Bicycle guys: “A car with an electric motor is still a car”
I’m don’t do very much bicycling, but I much prefer breathing next to EVs than ICE vehicles. Being forced to breath someone’s stinky exhaust when you’re breathing heavy from physical exertion sucks.
Yeah I’d rather be a cyclist next to EVs, but I’d much rather not have to share the road with cars. Those things are dangerous.
Breathing in Micro-rubber/micro-plastics from disintegrating car tires isn’t fixed at all by electrification.
I can also hear ICE cars approach from behind when I’m cycling, but that isn’t the case with electric vehicles (which might be using “autopilot” and can’t see me on the road). I’m not sure if that whirring sound is present outside of low speeds, but I certainly can’t hear it with wind crossing my ears. Sometimes tire noise is audible, but not always.
On the other hand, ICE drivers are more likely to intentionally try to hit me soooo
Breathing in Micro-rubber/micro-plastics from disintegrating car tires isn’t fixed at all by electrification.
But in the comparison of tailpipe emissions (0.02 mg/km) vs tire emissions (36mg/km), I know which one I’m more worried about.
Nick Molden of Emissions Analytics seems to think that the heavier the vehicle, the worse the wear on tires seems to be (though it greatly depends on driving style and torque). That’d probably mean heavy EVs and SUVs are the worst for this.
Not that bicycles are completely clean- but there’s probably a time in the future to worry about bicycle microplastics- after the cars have been phased out.
We’re talking about personal subjective measures, so there isn’t an objective “right” or “wrong” answer, but there’s a bit of a double standard to your logic. Here’s what I’m seeing from your stance:
- ICE vs EV = even though EVs better, its still a car so still not good enough so use third choice “bicycling”
- EV tire pollution vs bicycle tire pollution = bicycles produce the same type of pollution but less of it, so its good enough
It seems like your logic should follow:
- EV tire pollution vs bicycle tire pollution = bicycles produce the same type of pollution but less of it, but still not good enough so use third choice “walking”
You could argue “walking is too slow, while biking is faster and at least less destructive than worse alternatives for fast travel”. However, that would also seem to introduce “bicycling is too slow, while EV is faster and at least less destructive than worse ICE alternatives for fast travel”.
So you like bicycling, and there’s nothing wrong with that as it is purely subjective and there isn’t a wrong answer, but if you’re adhering to your logic, you should eschew bicycling for walking as its less destructive using an objective argument.
Just chiming in to mention electric bikes, which are faster than regular bikes, lighter than cars (thus less tire pollution), longer range than most people could reasonably bike, lower price point than evs, and cheaper to maintain than evs. It would be a reasonable alternative for short distance trips in cities and suburbs while cars are phased out in favor of other alternatives (buses, trains, trolleys, etc)
So you say because bisicles are not perfect we should just don’t give a shit?
The still produce way less tire pollution than cars.
- You only have two tires instead of 4.
- A bike has the fraction of the weight of a car.
- The tires are relatively thin and small, while car tires are just monsters. Especially those of electric vehicles.
So accusing that guy of double standards is just wrong. The problems bikes have are negligle, compared of a lot of things we use on a daily basis. And btw the tire pollution isn’t the worst part of an ev, by far. The production of the battery alone produces more co2, uses more resources and produces more waste (especially a lot of chemical waste), than 10 bikes produce during their whole livespann.
No, they are saying that the same logic of that comment against EVs can be applied on bicycles.
It is attacking the logic, not the concept.
So you say because bisicles are not perfect we should just don’t give a shit?
Nope, never said that.
Maybe this will illustrate my point better. I’ll use your words as the template:
So you say because walking is not perfect we should just don’t give a shit?
Shoes still produce way less tire pollution than bicycles.
You only have ZERO tires instead of 2. A pair of shoes has the fraction of the weight of a bicycle. The soles are relatively thin and small, while bicycle tires are just monsters. Especially those of mountain bikes.The problems shoes have are negligible, compared of a lot of things we use on a daily basis. And btw the tire pollution isn’t the worst part of an bicycles, by far. The production of the steel frame or carbon fiber resins alone produces more co2, uses more resources and produces more waste (especially a lot of chemical waste), than 10 pairs of shoes produce during their whole livespan.
So back to me: An argument against EVs with bicycles as the alternative also works as an argument against bicycles with walking as the alternative. That’s the double standard. Or to put it another way, if an argument against EVs (in this context) in favor of bicycles is valid, then that same argument against ICE in favor of EVs is valid.
I’m not sure if a study exists for it, but I’d assume walking produces more microplastics/km than bicycling because of how soft shoe rubber is and how scrubby the action is. Who knows. There is a study I saw that said that walking produces more CO2 per km than cycling, but I’m not sure if this is parallel to microplastic emissions.
The logic will make sense if you think that tailpipe emissions are so litte, it’s almost not worth considering in comparison to tire emissions. So the next step is to say “so how do we limit the microplastics in the air and in the ground on a necessary part of transportation”- the answer is to make it smaller and lighter. And if you want to go distances that you can’t get to by bike, that’s where public transportation comes in.
Breathing in Micro-rubber/micro-plastics from disintegrating car tires isn’t fixed at all by electrification.
but even if you deleted all the cars, you’d still have small trucks, busses, fire trucks, etc.
perhaps instead of saying no to car rolling things, come up with superior ways to roll things?
cycles leave the same residue, their wheels are simply smaller.
If transportation is necessary, find ways to mitigate emissions as best as possible. If emissions are unavoidable, use the thing with least emissions (small-tired lightweight vehicles) until you research a solution to a tire material that isn’t harmful (which is being worked on I think). Busses mitigate a dozen or two cars. Local rail mitigates a few busses and a few hundred cars. Essentially, personal vehicles should be small and lightweight, and essential mass transit or city services should be large enough to serve an entire area.
Yup.
But I’m sure a bicycle guy still understands the benefit of electric cars over regular cars
Literally true; but also yes. A car that doesn’t look before turning is the same whether it’s ICE or EV. I’m a bus-and-walking guy, not a bike guy, but any car is a danger to me when I’m crossing the street. It’s not a problem we’re going to solve with batteries. Mass transit, raised crosswalks, narrowing roads, physical speed controls, and densified cities (to name a few) are all things we desperately need.
Cute. But fuck Tesla.
Better yet, Unionize Tesla.
Person who does not care about a topic
No reaction
Person who cares
Strong reaction
No way!
Ya wai.
Reactionary Car Guys: look at the performance numbers on this ICE car! Fast! Acceleration! Wow!
EV proceeds to beat all those metrics
Reactionary Car Guys: Performance doesn’t matter!
I don’t know if car guys means hobbyist and tinkerers, but for those performance isn’t the most important metric to begin with. Feel and being able to repair and tinker are big ones.
As an EV zealot I 100% support tinkerers, racers, and people who simply love the spirit of an ICE. But not in commuting/traffic, where nobody is enjoying anything anyway.
It’s illegal to get a tesla and not get a vanity tag with a EV joke on it
While this was the case at one point, with the rise in EV ownership the pool of good EV joke plates became fewer and fewer. Many state have passed legislation allowing new EV owners to petition for non-EV joke plates where the state has reached full saturation. /s
edit: Why is @neptune@dmv.social being downvoted? They posted a joke. This isn’t a high art forum. Its in a shitpost community.
It’s depressing but we probably need to bring the “/s” back because people here are fucking clueless
Gotta say, Lemmy users are generally stupid at detecting sarcasm even with context.
How about just no cars
It’d be nice if I had an alternative first.
I agree, I’m just sick of cars and I drive one a lot for work
I don’t have solutions, I’m just complaining catharticly
Reactionary car guys are the people “ice”-ing charging stations and talking about how they’re just going to consume more oil in response.
I too enjoy foil
And the truth is somewhere in the middle
I hope it’s closer that the “huh. Whatever.” reaction than the second one.
I hate the mentality of the people who spew that bullshit, but I also don’t like the idea of thinking you are a planet saving warrior for driving a brand new SUV.
Same, but the truth is we’re fucked because the rich don’t stop using massive amounts of resources while telling us we’re not doing our part.
You mean the top one?
Both platforms have problems, thinking anything else is being a part of the problem.
Kinda… It’s just that all modern cars are pieces of surveillance tech with a side gig of transporting meatbags. Kinda worse with EVs, tho, AFAIK
Find me EV with soul and I buy
