has crumbled, plenty will still lie about what’s to blame.
When you’re outside all the gases coming out of your car’s tailpipe go up into the sky where they turn into stars.
Duh.
Edit: was looking at the serious answers. I apologize for my sarcasm.
That doesn’t sound right, but I don’t know enough about stars to dispute it.
Plus you get a nice smokey smell.
You’re being sarcastic but for the average person it’s simply: “Garage small, atmosphere big”.
They look down their street and can see a dozen cars in their field of view and then they see the all-encompassing sky with an endless amount of fresh air available. Conclusion: not a problem.
People mostly believe whatever is in their interest to believe. No one’s beliefs are 100% internally consistent.
30 people die a day just in Australia from traffic pollution.
I think it’s safe to say people literally don’t give a fcuk.
It’s very simple, really. Have you ever witnessed someone drop dead on the street from traffic pollution? No? Well then nobody cares because it’s not immediately visible.
A lot of it has to do with propaganda, both the oil and car industry have successfully convinced people that they need petroleum and a car
Actually going to delete this. To pointed of a question I believe. Just annoyed by people not giving a shit about our grandchildren
I like to think most people, at least where I live, know cars burn up the planet. Problem is most can’t afford a $50k AUD EV, even on finance, but a 2011 Hyundai shit box or a 2005 Toyota hilux is less than $10k.
Oh also, cars are being made to be replaced within a few years. Cost and build quality of modern vehicles pushes me away from buying an EV. Hopefully in the future, they become more ubiquitous, cheaper, and we can solve the problem of handling old batteries and stability.
Buy a 2016 shitbox eGulf or a Volt instead. No more gas bills.
Not sure about the egulf, but the Volt in Australia is a Holden badge and I am pretty sure is a hybrid. The cheapest you can get here is a Nissan leaf, which I honestly had no idea existed until now.
Regardless, all manufacturers are adding electric to a lot of their range, as the years go, they’ll be cheaper second hand and I bet that’s when adoption will sky-rocket.
There batteries are rated to make something like 480,000 miles before getting to 80% battery life.
The costs are high right now but the median ice car is over 32,000. You aren’t buying any car new for under 10 grand.
Because the human brain doesn’t intuitively count the way we’re taught in school.
Our brains are very good at understanding 1, 2, sometimes 3 and, “many”. That’s the data we get from smart chips, young children and isolated pre-literate societies.
Counting bigger numbers requires abstract systems. Our brains can do that but it’s much harder and we don’t grasp it as well.
The practical offshot of this is that while it’s intuitively obvious that a small space like a garage will quickly fill up with toxic gasses, it’s far less intuitive that a “very big” outside can get saturated by a “pretty big number” of cars.
