18 points

Or just invest in public transit instead of more cars?

permalink
report
reply
14 points

In practice, we need ebikes, cycling infrastructure, better transit, and EVs. No one thing can be enough to get to where we need to be.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Sure but when it comes to investment using public money the worst options need not make the cut. You can count on people to blow copious amounts of their own money on the convenience and luxury of EVs. Public money should be focused on cycling infrastructure in the most full-blown way possible. And if there is still money to spend, then public transit. #fuckCars.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

How about not charging 5 years salary of the average people for a car.

permalink
report
reply
11 points

Cash for clunkers2.0

permalink
report
reply
6 points
*

It would be a good move, provided that it’s also associated with rules to stop making huge gas-guzzling trucks as a single-person commuter vehicle.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
reply
6 points

A lot of cities have started programs which do in fact pay people to move to an ebike.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

How about pay people to retrofit. If they can standardize swaps for the Civics/Camrys/Accords and such, they could make a big dent.

permalink
report
reply
1 point

That’s what the article is about: paying people to switch

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

Hm, sorry if I missed a section. It seems to be only about trading in old cars for a credit toward a new one. I was suggesting paying people to retrofit existing vehicles to be EVs.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

Bingo. Indeed you caught on to the problem with this rebate program.

The article fails to mention that retired cars worldwide go to Africa, where the average age of a car at the time of purchase is 21 years. So the clunkers continue to emit GHG and EV buyers falsely assume they’ve done something good for the planet. They only move the emissions from the US to Africa.

In that whole article, there is only ONE sentence that covers where the clunkers go:

“The clunkers go to a nonprofit that breaks them down to recycled scrap and pours the proceeds into scholarships to train car mechanics.”

Sounds encouraging, but it’s hard to be convinced that they are actually melting down the metals. I want direct 100% reassurance that they are doing the right thing. In fact, melting them down is only the right move if the frame is trash. If the frame and everything apart from the engine and transmission is good, the environmentally sound approach is to convert them to an EV (to thwart the purchase of a new EV). And for engines that are still good, the best move is to convert them to power generators which would only be used during power failures.

I’m skeptical because if they really are just melting the metals, I would think the revenue is only enough to cover the wages of the scrap workers… not sure about scholarships. But say it’s true that there is spare money in the end. It should go to cycling infrastructure, not cars in any way.

#fuckCars

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Currently, that’s more expensive than buying a brand new car

permalink
report
parent
reply

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

!climate@slrpnk.net

Create post

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

Community stats

  • 3.9K

    Monthly active users

  • 5.5K

    Posts

  • 27K

    Comments

Community moderators